[From Hon. T. B. Stockwell, Commissioner Public Schools, Rhode Island, August 19, 1890.}

No such instances as those specified, or any other so far as I know, have ever occurred in this State. Accordingly, the question has never been brought before our courts for a decision in that form.

It has been decided that public-school property can not be used for any religious purposes if a single taxpayer objects thereto.

I have heard of instances of coöperation in Connecticut and New York, but do not recall others.

[From Hon. John Gannon, State Superintendent Public Instruction, Montana, August 21, 1890.]

No instance in which buildings were rented with special conditions as to teachers, or exercises therein, or arrangements for religious instruction.

Such an agreement would be illegal in Montana.

[From Hon. J. R. Preston, State Superintendent Public Instruction, Mississippi, August 22, 1890.]

The only instance of adjustment that I am aware of in this State happened while I was superintendent of the Water Valley public schools. The Catholic children attended the public schools, and the priest was allowed to give them one hour's instruction in religion twice a week in a class room after school. The priest and I both left at the end of the year and the place was abandoned.

[From Hon. R. B. Bryan, State Superintendent Public Instruction, Washington, August 23, 1890.]

I do not recall any instance of a compromise between parochial and public schools, outside of New Mexico, where it was reported to me when there some years ago that the practice of appropriating the common-school funds to the support of Catholic schools was very common, in fact, almost universal. Any arrangement of that kind would be illegal and uuconstitutional, and the attempt would raise one universal howl of condemnation.

[From Hon. J. L. M. Curry, Agent Peabody Education Fund, Virginia, August 24, 1890.]

In Virginia there is no example of adjustment between public and parochial schools, involving a division of school funds. Such an adjustment would not be in accordance with our public-school system. In my judgment it would be highly detrimental and unjust and involve pro tanto a hateful connection between a church or sect aud the State. However plausible such a division of school funds may be made to appear, it involves the overthrow of our free schools.

[From Hon. John Hancock, State Commissioner of Common Schools, Columbus, Ohio, August 23, 1890.]

I have no knowledge of any attempt at such an adjustment, and if there had been an attempt of the kind, I think I should have been informed of it. Any such adjustment would be illegal in our State.

[From Hon. S. M. Finger, State superintendent public instruction, North Carolina.]

I beg to inform you that in this State there have not at any time been any adjustments between the public and parochial school authorities involving a division of the public school funds. I do not anticipate any trouble on this subject in this State.

[From Hon. Henry Sabin, State superintendent public instruction, Iowa, August 25, 1890.J There are no schools in Iowa in which any adjustments between secular and denominational free schools have been made, as far as known at this office.

No arrangements would be legal in this State which did not give the boards of directors full and complete control of the school and school buildings. In other words, the school would have to be, in every sense, a public school, in order to be entitled to a proportionate share of public money.

The following extracts from the Iowa school law, section 1764 (c) (d) were inclosed: "(c) The diversion of the school fund in any form or to any extent for the support of sectarian or private schools is inadmissible and clearly in violation of our laws. "(d) Public money shall not be appropriated, given, or loaned by the corporate authorities, supervisors, or trustees of any county, township, city or town, or municipal organization of this State, to, or in favor of, any institution, school, association, or object, which is under ecclesiastical or sectarian management or control." (Section 552, Code.)

ED 89-28

[From Hon. J. W. Winans, State superintendent public instruction, Kansas, August 25, 1800.}

I can not now recall in this State examples of adjustments between public and parochial school authorities involving division of the public school fund and rental of buildings belonging to Roman Catholic and other churches. As I understand the law of this State, there is no provision for such an adjustment.

[From Dr. A. D. Mayo, August 26, 1890.]

As far as I am informed, the State of Georgia alone has a provision in its school laws by which all classes of private or parochial schools may for the time be regarded as free common schools by the authorities passing over to them the public school funds, on condition that while they last the school shall be free. Under this arrangement, I found Roman Catholic parochial schools in Savannah included in the public system and was informed that the same was true in Augusta.

In the open country this practice, I am told, is so common that in some districts all the schools are of this sort. The leading educators of the State regard this as one cause of the low educational condition of Georgia. The temptation to subsidize a private or denominational school already on the ground for a few months, leaving such children as desire to remain members of it on the expiration of the term, is held to be a leading cause of the neglect and the unwillingness of the legislature to appropriate money or impose taxes.

