The Fremont weekly journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County, Ohio) 1867-1877, 1874-11-27


matter from any other stand point
than that of their counties paying
more into the common fund than
they received back, and jump at
once to the conclusion that the thing
is wrong. If they will go over the
ground little more carefully, they
will probably modify their views, il
not entirely change them.
The common school fund is a fund
created for the purpose Of educat-
ing all the children of the State,
otherwise there would be no object
in its creation. If as the Reflector
suggests, "each county should ed
ucate its own youth without the help
of its neighbor," the State Board
might as well be dispensed with and
the State School Commissioner find
his Occupation gone"
If each county should be obliged
to educate its own without the as
sistance of iJs neighbors,i it would be-
come imperative that it should con-
troll its own school system independ-
ent of its neighbors, and we would
have about as many systems as we
have counties. In niggardly, par
simonious communities, we should
have a system equivalent to no
school, while more liberal localities
would have the best, unless the Civ
ing of the regulation of these mat
ters into the hands of the counties,
should beget niggardliness and par
simony in all, and deterioration of
educational interest all over the
State.
The argument urged by the Re
.fector is the same that used to be so
common when the Common School
system was first established, by rich
old bachelors, old maids of property,
grandees who had no children, ct
hoe genus Onane,. i. e. "Why should
I be taxed to educate my nelghbors
children" at is wrong to tax me,
who have no children, in order to
sustain public schools" "Let
those who have children, bear
the burden of their education" &c.
&c. The argument in the above
extract is this and nothing more, and
it is fortunate that the makers of the
State laws were men of more enlarg-
ed views, and statesmen ike char
acter. To them and not to men of
such limited views, is the State in
debted for the noble school system
which is the pride of OHIO.
In order, therefore, that the mat
ter might not be left to the counties,
a common school fund became nee
essary, and was and is raised by an
equitable tax upon all the property |
of the State. There is no injustice |
in this, because no locality pays any
more in proportion than its neigh
Dor, the rate of taxation being the
same in each. If one has more prop
erty than the other, the tax aggre-
gates more, at the same rate, and
could not be otherwise, unless each
locality was obliged to raise a GER
tsin amount, a condition which
would be unjust and oppressive to
the poorer and more meagerly set
tied districts. Surely our neighbor
would not want such a condition of
things as that.
The tax thus raised and passed
into the State Common School fund
is then distributed to the counties,
not according to their wealth but &C
cording to their school enumeration.
and that is why some counties re-
ceiVe back more than they pay into
the State School fund, for school
purposes-nOt because OF an inc
quality Of taxation.
And this is right. The State re-
quires The same military and other
service from the citizens of the poor
er and more sparsely settled dis
tricts, than it requires from those
of the most populous and wealthy;l
why then should it not extend to
them the same consideration? fit s
is the "duty of the State to educate {
the children of the State" then it
must distribute its funds per capita,
Ia order that each child shall be
equally provided for. And so it will
always happen, that the more veal
lhy communities will contribute :
more to the school fund than thev I
received back, though only paying L
he same tax rate as others; and VIC t
lnow of no other way to avoid this I
'esult than to have those districts a
yrow poorer or have more school G
.hildren. b
But the amounts vary, for one Il
ause or another from year to year. 4
FOR instance, the table above shows s
hat Huron paid in $I7,576 while C,
'andusky county paid in but $I2.- G
6S-nearly $4,000 less. Yet the t;
commissioners report for the yesr u u
nding Aug. 81, ,IS7I, shows Sandus- te
y county to have paid in $I4,437l8
lille Huron paid in but $I4,335,44 W
something less than Sanduskv &c
nd in that year, other things being +. !.
lual, Grew out as much if not more tb