The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1899-05-25

lndtScrlmlnate TenelOSlty'
our esteemed contemporary, the
Philadelphia Inquirer, recalls that
when. in 1897 responding to senate
resolution Superintendent of Public In
structiun Schaeffer compiled a list OF
the school districts of the state in
which a less sum of money is raised
and appropriated locally than it re-
Ccvcd from the state for school pur-
poses. Senator Finn, now one OF the
most virulent critics of the governors
course in reference to the state school
appropriation, was then one of the most
determined advocates of a reformed
school fund apportiOnment. He even con-
tributed out of his own pocket money
for a wider circulation of DR.. Schaef-
fers statistics--a circumstance tending
to show that his present attitude is
insinccre.
This compilation is published in the
Pennsylvania State Journal for 1897:
Part II, pages 237l to 2SS5 1t shows
that in very few cases does the total
amount of school tax levied for the
by state appropriation. In majority
of cases the amounts raised by the dis
tricts were within one-third of the
amount received from the state, while
many raised only 80 per cent, and even
less than % per cent. In some dis
tricts there We're absolutely no school
taxes levied whatever, the districts de-
pending entirely upon the money OBJ
tanned from the state treasury. The
failure TO provide for local schools is
notable not alone in small and inde-
PENDENT districts, hut in large districts
in various parts Of the state which
are wealthy and thickly populated.
Among The extreme cases, as our
Philadelphia contemporary points out,
80" "cpoIt shows that Harmony town
snip, Ia Boaver county levied no school
tax Nbd'over, and received s345.2T from
me stn;c. No school taN was levied
by ~ .l!crShurg borough, in Somerset
county, and II "aS given $l9S.12 :rom
The state .rCasury. Some Of the tax
isyinS we're So small as to he compar-
"tiNoly insignificant ana practically
IuihiaG as ir the case II Union,
.i,2us "our.y which produced only
'"' ty"a is nMn pockets for IT'S schools
!.r 'ha sea. IS36. hut secured fruin
ihr STATE $ir"C.:2 Hampton, in the
sa'lr county, 'a>cd !tself $40 toy lhe
yea, unt secured T&2j from ,he state.
and E.,Nu5p, ARMSTRONG county. re-
r..v"a from tho state S5&3.oG, while IT
,;~cl ;!aa|I only S63. Derry, West
r.h..I&HG co3n,!. affords . sample Of
tlr .&aoa ~ wNich an apparently tmiv-
i"" discreet is content 20 Supply only
." ..Ei5IH.cGnt part ut itg school ex-
praavs. x raised oriy 1885,, school
tx aui received fron the state an
appropriation % S2,2l2.3i. 4 remark
able diversity oi sentiment regarding
tn" maintenance of the public schools
is shown in some instances where one
township, which approaches the right
lEng in The matter of school taxation,
lies adjacent to a township on a bor-
ough which pays little or none of it's
own school eXpeHscs Thus Lynn
township, in Lehi&h county received
q EAtNt bIlOplltfNloll VI ootOOl'OO anu
nearly equalled IL by lavying a school
lax Of S3,i49, 80, while Macungie bor-
nugh. near by, received s795.9S Of the
state runds ana raised by it's own
school taxes only S6G5O. Ir all 5S7
school districts levied less taxes for
school purposes than they received
from the state.
In 1885 The state appropriated only
Sl,0OO,OOo TO the public schools. Two
years later an extra half million was
tackled on; two years later. another;
in 1891, the state, with revenues more
abundant than the lawmakers knew
what to DO with, increased the school
appropriation to s5O0O,OOO a year and
in 1898 another half million was added
FOR the purchase OF text books, an ad-
dition duplicated at each subsequent
session. No other state in the union
approaches this state in its allotment
Of schools funds, and as is clearly
shown in DR.. Sehaeffer's report, the re-
suit of Pennsylvania's indiscriminate
generosity has been in many cases to
q encourage local indifference 10 school
taxation and school management.
Governor Stone believes as firraly as