Full text of "A mill tax for the support of higher educational institutions in Texas."

See other formats

17 SbE

University of Texas Bulletin

No. 2236; September 22, 1922

A Mill Tax for the Support of Higher Educational
Institutions in Texas

The Interscholastic League Division

Bureau of Extension

PUBLISHED BY

THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS
AUSTIN

GIFT OF

£ f

Jl-2226-9-2-22-5«

University of |T_exas Bulletin

No. 2236: September 22, 1922

A Mill Tax for the Support of Higher Educational
Institutions in Texas

The Interscholastic League Division

Bureau of Extension

PUBLISHED BY THE UNIVERSITY FOUR TIMES A MONTH, AND ENTERED AS
SECOND-CLASS MATTER AT THE POSTOFFICE AT AUSTIN. TEXAS,

UNDER THE ACT OF AUGUST 24, 1912

The benefits of education and of
useful knowledge, generally diffused
through a community, are essential
to the preservation of a free govern-
ment.

Sam Houston

Cultivated mind is the guardian
genius of democracy. ... It is the
only dictator that freemen acknowl-
edge and the only security that free-
men desire.

Mirabeau B. Lamar

PREFACE

This bulletin has been prepared primarily for use in con-
nection with the debates among the schools belonging to
the University Interscholastic League. However, since it
deals with a subject of vital interest and importance to the
people of Texas at this time, it is hoped that it will be
widely used by debating societies, civic organizations, and
individual citizens.

It should be noted that the question for debate is not the
support of our higher institutions of learning. Ail good
citizens who are informed on the subject favor the main-
tenance of these units in our state educational system. The
question for discussion is, the method and degree of such
support. . Arguments on both sides of this issue will be
found throughout this bulletin, oftentimes in a single ar-
ticle. It was therefore impracticable to separate into dis-
tinct groups the arguments pro and con. The bulletin was
prepared by Edwin DuBois Shurter, Professor of Public
Speaking, and R. C. Coffee, A.B., LL.B.

Each school belonging to the Interscholastic League is
entitled to two free copies of this bulletin, but these will
be sent only upon application. For additional copies and
to non-residents of Texas a charge of 15 cents a copy is
made. Address Interscholastic League, University Station,
Austin, Texas.

In collating material for this bulletin grateful acknowl-
edgment is made of the assistance rendered by Miss Octavia
Rogan, State Legislative Librarian, who through question-
naires obtained a large part of the material bearing upon
the method of supporting higher educational institutions
in other states. The editors also desire to acknowledge
their indebtedness to Mr. H. J. L. Stark of Orange, Chair-
man of the University Board of Regents, for his co-opera-
tion in the work of assembling material.

The University Interscholastic League.

INTRODUCTION

The subject for debate in the University Intersch elastic
League for 1922-23 is: "Resolved, that an amendment to
the Texas State Constitution should be adopted providing
for a three-mill tax for the support of the State's higher
educational institutions; and that supplementary appropri-
ations by the Legislature should be prohibited." By a
"mill tax" is meant a tax of three mills on every dollar of
assessed property in the state, or thirty cents on every
one hundred dollars. By "constitutional tax" is meant an
amendment to the state constitution by a vote of the people
fixing such a tax, as opposed to a statutory tax which might
be adopted by legislative enactment. The term "state in-
stitutions of higher education" includes the University of
Texas comprising the Main University at Austin, the Med-
ical School at Galveston and the School of Mines at El Paso,
the Agricultural and Mechanical College, the College of In-
dustrial Arts, the Grubbs Vocational College, the John B.
Tarleton Agricultural College, the seven state normals for
white teachers comprising the North Texas State Normal,
the Southwest Texas Normal School, the West Texas Nor-
mal School, the Sam Houston Normal School, the East
Texas Normal College, the Sul Ross Normal College and
the Stephen F. Austin Normal School, and the Prairie View
Normal for Negroes.

Under the present system of support each institution
must submit to the State Board of Control, not later than
the fifteenth day of September of each year preceding the
regular biennial session of the Legislature, an itemized
statement of all expenditures for the preceding two years,
together with an estimate of the appropriations required
for the succeeding biennium, itemized in such form as may
be practicable and as said Board of Control may require.
The Board, upon receipt of these estimates, is required care-
fully to consider and investigate each item contained there-
in, obtaining information from every available source, and

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 5

after holding hearings thereon, must make up an appro-
priation budget for the approaching Legislature. The Leg-
islature then makes appropriations for the two years next
succeeding. It may alter, change, or vary the proposed-
budget in any manner it deems proper. A school may re-
quest a certain amount or sum for a particular department,
and the Board of Control may recommend another, or the
same amount for that department, while the Legislature
may appropriate an amount entirely different from the
recommendations of either. In addition to the biennial ap-
propriations, the University receives about $200,000 each
year from its permanent endowment fund established
through grants of land by the founders of the state. The
Agricultural and Mechanical College received from the
United States Government in 1919-20, according to the
latest available statistics issued by the United States Bureau
of Education, $340,124.