I find a similar practice prevailing to some extent in all Southern States, in country districts and the smaller villages. The practice is illegal, and, especially in Texas, has been discouraged by the State authorities. I do not think it is looked upon anywhere as a permanent condition, but as the best that can be done in communities in the transition period.

[From Hon. J. W. Patterson, State superintendent public instruction, New Hampshire, August 27, 1890.]

I do not recall any case of attempted adjustments between public and parochial school authorities involving a division of the public-school funds. In this State a division of school funds raised by taxation for the support of parochial schools would be impossible, as there is a constitutional provision which would prevent it.

As this subject was mooted in some of the States, the constitutional convention of New Hampshire, in 1876, adopted an amendment, which was accepted by the people, as follows: "No money raised by taxation shall ever be granted or applied for the use of the schools or institutions of any religious sect or denomination." So you see such a thing in this State would be impossible. It is a question whether or not article VI of the bill of rights in the constitution of New Hampshire as originally ⚫ drawn would have allowed such a division if the above amendment had never been made.

I have never known the school authorities of any town or city of this State to rent buildings belonging to the Roman Catholic or other churches. I did hear, a few years since, that the school authorities in one of our cities did rent to the Catholics, for school purposes, a school building not then in use, as the establishment of a parochial school had vacated it.

Roman Catholic young ladies are educated in our normal school and employed in our public schools as teachers without any question as to their religious predilections, and it has given no offense whatever. Such teachers, in many instances, have, to my knowledge, been quite popular.

[From Hon. John E. Massey, State superintendent public instruction, Virginia, August 30, 1890.]

I do not recall in this State any examples of adjustments between public and parochial school authorities involving the questions you submit. Any such adjustments would be illegal in this State.

So far as I am informed, the lines are quite distinctly drawn by authorities of local parochial schools, but not in such a manner as to bring about any conflict at this time.

[From Hon E. B. McElroy, State superintendent public instruction, Oregon, August 23, 1890.]

I am pleased to report to you that we have had no difficulty whatever in this respect in Oregon, so far. In many of our towns and cities Catholic children attend the public schools. In brief, there has been no report of difficulty in this line sent to me, so far, from any part of our State.

Again, there have been no Catholic schools or private parochial schools that have had under their management public funds, so far as reported to me. So far as I know they are all separate and distinct schools, independent private schools. The

Catholics have several academies and one college in this State. The public-school laws of this State would not, in my opinion, permit the union of church and State in this way; that is to say, neither the public-school law nor public opinion would permit the Catholic church to use public moneys in any way in the advancement and support of their immediate parochial schools. No complaints under this head have come to me from any quarter of the State.

[From Hon. N. E. Slaughter, State superintendent public instruction, Wyoming, September 5, 1890.]

I have never known any such arrangements to be made or attempted.

[From Hon. A. J. Russell, State superintendent public instruction, Florida, September 3, 1800,]

Replying to your circular letter touching denominational schools and the publicschool system, we have fortunately had but little experience of any kind.

In St. Augustine, where the native population is largely Roman Catholic, and there is present the ubiquitous consent, the question arose; upon consideration of the case, and providing that a large number of youth most needing enlightenment would not attend the public schools, it was suggested to the local school authorities that the sisters be employed to teach public school No. 1, employed just as other teachers were employed, subject to the same examination, the same contact, the same regulations, and to be required to use the same books adopted by the public-school board for use in the public schools; this was acceded to, and everything has been smooth since. The constitution of the State forbids the appropriation of any part of the permanent or available school fund to be used for the support of any sectarian school. [From Hon. John I. Stewart, deputy State superintendent public instruction, Pennsylvania, August 18, 1890.]

There is no adjustment whatever between the public-school authorities of Pennsylvania and the parochial schools, and can not be under the provisions of the State constitution and laws governing the operation of the public-school system.

Letter contained the following inclosures:

Constitution of 1873, Article X, Education:

"SECTION 2. No money raised for the support of the public schools of the Commonwealth shall be appropriated to or used for the support of any sectarian school."

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,

Rev. I. N. HAYS, D. D., I. H. BALDWIN, Esq.:

Harrisburg, October 1, 1888.

DEAR SIRS: As a committee representing quite a large body of the citizens of Pittsburgh, you have asked this department to give its official construction of the law governing school directors in the purchase, holding, and disposal of school property. The request is grounded upon what you regard a violation of law by a board of directors within the Pittsburgh school district, who, as alleged, have rented or leased a public school building for the use of a private and parochial school.

