Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1911-02-10
REPLIES TO BOARD
Maj. Judson on Cost of Educa-
ton in District.
QUOTATION OF FIGURES
Comparison Of Expenditures Here
and in Other Cities.
PERCENTAGE BASIS DISCUSSED
Response to Statement Which Re-
Gently Emanated From the
Board of Education.
PERCENTAGE BASIS DISCUSSED

commissioner JudSon replied today to
the figures of the board of education and
the statement from that body, printed in
The Star of yesterday. along with an in
tervew with Commissioner Judson on the
cost of education in the District The
board of education made the reply that
the cost of education is not excessive and
said the Commissioner should base his
comparisons the Districts entire in
come, not merely the half which the peo-
pie of the District contributes by taxes.
Commissioners Reply.
Commissioner Judson's reply today is
as follows:
referring to my statement in The
Star of February 8, on the subject of the
cost of education in the District of Col
umbia. and to the reply thereto by the
board of education. published in the same
column, am requested to say whether
the figures prepared by the board do not
refute the conclusions l sought to draw,
to w.t. that the cost of education in the
District of Columbia is excessive
l the first place. l would say that |
am glad the discussion is amicable and
.nat we all appear to be working to-
Sether to ascertain the real facts re-
gardlng subject of such vital impor-
lance to the District Of Columbia And
II In this matter the board of education
VIII take the part Of the devils advo-
cate, l can readily understand that il
will be with a view solely to secure -
emphasis upon the facts that may b.
brought out.
Statistics are dry and uninteresting
unless attention can be focused upon
them.
Careful attention is invited to the
matter contained in The Star Of Febru-
airy 8, aforesaid. and to what follows
On Percentage Basis.
I'm the first place. I admit that COM
rarfsons on a percentage basis are per-
fectly proper if the comparisons are be-
tween costs of education within the Dis
trict of Columbia for different periods of
time
Thus 1t is significant and proper to
say. as did in The Star of 'February 8.
that while in 1906 mot 19OS-that was
misprinD. and Whereabouts, we were
spending for education but about IS per
cent of our revenues locally collected.
now we are spending % per cent 1t
would be equally significant and proper
and equally true to say that in 1906 we
were expanding about 10 per cent of our
combined revenues for education. while
now We are expanding about IS per cent.
The ratio of increase is the same, how
ever it be stated. and the significance of
this increase is the same.
IF the figures of the census Office,
pointed to recently by the board of educa-
ton. show that few years ago only
three cities out of lat We're spending
more than We were for education, and If
since then our own cost has increased
nearly 30 per cent, to wit. from $6.46 to
$50 per capita per annum, then the
alarming state of affairs becomes readily
apparent to all.
Il do deny, however and am prepared
to show as I do hereinafter. that YOU
cannot fairly compare the cost OF educa-
ton here with costs elsewhere on a per-
centage basis.
Regarded as Useless.
"In fact, all such comparisons on
percentage basis are useless. SO far as
the District of Columbia is concerned
as the following reasoning will show:
IF equal percentages of taxes locally
collected are allotted to school pur-
poses in two cities of the same size, of
the same school population, and SINH
larly taxed per capita. equal amounts
will be available in those two cities for
educational purposes. and equal
amounts per pupil per annum.
IF, in the District of Columbia the
amount of taxes locally raised be dou-
bled. but the same percentage of eX-
penditure be preserved as in the case
of similar city of equal size. of the
same school population and similarly
taxed per capita, then in the District
of Columbia the amount annually de-
voted to educational purposes will be
twice that devoted to such purposes in
the other city and twice as much per
pupil per annum.
TT is evident at once that we cannot
fairly compare municipal expenditures in
Washington and elsewhere by any COM
parison of percentages using the COM
bined or double revenues here as a basis.
Questions Of Propriety.
Even when the revenues of the District
proper are used as the basis of the local
percentage, certain questions of propri-
ETY. arise.
First are the people here taxed as
heavily per capita as in other American
cities of similar size? l assume that none
of us will answer this question in the
negative.
Second are not taxes locally paid
equivalent to or in lieu of combined city,
county and state taxes, together with
certain street improvement assessments,
paid elsewhere? An affirmative answer
TO this question suggests the thought that
the careful and analytical statistician
might, before computing percentages here
for purposes of comparison deduct some
thing even from the revenue locally col
lected for District purposes. to cover
such expenses as are commonly borne in
other cities by state and county and by
special assessments for street Improve
ments as for our insane, our criminals
and our street paving.
After this deduction the remainder
might we'll be held to constitute the sum
that is comparable with what is raised
locally in other cities for municipal Gn-
Guiding educationaD purposes only
"Or. to put it another way, it might
well be held that the city revenues in
other cities should be increased by the
amounts locally raised there for state
county and certain other purposes before
percentages of them are taken for COM
parison with percentages deducted even
from our revenues locally collected.
Municipal Expenses.
What precedes is recognized to be
intricate and difficult for him who runs
to read. but. whether the reader compre-
hends the reasoning or not. it must at
least suffice to convince him OF the utter
absurdity Of comparing municipal ex-
penses here with those elsewhere ON a
percentage basis.
1.-The fairest comparisons that can be
made are between unit costs, IL the units
be intelligently chosen.
1.-The best unit for street paving is the
square yard, and the unit cost Is the cost
per square yard.
1.-The best unit I can conceive of for
public education is one days instruction
for one pupil, and the unit is the cost
per pupil-day.
IF we are paying 50 per square yard
for asphalt paving here, while they are
paying 81 per square yard in other