Nineteen states have a fixed tax for the support of their
institutions of higher education. Some of these states pro-
vide for the tax in their state constitutions while in others
the tax is by legislative enactment. In practically all states
having a special tax, the revenue derived therefrom is sup-
plemented by special appropriations by the Legislature.
The tax varies from a small fraction of a mill in some states
to more than three mills in others. In some states the tax
is applied to the support of only the state university, while
in others it applies to all the higher schools, including the
state normals. A few states provide a mill tax for building
purposes only. In most states the Legislature appropriates
from the general revenue a sum which is considered neces-
sary for the needs of the higher institutions. In several
states these institutions have large endowments, and a few,
including Texas, California, and Michigan, have a perma-
nent land endowment which supplements the annual income.

Dissatisfaction with the existing status of financial sup-
port for our state institutions of higher education has long
been felt by leading educators and statesmen. This has
been due in part to the inadequacy of the legislative appro-

6 University of Texas Bulletin

priations, and in part to the feeling that this method of
support is harmful in other ways which could be remedied
by a change in method. Some have proposed a constitu-
tional amendment, fixing a definite tax; for the special
schools; some have favored instead a legislative measure
establishing the tax, or as still others have proposed, set-
ting aside a certain per cent of the total state revenue for
the higher schools ; while yet another remedy advanced has
been the idea of a permanent fund created by the issuance
of bonds.

THE ARGUMENT PRO AND CON
THE ISSUES INVOLVED

It should be borne in mind that the question to be debated
is simply a question of the best method of providing the
necessary support commensurate with the interests and wel-
fare of the state. The affirmative will assume and the
negative will readily admit, that Texas is below even the
average of states of equal population and wealth, in the
matter of financal support given her state schools. The
issues involved, therefore, are: (1) Will the proposed plan
provide more liberal support than the present method?
(2) Are there other evils connected with the present
method which the proposed plan would remedy? (3) Is
the proposed plan better than any other that couldi be
advanced? (4) Does the experience of other states justify
the adoption of the proposed plan?

THE CASE FOR THE AFFIRMATIVE

In proposing a constitutional tax of three mills for the
support of our state institutions of higher learning, the
affirmative maintains:

1. (a) That under the existing plan of biennial appro-
priations all of the state's higher schools are suffering from
lack of sufficient funds to meet their growing needs. The
buildings, the equipment, and the teaching force of the
schools are inadequate and insufficient to meet the demands
of the student bodies. Dormitory and housing facilities are
unprovided ; shack and temporary wooden structures supply
the necessary classroom space; the services of the best
teachers and professors are hard to secure and retain on
account of the lowness and uncertainty of salary and po-
sition. Consequently Texas ranks far belovv^ states her
equal in wealth and population in providing for her higher
schools, and as a result many Texas students go outside

8 University of Texas Bulletin

of the state and spend thousands of dollars annually in
other educational institutions.

(b) The governing boards cannot formulate definite
policies for their respective schools covering a number of
years. They never know from one Legislature to the next
how much will be appropriated. One Legislature and a
Governor may follow a policy whereby certain provisions
are made for carrying on the schools, and they may make
fairly liberal appropriations ; while the next Legislature and
Governor may occupy a different attitude toward the schools
and hence abolish the provisions of the previous Legislature
or institute new or different provisions for carrying on the
schools and make less liberal appropriations. Thus the pro-
cess continues from time to time. Any successful business
enterprise must have clearly defined policies and plans for
future operation in order to be efficient and economical in
executing its purposes ; likewise, these same principles apply
to these public enterprises, and definite policies are just as
essential to their success and efficient and economical opera-
tion. The haphazard and uncertain plans and policies that
go hand in hand with legislative appropriations will be
eliminated through the mill tax.

(c) The schools are subject to undue political influence.
The heads of the institutions must spend most of their time
during each legislative session at the State Capitol in/ order
to present the needs and claims of their schools to the
Legislature. They must place themselves upon a common
level with every lobbyist, who comes for a selfish purpose,
in pleading for the educational facilities for the boys and
girls of the state. Such a policy must carry with it all the
wire pulling, log-rolling and swapping of votes that is known
to exist in legislative action. A Governor, or any member
or set of members of the Legislature, who may be or who
may become personal or political enemies of the heads of a
school or its faculty, can under the present plan injure or
seek to destroy that school in order to give vent to their
political antagonism. The action of the Thirty-seventh

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 9

Legislature in adopting the "Pope Amendment" to the ap-
propriation bills for the educational institutions shows
clearly the tendency by the Legislature to usurp the power
and authority of the governing boards and regulate the in
stitutions in the most( minute details. In frequent political
controversies these schools are made the tools of politics.
The affirmative contends that such is not consistent with
the steady growth and development of such institutions;
that the present plan inevitably draws these institutions
into the political arena to become the football of politics,
and that the mill tax will avoid such detrimental political
influences.

(d) Jealousies and hurtful rivalries among the different
institutions result from the biennial scramble. The heads
of the schools go in to get all they can for their particular
school, and each readily feels the discrimination and differ-
ence in treatment that may be received at the hands of the
Legislature. One school frequently. contends that a certain
function and sphere of activity belongs to it, while another
asserts that such function belongs to it and that it should
receive the appropriation for such work. Hence each school
becomes a rival of the other in the scramble for appropria-
tions. Such condition prevents the co-operation and cor-
relation of the work of the different schools into a unified
system.