This department can see no reason why it should not make official answer; and the question raised is of such fundamental importance that we feel constrained to send our construction of the law to the directors referred to as well as to yourselves. The constitution of the Commonwealth (Article X, sections 1-2) declares that "the general assembly shall provide for the maintenance and support of a thorough and efficient system of public schools, wherein all the children of the Commonwealth, above the age of six years, may be educated, and shall appropriate at least one million dollars each year for that purpose," and that "no money raised for the support of the public schools of the Commonwealth shall be appropriated to or used for the support of any sectarian school." Under these wise and imperative declarations of the constitution our public school system is carried forward and must be maintained.

*

In establishing the public school system, the maintenance and support of which the present constitution thus makes imperative, the general assembly by act approved May 8, A. D. 1854, section 18, provides "that the several school districts within this Commonwealth shall have capacity as bodies corporate to purchase and hold such real and personal property as may be necessary for the establishment and support of the schools, and the same to sell, alien, and dispose of when it shall ne longer be necessary for the purposes aforesaid."

It is plain from this section, without further citation, that school houses and grounds are held by boards of directors as corporate bodies in trust for the use of the

public schools; that is, for schools established and maintained by the public fund, under the authority of the constitation and laws, not for private or parochial schools, but for statutory schools.

Beyond the limits of such trust directors have no right to go. All diversion of school property to other uses not purely incidental is clearly unauthorized and illegal. It certainly is a plain principle of law that corporate property must be used solely for corporate purposes. Otherwise, all the school property of the Commonwealth might by a simple vote of directors be devoted to any purpose they saw fit.

In the syllabus of a decision rendered by Hon. George W. McIlvaine, chief justice of the supreme court of Ohio (35 Ohio, f. 143), it is held, first, that "boards of education are invested with the title to the property of their respective districts in trust for the use of public schools, and the appropriation of such property to any other use is unauthorized," and, second, "that a lease of a public schoolhouse for the purpose of having a private or select school taught therein for a term of weeks is in violation of the trust, and such use of the schoolhouse may be restrained at the suit of a resident taxpayer of the district."

In rendering the decision, this able judge says: "The questions in this case relate solely to the power of a board of education to appropriate the public schoolhouse of its district to private uses, or, indeed, to any use other than public schools." After citing the Ohio enactment for the reorganization and maintenance of common schools, which defines the powers and capacities of school directors in language almost the exact parallel of our enactment above quoted, he says: "By virtue of these sections, all public schoolhouses are vested in the boards of education in trust for the use of the public or common schools, and the appropriation of them to any other use is unauthorized and illegal."

In the case submitted to us it is stated that the board of directors have rented or leased a public school building for the use of a parochial school, where the peculiar dogmas and usages of a particular church are promulgated and taught, or where only a certain distinct class of children are admitted. In this case, granting the statement of facts, there is not only an unauthorized violation of trust, but a seeming indifference to what is explicitly forbidden by the constitution of the Commonwealth itself.

A school is not sectarian because taught by a minister, or priest, or any church official. But a school controlled or managed in the interest of any particular church organization, upholding its peculiar confession and ecclesiastical practices, and used for any class of pupils, exclusive of others, is certainly sectarian. It does not, in any sense, belong to our system of public schools. On the contrary, no money raised for the support of the public schools can be used for its support, without a direct violation of the constitution. Were school directors permitted to lease our public school property thus, at their own will, for the use of parochial schools, the ecclesiastical convictions of the directors could turn our public schools into as many different kinds of church schools as there are different denominations in the Commonwealth. The point is too plain to require any further explanation.

Some may be willing to grant that directors can allow school buildings to be used, out of school hours, for such incidental purpose as singing schools, debating societies, etc., without justifying an injunction of restraint, although there has been a decision in Connecticut, by a divided court, even against this (see 27 Connecticut, f. 499), yet here, the school building, as alleged, is used, not incidentally, but excinsively for a purpose not contemplated in the law and forbidden, as regards statutory schools, by the constitution itself. The very fact that the school building is rented, or leased, or granted for the temporary use of a school is sufficient evidence that its essential, corporate use is perverted; for public schools do neither lease, nor rent, nor ask for the temporary use of that very property which, by public tax, has been purchased and is to be held in trust for their permanent use alone.

