New-York tribune., 1918-12-09

Who should manage the schools
A., BOARD Of Education or tho Board
af Estimate? Control of finances is
.Ao sion of final power. For long years
nontest has been waged between the
.,ro hodes, contest now renewed with
.adoubled energy in litigation between
.hsm. The BOARD of Education has
..r,snded that it's knowledge and ex-
rerienee equipped it for q more saga
Ions administration of school funds
.hsn the Board of Estimate. absorbed d
w. Thousand other matters, could
1--WE The Board Of Estimate has con-
tended that recent history showed the
poard Of Education to be a Spendthrift
who must be kept in leading strings.
Educators with one consent support
tbe claims of the Board Of Education,
because that board has ever been eager
70 snend more millions than the Board
of Estimate would grant. Taxpayers
and economists, on the other hand. get
behind the Board of Estimate. because,
they say. the Board of Education is re-
snonsible to nobody for its steward
shin. and common prudence demands
the limitation of its expenditures.
SN tnp SNINC NNQAaNlQA AdW WHICH
went into effect last January, when
Mayor Hylan's Board Of Education as
sumed office, il was expected that the
contest was settled and the Board of
Fducation's authority over fund linz
;ted though adequate was established
II was enacted that the Bosrd of Educa-
net of 40 mills of the assessed value
ho 81,
the state appropriation in aid of the
schools At least Mayor Mitchel's
Board of Estimate. upon an opinion of
his Corporation Counsel, admitted this
version of the law, and the budget of
the Board of Education for 1918 was
fixed accordingly at a figure $1,4OO,000
in excess of what would otherwise have
been granted.
Abundant Funds and
Law on Its Side
Here was splendid opportunity,
educators thought. for the Board Of
Education to make history 1t had
abundant funds and the law on its
side Would it display statesmanlike
foresight and defend firmly its pre-
rogative? Would itiay out a longtime
programme for developing education
upon the fixed income assured to it,
as DR.. Charles Eliot and other sup
porters of the financial independence
of boards of education had urged?
Very speedily these hopes were dis
sipated. Early in the year the Board
Of Education, all but two of its mem
bers entirely new to its work, ignorant
of the issues involved and instinct
with loyalty to their official creator
resumed the habit of running privately
TO the Mayor and the Controller for
approval of contemplated expenditures
and submitted to the Controllers rul-
ings as to how it should spend its
money Thereby, they restored to the
Board of Estimate in effect, its old
ascendency. On the other hand, the
Board of Estimate showed an eager
ness to assume the responsibility for
educational affairs. 1t could have said
to the Board OF Education:
eve shall appropriate for. your use
each year hereafter the money allowed
you by law, which leaves you an ample
margin this year. which you must con-
serve. You are appointed to admins
ter the schools on that allowance. If
you can't do it. make way for others
who can, but don't try to pass the
buck to us"
That policy would have put the
Board Of Estimate in an impregnable
position and would have forced the
Board of Education to perform it's own
task
Instead, the Mayor and Controller
have reached out for more power over
the schools than their predecessors ex-
ercised and, in addition, they have in
famed the situation by denying that
the state appropriation in aid of the