The student may find material for the further develop-
ment of the arguments above outlined from the reports of
the Boards of Regents, the reports and investigations of the
Legislature, a part of which is contained herein, and from
the articles by the various Texas citizens and other excerpts
printed herein.

2. (a) That a constitutional tax of three mills will
render adequate financial aid. It would produce a revenue
of $10,366,080.26 as based upon the assessed valuation
of 1921 of $3,455,360,089. This revenue would furnish
about two million dollars more than the state schools of
higher learning requested for 1921-1922, and about five
and a half million more than the Legislature appropriated

10 University of Texas Bulletin

for 1921-1922. Hence the proposed tax would be very
liberal and would enable the schools to supply the present
need for buildings and equipment and to form a definite
policy for future maintenance.

(b) It will provide an automatic means of definite and
increasing support to meet the increasing demands of the
schools from year to year. The table of assessed valuations
contained herein shows that the average increased valua-
tion is about $100,000,000 annually. This increased valu-
ation would increase the mill tax revenue for the schools
about $300,000 per year. Hence as the enrollment increases
from year to year, the revenue would likewise increase with
the wealth of the state to meet such demands.

(c) It will remove the schools from politics. It relieves
them from their biennial appeal to the Legislature and the
consequent political controversies and influences resulting
therefrom.

(d) It will place them upon a dignified basis of independ-
ence that will remove existing causes of hurtful rivalry.
The revenue is both known and fixed for years in advance,
and they are no longer struggling competitors to be fed ac-
cording to the humor and whims of different law-making
bodies. Upon such basis they are left free to co-operate in
the correlation and unification of our educational system,
and to inaugurate more permanent policies.

3. The affirmative further maintains that a tax of three
mills, the revenue therefrom growing with the growth of
the state, will be adequate for the support of our institu-
tions of higher learning; that it should be a constitutional
provision, and not subject to change and repeal through
legislative action ; and that by the exercise of due foresight
unforseen contingencies or losses in the administration of
the school's funds can be provided against. Texas has a
vast expanse of territory, a large amount of undeveloped
resources ; and is fast becoming the wealthiest state in the
Union. The state valuation of property is more than three
times as great today, as the valuation of twenty years ago.
Hence the affirmative maintains, that, since a three mill tax

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 11

is very liberal at the outset, a sufficient income will be pro-
duced from the continuous growth in wealth of the state
to supply the needs of higher education for all time to come ;
that the need for. supplementary appropriations will not
exist and should therefore be prohibited. Such prohibition
will place the schools on notice that they must make pro-
visions from this income for any unforeseen contingencies
and economic fluctuations; and that such a policy would
establish a more economic and business like management of
the schools.

The constitutional provision would prevent one Legisla-
ture from destroying the work of another, and the hap-
hazard and unbusinesslike management that must prevail
under legislative appropriations and supervisions.

4. The experience of other states shows that a mill tax
sufficiently liberal is the best method for the support of
higher education. It is advocated and supported by the
most able authorities. The student will find ample ma-
terial herein showing the results of the mill tax in other
states, and the authorities supporting such a tax.

THE CASE FOR THE NEGATIVE

The negative will readily admit the need of more liberal
financial support for the state's higher educational institu-
tions. It may also be admitted that, under existing condi-
tions, these schools are sometimes subjected to unnecessary
and hurtful rivalries and political influences. However,
among other and better plans for meeting the situation than
that proposed by the affirmative are :

(1) Remove by constitutional amendment the present
prohibition upon the Legislature of levying taxes or mak-
ing appropriations for the erection of buildings for the
State University, and enact a statutory law levying a special
tax for the support of all the schools for higher education.

(2) Adopt a constitutional tax of two or two and a half
mills, say, and leave the Legislature free to make supple-
mentary appropriations.

12 University of Texas Bulletin

(3) Adopt a constitutional amendment that will permit
the issuing of bonds for the creation of a permanent fund
for the different institutions, such fund to be supplemented
by biennial legislative appropriations.

(4) Establish a severence tax on certain natural products*
as oil, gas, sulphur, lumber, etc., similar to that adopted by
the state of Louisiana as set forth in a subsequent part of
this pamphlet.

In weighing the advantages of any one or all of these
measures over the one advanced by the affirmative, let us
consider the objections to the affirmative proposition. First
and fundamentally it is too rigid. It does not admit of a
possible contingency when the schools would have need ot
additional assistance which they could not obtain on account
of the prohibition of appropriations by the Legislature.
Such a contingency might be due to a fire, a shrinking in
taxable value, on account of crop failure, financial panic, a
change in the method of valuation, or an unlooked-for in-
crease in attendance at the different schools. Furthermore,
Texas has established in the last six or eight years five new
institutions of higher education comprising the East Texas
Normal College, Sul Ross Normal College, Stephen F. Aus-
tin Normal, Grubbs Vocational College, and John Tarleton
Agricultural College and a mill tax that would have been
liberal and adequate a few years ago, would be absolutely
inadequate to meet the needs of today. Hence it is reason-
able to suppose that, with the continued growth and devel-
opment of the present institutions, with West Texas now
demanding an A. and M. College, and with the need for
other institutions that may arise in the future, the proposed
plan would be wholly inadequate within a few years. It has
been found expedient to increase the tax rate for general
revenues from time to time ; then why might It not be neces-
sary to do the same for the tax rate for higher education?
The negative contends that it would be unwise to tie our-
selves down to the hard and fast plan proposed by the af-
firmative.