E. E. HIGBEE, Superintendent of Public Instruction.

[From Hon. J. H. Rice, State superintendent of education, South Carolina, October 4, 1890.]

I do not know of any adjustments between public and parochial school authorities involving a division of the public school funds. The State constitution prohibits the appropriation of any funds raised by taxation to purposes of sectarian education.

[From Hon. Frank M. Smith, State superintendent public instruction, Tennessee, October 14, 1890.]

In this Stato no compromise has ever been made. The Roman Catholics have their schools, but they do not receive any of the benefits of the public school fund of the State because they will not send their children to the public schools, and that is the only way to compromise the matter.

[From Hon. J. S. Boreman, State commissioner of schools, Utah, October 30, 1830.] Throughout this Territory it has been, I am informed, a common practice until within a very recent period for the public schools to be conducted very much as Mormon church schools. This practice has passed, or is rapidly passing away. I do not think that it is now practiced, although a case or two has been reported to me, and I am now investigating the same. This whole proceeding of conducting the public schools as church schools was, of course, in violation of law and contrary to the genius of our Government. No other church has been connected with the public schools in this Territory.

[From Hon. W. J. Clapp, State superintendent public instruction ̧ Dakota, November 10, 1890.] Religious teaching can not be well given in our public schools. The various and antagonistic ideas of parents and guardians, and consequently the children, upon matter and form of religion would lead to harm, it seems to me, if any form of religion is attempted to be taught in the free public schools.

Our State is new and cities small. So far as I can learn, in but one city has any attempt been made to support denominational schools with public funds. In the city of Wahpeton one school board by resolution, for about twenty months paid the Roman Catholic parochial school in the way of tuition at the rate of $250 per annum. This amount was paid against the protest of many of the citizens. The scheme proved unpopular, and now all classes of citizens are much better pleased with the present system, which carefully excludes everything in the way of religious instruction, and teaches only, in addition to the usual branches, good morals, a love and respect for one another and for the common country.

The following account of what has become widely known as the Poughkeepsie plan is from a statement made by George E. Cramer, President of the Board of Education, Poughkeepsie, N. Y.

"About seventeen years ago, the Board of Education of Poughkeepsie assumed control of two large parochial schools which for several years had been maintained at its own expense by the St. Peter's Catholic Church of this city, in buildings owned and erected by that church for school purposes.

"The conditions upon which the board accepted these schools were substantially and in brief as follows, viz:

"The board to lease from the church the school buildings at the nominal rent of $1 per annum, keep them in repair, pay insurance, cost of heating, teachers' salaries and other expenses of maintaining the schools, and conduct them in the same manner as the other schools of the city under its supervision; the church reserving the privilege of using the building for its own purposes outside of school hours, but no religious instruction to be given during said school hours.

"The course of studies, text-books, appointment of teachers, and general conduct and control of the schools to be entirely under the jurisdiction of the board, and the members of the board and its officers and agents to be allowed free access to the buildings during school hours. This arrangement is still in operation."

Hon. B. M. Zettler, superintendent of public schools, Macon, Ga., says:

"The second year of our school system the Roman Catholics petitioned our board to elect two teachers, Sisters of Mercy or members of the Roman Catholic Church, as public school teachers, and allow them to occupy a building furnished by members of that Church, and also to permit children of that congregation from all parts of the city, without regard to school-district lines, to attend the school thus provided for. The application was granted, and the same arrangement has continued to this date. The same books are used in this school as in the others, and the school has the same daily sessions as the others."

The following additional cases are reported from Georgia :

"The school board of Augusta," as appears from the report of the city superintendent, "simply appoints Catholic teachers to certain school buildings for which the city pays no rent. Some of the teachers belong to the order of Sisters of Mercy, and in consideration of their veiled seclusion they were, at the special request of the commissioner, excused from attendance on the normal class by the trustees of the wards in which their schools are situated. This the trustees had a perfect right to do under the rules of the board. Others of these teachers belong to the order known as Christian Brothers. They do attend the normal class."

The plan of union between Roman Catholics and the city schools in Savannah is as follows:

"1. The Catholic schools shall be received under control of the Board of Education. "2. Teachers in the Catholic schools shall be in all cases members of the Catholic Church, but to be subject to examination and appointment by the Board of Education. "3. The text-books used in these schools shall be the same as are used in the other public schools, except books on history, geography, and reading books.