The experience of other states does not argue either the

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 13

necessity for or the advisability of so rigid a measure. The
recent experience of Oregon, Montana and Arizona shows
clearly the inadvisability of such a measure. The increased
valuation has not kept pace with the growth and develop-
ment of the schools. They must conform to the economic
fluctuations under the proposed plan. This rigidity could
not be easily removed by constitutional amendment, for
experience shows that, no matter how obviously desirable
a constitutional change may be, it is next to impossible to
get the people to adopt it, especially if it would make pos-
sible an increase in the expenses of government.

This absolute removal of the schools from financial de-
pendence upon the Legislature is also undemocratic, and
might easily lead to extravagance and to the growth of aris-
tocratic or ultra-conservative tendencies in the schools. The
legislators are elected directly by the people and are highly
susceptible to the interests of the public. The budget sys-
tem and legislative control thereby furnishes those checks
and balances essential to the growth and development of
thoroughly democratic institutions. State supported insti-
tutions should be highly responsive to the public needs. In
a representative or democratic form of government the duly
elected representatives of the people must be the sole judge
of those needs. The boards of regents for the different in-
stitutions, who are appointed by the Governor, are usually
men that are very busy in private affairs. They have little
time to devote to the institutions, and consequently they
know very little about the real inner-workings and nature
of those institutions. They almost invariably do and act as
the head of their institutions advises and directs. Hence
under the affirmative's plan the schools would take from the
people of the state their taxes for support and at the same
time they would be practically the sole judge as to how they
would spend the people's money and the nature and kind of
service they would render to them. While it is admitted
that they should not be entirely dependent upon any par-
ticular legislature for support, yet to remove them alto-

14 University of Texas Bulletin

gether from any dependence upon the body which repre-
sents the people, would be equally as bad. A middle ground
is the best, such as would obtain under either of the plans
proposed by the negative.

The plan of issuing bonds for the creation of a permanent
fund for the different institutions, such fund to be supple-
mented by the biennial appropriations, might be advanced
as an alternative measure. This plan has from time to time
received the attention and support of educators and mem-
bers of the Legislature and of the governing boards of the
different institutions. A strong point in favor of bond
issues is that this would distribute the cost of education
more equitably, since a larger share of such cost would fall
upon succeeding generations who will reap the benefits of
educating the present generations. If cities and counties
may issue bonds for school purposes, why not the Legisla-
ture, representing the whole state, issue bonds for the
support of the special state schools? Is not one as demo-
cratic, as just, and as desirable as the other? The chief
point against such a proposition is the people's inherent
prejudice against the issuance of bonds. But the people
are also strongly opposed to any increase in the tax rate,
and the constitutional amendment proposed by the affirma-
tive would probably be as difficult to pass as would an
amendment authorizing and instructing the Legislature to
issue bonds for the creation of a permanent fund for the
purpose under consideration.

Either of the plans suggested by the negative would ren-
der adequate financial aid without leading to extravagance ;
would be sufficiently automatic and definite to enable the
school authorities to pursue consistent plans through a per-
iod of years ; would remove the schools from politics so far
as that is desirable; would lessen materially the strife and
jealousies among the different institutions caused by the
evils which must be expected from the rigid and undemo-
cratic plan of the affirmative.

AFFIRMATIVE REBUTTAL
1. The affirmative will need to be prepared to point out

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 15

the defects of any plan the negative may offer. Usually it
may be urged against the plans of the negative that they
fail to solve the problems of higher education. They will
either provide inadequate revenue or subject the schools
to the same harmful political influences that exist under the
present plan, and usually both of these objections may be
urged. Hence no material improvement is obtained over
the present system. In reference to the four plans pre-
viously stated the affirmative may urge that the negative
have agreed with them insofar as their plans furnish a
certain and definite income ; but the affirmative will contend
further that their plans do not go far enough to provide
a sufficient income that is definite and permanent; that if
supplemental appropriations are permitted or if their plan
is subject to change and repeal by any and every Legisla-
ture, the same political interference and haphazard methods
will continue to exist and no efficient business policy can be
established and continued.

2. The affirmative in defense of their plan will urge that
the negative's objection to its rigidity is based upon the as-
sumption that the income will be insufficient to meet each
and every need as it arises, and that in the course of a few
years it will be entirely inadequate ; but the affirmative con-
tends, that this assumption does not arise in reference to
their plan, that a three-mill tax provides a very liberal in-
come sufficient to provide at once the needed buildings and
equipment, that the income continues to increase with the
development and increase in wealth of the state and wi!l
be sufficient to meet the growing needs of higher education
in tfte future. Then, since the income is sufficient and sup-
plemental appropriations are not needed, the same should
be prohibited. Such a plan will force the schools to adopt
a business policy to meet any contingency that might arise,
and it would prevent the schools from going to the Legisla-
ture, and seeking supplemental appropriations that would
result in extravagant expenditures.

3. The affirmative may further contend that the people
will have sufficient control through the Governor, and the

16 University of Texas Bulletin

Board of Regents, to make the schools responsive to the
public needs and at the same time keep in check any ex-
travagant, undemocratic and ultra-conservative tendencies.
It may be granted that in the absence of the legislative con-
trol and check on the schools through legislative appropria-
tions under the present system the people would not have
sufficient control to make the schools responsive to their
needs and welfare; but the affirmative will contend that
proper control and check by other methods, can be obtained
that will be better than the popular control and check se-
cured through legislative appropriations which inherently
carries with it certain evils previously pointed out by the
affirmative. The Board of Regents or governing boards
could be made responsible directly to the people, or an edu-
cational council as suggested by the Central Investigating
Committee of the Thirty-fifth Legislature could be estab-
lished in order to give the people proper and sufficient con-
trol and check on the schools under the proposed mill tax.
Other and sufficient data may be found in the subsequent
pages to further sustain the arguments of the affirmative.

The foregoing outlined arguments for the affirmative and
negative are intended to be suggestive only; and the stu-
dents are expected to organize and develop the arguments
for themselves. The student will need to be more specific
and concrete and to develop more fully the arguments as
suggested in the outline. Material for other and new ar-
guments may be gathered from the subsequent articles con-
tained herein.

CO O O O O O
03 O O O O O

o o o o o o
' q q q q q q

2 TH o" -* d d d d o" d 10 d o* 10

+3 tOTHO03O-^OscOOCMLO-^05

Oj rH~-<*O5iO3-<3<tOO5O3COtOOO5O5^tO

oi co LO" oT ccf to" r^ 03" 03~ TH" 03" r^ r-T 05" oT

r< b€ .OSCOC-^rHOSOSCOOSt-t-tr-OS
CbJOCOt-rHrHTHO3r-i<MrHrHTH 4—

3 S

O &

OOOoOOOOO

ooooooooo

(M O O O O

03 ® ® q "— j

O5 rH rH rf O
'-|tOO3003O5T^OcOtO^Tj<05

^ r£ co_ -^ q ^ ^ q co cq 03 op to CM_

fOLOO300LO^fCOO3
O5t>t— LOrHrHO

^CO^t-rHrHTHCOOS

O LO O O

tO -<* CO LO LO
00 O t> 00 O5
i—i O3 rH rH

P COOOOOOOOoOOOO

^ oaqqqqqqqqqqqq

c SLoddddddio'dddd

O ^COOOrHOOrHrHCOt>I>LOcOO5

O rH"°l^OtT0^LO'l~lTHl^<:g~C^00~

«n co co" oT TjT c<T 03" co" ^ d LO" LO r-T -^

.t-OOCOO3Ti<G500coLO^tOl>

_- h/)bJDr~|OO3O3O3T}*rHc<|O3O3rH

Q
O

«
ffi

COOOOOOOOoOOOO

j^JqqqqqqOqqoqq

O5LOTJHddLOdC>LOLOLOLOO

rHCOOOrHOOLOrHOSQqOSrH^-^f

•> OS LO Tf O3^ CO LO C*^ 00 LO 00^ TJ< O3^

^-^ CO LO 00 ^^ rH CO "^ f^i ^* 00 tO LO

t-^OOOS-^coOSr^TjHOOOO

^jr)rH^OOrHO3rHCOC'3Tj*COrHCOO3

^ f O O 05

o o o
o o o

OoOOOOOO

LOoq^qqqq
ddLO-^oooLo'd

LO LO TH T"1 t- O rH

t- t> to co to

CO CO rH O3 LO "<tf
. tO O O rH CO

b/) to r- co LO co

^^ "^ OO "^ rH
3 O O3 CO CO rH
? O -^ CO LO rH

5 w

§000000
o o o o o o

fn O3 O O O

03 03 q q q
Kj__it~oocot>^QLoocoodo

r^ ^LO-^LOOtOLoCOOSOSOOOLO
^^ CO LO "^ "^ C>* eo ^^ rH ^t1 £*• "^ CO
CO Co"T-rT-rCo"rjr— rT^O5"o3"rH1Lo"co"
-"-'tC-OOosSTf^OOSCOrH
^^LOcOoo^LO^cO03CO

03
03 g

X o> t
« 60 O

H a 55

o *

S >

Z-v

0) C
> 03

& < OH

O o

o 6
•e'1

bx) o

^•-g

c g

5 >

a .§

H-g
^1

13 :
< ^
s

College of
Sam Hou

North Texas State Nor;
Southwest Texas N

ft
9 3

02 02

University of Texas Bulletin

TEXAS TAX RATE AND THE TOTAL VALUE OF THE PROP-
ERTY ASSESSED EACH YEAR FOR THE YEARS
1884 TO 1921, INCLUSIVE

TAKEN FROM THE REPORT OF COMPTROLLER

Year

Rate of Tax
Revenue School

1884 $0.17%

$0.12y2

1885 ....

1886 ....

1887 ....

;...., .25

1888 ....

.10

1889

1890 ....

1891 ....

16%

1892 ....

1893

1894 ....

.15

1895 ....

: 25

1896 ....

1897 ....

j 20

1898 ....

1899 ....

1900 ....

16%

1901 ....

16%

1902 ....

16%

1903 ....

16%

1904 ....

16%

1905 ....

1906 ....

1907 ....

12%

1908 ....

06V4

1909 ....

1910 ....

1911 ....

.12%

1912 ....

1913 ....

1914 ....

12%

1915

1916 ....

1917

1918 ....

1919 .

.35

.12%

.12%
.12%

.121/2

.12%

.20

.18

.20

.16%

.17

.20

.35

Total
Valuation

5 603,060,917

621,011,989

630,591,029

650,412,401

681,084,904

729,175,564

782,111,883

856,202,283

856,526,600

886,175,395

865,120,898

860,910,567

850,309,246

854,894,775

854,619,365

922,927,231

946,320,258

982,187,865

1,017,571,732

1,064,948,033

1,082,779,775

1,139,022,730

1,221,159,869

1,635,297,115

2,174,122,480

2,309,803,626

2,388,500,124

2,515,632,745

2,532,710,050

2,680,907,991

2,743,078,976

2,755,171,793

2,748,310,775

2,871.744,269

3,012,819,287

3,200,295,205

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 19

1920 22 .35 3,390,953,149

1921 22 .35 3,455,360,089

ANNUAL ENROLLMENT AT THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS
FROM 1883 TO 1921

1883-1884 221 1903-1904 1,294

1884-1885 209 1904-1905 1,414

1885-1886 199 1905-1906 1,907

1886-1887 245 1906-1907 2,141

1887-1888 250 1907-1908 2,321

1888-1889 278 1908-1909 2,425

1889-1890 309 1909-1910 2,522

1890-1891 283 1910-1911 2,712

1891-1892 388 1911-1912 2,872

1892-1893 353 1912-1913 3,323

1893-1894 482 1913-1914 3,499

1894-1895 630 1914-1915 3,899

1895-1896 730 1915-1916 4,215

1896-1897 751 1916-1917 4,624

1897-1898 800 1917-1918 4,045

1901-1902 1,240 1920-1921 6,988

1902-1903 1,281 1918-1919 5,060

1 808-1899 986 1919-1920 6,445

1899-1900 983

1900-1901 1,094 Total 73,318

COLLEGE ENROLLMENT IN TEXAS
J. A. HILL, PRESIDENT WEST TEXAS STATE NORMAL
Name of College 1910-1911 1920-1921

University of Texas 2,712 6,988

A .and M. College (excluding Summer School) 1,082 1,848

College of Industrial Arts 340 2,016

Sam Houston Normal Institute 1,073 2,101

North Texas State Normal College 1,261 3,349

Southwest Texas State Normal College (ex-
cluding Summer School) 506 712

West Texas State Normal College ' 612 2,179

East Texas State Normal College ... 1,858

Sul Ross State Normal College 417

Prairie View State Normal College 766 820

John Tarleton College 740

Grubbs Vocational College 493

Total 8,352 23,521

20 University of Texas Bulletin

LEGISLATIVE APPROPRIATIONS FOR SOME OF THE TEXAS
STATE SCHOOLS OF HIGHER LEARNING

1903-04 1922-23

University of Texas $173,006.66 $1,395;461.00

Agricultural and Mechanical College. . 139,000.00 739,910.00

College of Industrial Arts 53,483.00 292,940.00

Sam Houston Normal School 40,100.00 292,940.00

North Texas State Normal 80,250.00 231,330.00

Southwest Texas Normal School 37,831.00 192,600.00

Prairie View Normal School 32,500.00 176,204.00

THE MILL-TAX METHOD OF SUPPORT FOR STATE
INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN TEXAS

BY F. M. BRALLEY, PRESIDENT, COLLEGE OF INDUSTRIAL ARTS,
DENTON, TEXAS

The mill-tax method of supporting state institutions of
higher learning has been tried, and still obtains in several
states of the Union. In every case, this plan has proven
more satisfactory than has the plan of support by legisla-
tive appropriations alone. In other states, the scheme of
support is by a mill-tax and supplemental appropriations
by the Legislature. In no state has this method proven un-
satisfactory. On the other hand the authorities of these
state institutions are enthusiastic in their approbation, and
emphatically state that such method is far superior and is
much to be preferred to the former old method of appro-
priations alone. The certainty and dependability of the
mill-tax method give assurance and continuity to the annual
maintenance of higher education; and furthermore, such
plan affords an opportunity for planning and realizing sure
and ample development of state-supported higher educa-
tional institutions.

Among the states in which the mill-tax method is in
operation may be mentioned Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado,
Illinois, Indiana, Kansas (voted but not levied), Kentucky,
Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New
York (temporary), Ohio, Oregon, Tennessee, Utah, Wash-
ington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 21

The adoption of the mill-tax method of support for the
state institutions of higher education of Texas would re-
quire an amendment to the state constitution. The rate of
such tax, in order to remedy the present situation and guar-
antee future support and development, should be between
two mills, and three and one-half mills. The inadequate
support of the Texas state institutions of higher learning,
for the current fiscal year, is equivalent, approximately,
to a two-mill tax. Since no expansion, increased facilities,
or enlargements were provided for the present fiscal year,
it is evident that a two-mill tax would not be adequate.

In order to procure the adoption at an election by the
people, of an amendment to the state constitution authoriz-
ing the mill-tax method of support, it would be necessary
to have the united, wholesouled, and harmonious support of
all the state institutions of higher education. Such support,
in my opinion, would be contingent upon an equitable and
satisfactory fixed apportionment among the said institu-
tions of the income to be derived from such tax. Therefore,
the rate of the mill-tax to be levied for the state -institutions
of higher learning and an equitable and fair apportionment
of the income from such tax among the several state insti-
tutions of higher education, must be plainly set forth in the
proposed constitutional amendment. In addition, a definite
apportionment in the constitutional amendment would ren-
der impossible any misunderstanding among the institutions
that might arise if the amendment failed to make such
apportionment. On the other hand, such a plan would have
the effect of encouraging and maintaining harmony and co-
operation among the state supported educational institu-
tions. It seems feasible and expedient to me that the au-
thorities of all the state institutions of higher learning in
Texas should unite on such a plan of procedure and, in a
spirit of concerted action and a realization of a common
purpose, clearly present the necessity and the merits of
such a plan to the people of Texas. Such presentation
should be made in clear and unequivocal terms and in a
manner that would be convincing to the people of Texas.

22 University of Texas Bulletin

This unanimous action and hearty co-operation is the only
hope for the adoption of the mill tax method, in whole or in
part, for the support of our institutions of higher learning.
I believe there is a desire and a disposition on the part of
all authorities of state institutions of higher learning in
Texas to co-operate along broad, constructive lines of edu-
cational procedure. In this way, hurtful competition would
be practically impossible while initiative, freedom, and
alertness, so essential to educational efficiency, will be pre-
served and guaranteed. There is no such thing as pro-
crustean uniformity and the highest efficiency at one and
the same time among educational institutions. Since these
institutions are supported by public funds and since there
is ample room in Texas for full development of them all,
both public and private, their authorities should join hands
in a spirit of genuine comradeship, and should labor unitedly
for a common aim. Our wish now is to place the College
of Industrial Arts upon record as assuming an attitude and
spirit of fellowship and hearty sympathy and friendship
for all other educational institutions in Texas. Further-
more, we wish to extend to this committee, and all friends
of higher education, unreservedly, our entire strength and
ability in furthering and perpetuating any movement or
measure that may contribute to the promotion and upbuild-
ing of the educational machinery and of society in general
in this commonwealth. In presenting such a plan to the
people, we can assure you that the alumnae of the College
of Industrial Arts, representing nearly 20,000 women resid-
ing in all parts of the state, will give their assistance will-
ingly and unreservedly.

HON. A. B. CURTIS, MEMBER OF TEXAS LEGISLATURE,
FORT WORTH, TEXAS

It is my opinion that the best method of distribution of
the public funds, whether national, state or local, is to vest
the power of such distribution in the same department of
government vested with the power and duty to provide for

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 23

the levy and collection of such funds. All state revenues
must be levied and collected under bills passed by the Legis-
lature, subject to the action of the Governor thereon. The
legislators are elected directly by the people and are highly
susceptible to the interests of the public. I think it unwise
to take away from the Legislature the power to finally pass
upon the different appropriations of the moneys which it
must provide for, and vest such power in boards of regents
or other bodies which are appointed and not elected by di-
rect vote of the people. Each institution and department,
under the present law, is expected to prepare its budget
and submit the same to the Board of Control; the original
budgets with recommendations of the Board of Control are
presented to the financial committees of both houses, and
the heads of the different institutions and departments may
and do advise with said committees as to the proper appro-
priations to be made. The bills as finally recommended by
the committees are subject to public discussion and to the
approval of the membership of both houses and to the action
of the Governor. This budget system with the checks pro-
vided on the action of the heads of the different institutions
and departments, as well as the action of the Legislature,
is in my opinion superior to any other method which has
been called to my attention.

It is but natural that the heads of each institution and
department should think that their particular institution or
department are of prime importance, and each such head
does strive in every honorable manner to secure the appro-
priation which he thinks proper for his particular depart-
ment or institution. If our constitution should be amended
and the mill-tax imposed and all discretion as to the amount
of expenditure should be taken away from the Legislature,
it is but natural that each institution would find a method
to expend all the taxes collected for its maintenance.

If a mill-tax ought to be imposed for the support of the
higher educational institutions the same method should log-
ically be pursued as to each and every institution and de-
partment. If such should be done and a separate mill-tax

24 University of Texas Bulletin

imposed for the maintenance of each institution and depart-
ment, some scientific method must first be worked out by
which each would have sufficient but not too much appro-
priation for its maintenance. There could be no provision
made in constitutional amendments providing for mill-tax
for the increased or decreased amounts that might prove
to be necessary for each department or institution as the
same might demand larger or smaller appropriations; for
if such provision should be made, the power must then be
vested in the Legislature or some other body to increase or
decrease such appropriations and to provide appropriations
for new institutions or departments as the same might be-
come necessary, and such method would be subject to the
same objections as are urged against the present method.
If the rate of taxation is absolutely fixed by the constitu-
tion for each department or institution, the same could not
be varied except by constitutional amendment, which is
slow and uncertain. If the Legislature is still to be allowed
the power to add appropriations out of the general funds to
mill-taxes imposed, or to use any portion thereof for any
other purpose, no real change has been made.

If it is proposed to levy a lump mill-tax for all the higher
educational institutions, the same method should be pursued
as to all the departments and all the eleemosynary institu-
tions. If this is the method proposed, power must still be
vested in the Legislature or some other body to make distri-
bution of the mill-tax levies to the different institutions and
departments. This would result in no material change or
improvement of the present method.

It has been charged that our educational institutions are
now in politics and that their heads must use political meth-
ods to obtain the necessary appropriations.

As stated in the foregoing paragraphs the mill-tax method
offers no relief from this objection unless a fixed mill-tax
is to be imposed for each institution and department, which
could not be done in such a method as to insure proper but
not exorbitant appropriations, as the amount of revenues
and the demands for each institution and department might

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 25

vary, and as the same might vary no relief could be afforded
except by the slow and uncertain method of again amending
our constitution. In fact under such a method, the institrr
tions would fare well and probably have exorbitant appro-
priations during prosperous years when large taxes are
collected, and would have inadequate support during the
hard years when large amounts of taxes remain unpaid.

If the mill-tax method should be carried to its logical
conclusion and the amount of taxes allowed by the constitu-
tion should be apportioned by constitutional amendment
among the • different institutions and departments, there
would be no way to provide for the additional institutions
or departments that it might become necessary to establish
except to increase the constitutional limit of taxation and
thereby unduly burden the taxpayers. Such increased bur-
dens are the logical result of the mill-tax method of taxa-
tion.

There has been considerable complaint to the effect that
under the present method our different educational institu-
tions may be allowed varying amounts by the Legislature,
and that there is therefore no uniformity in appropriations
allowed them. This criticism is largely unwarranted. Dur-
ing the two terms of my experience in the Legislature there
have been at least three increases in the salaries allowed
in the budgets for the different educational institutions. The
last increase was allowed upon the theory that larger sala-
ries were temporarily necessary because of the abrormal
and unusual expenses of living. This temporary increase
could not have been provided for under the mill-tax method,
but was provided for under the present system. At the
last session of the Legislature, many of the legislators be-
lieved that these temporary increases had served their pur-
pose and that living expenses had about returned to normal
and that therefore the budget allowed for the ensuing two
years should be upon the same basis as obtained prior to
the temporary increases. The result was a long continued
fight and a compromise under which the professors in the
State University were allowed about $4,500 annual salaries

26 University of Texas Bulletin

and the heads of the different normal institutions $4,300
annual salaries, the same being material increases over the
amounts allowed prior to the emergency raises. This re-
sulted in a slight decrease of certain salaries from that
allowed under said emergency increases, but such decreases
were warranted and necessary and proper to prevent the
imposition of exorbitant taxation upon the people. The
same session of the Legislature by the elimination of un-
necessary positions and expenses cut the appropriations for
the different state departments for the coming two years
in the amount of about $750,000, which cut "would have
been impossible if the mill-tax method had been in force.
As a result of these cuts the same tax rate was levied for
1922 as that for 1921 ; whereas if such cuts had not been
made it would have been necessary to levy a tax to the con-
stitutional limit and an additional indirect tax on gasoline
or some other commodity of general use in order to provide
the necessary revenue.

In view of the present financial distress of the vast ma-
jority of the people I do not think such increases were war-
ranted. If a mill-tax adequate for the period of unusually
high prices had been levied no reduction thereof could have
been made by the Legislature when normal prices returned.
If a mill tax had been levied during the period of normal
prices, no provision could have been made for the period
of inflated prices.

For years our federal government has endured the ills
resulting from dictation from different bureaus as to the
amount appropriated for their maintenance. As a result
direct and indirect federal taxation has become more and
more burdensome until at last there is an effort to enforce
a budget system and for Congress to exercise its legal func-
tions in the matter of control of appropriations. If we
were to provide for mill taxes for our different institutions,
the same would be expended under the direction of their
governing boards and we have no assurance that such
method would not result in the same extravagant and ex-
cessive expenditures as have existed in the different federaJ

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 27

departments and bureaus. The governing bodies of the dif-
ferent state institutions are not elected by the people arid
are not directly responsible to the .public. They are nat-
urally and properly enthusiastic for their particular insti-
tutions. They are likely if uncontrolled, to incur expenses
which might not appear necessary to a disinterested body
representing the public and charged with the duty of ap-
portioning the available revenues. An an allustration of
the truth of what I have just said, the bills presented to the
last Legislature provided for appropriations for publicity
for three of the educational institutions varying from
$2500 to $10,000 per annum, when the heads of said insti-
tutions were complaining that they did not have sufficient
facilities to take care of all the students desiring to attend
their institutions. This unnecessary appropriation was cut
out by the Legislature. Under the mill tax system such
cut would have been impossible.

It has been widely charged that I am an enemy to educa-
tion. This charge is untrue. I am a patron of the State
University and was at one time a public school teacher. 1
realize that it is imperative that provision be made for our
public schools and that it is fit and proper that liberal appro-
priations be provided for our higher educational institution.
However, our public schools are of primary importance and
should be first provided for, and thereafter due provision
should be made for the higher educational institutions. If
we were to provide a mill tax for the higher educational
institutions and give them the amounts they might demand,
I am fearful that there would not be sufficient remaining
available revenues to provide public school facilities for the
children who might not be given such advantages by their
local communities.

Before we undertake a new and largely untried experi-
ment in the method of distribution of taxes and depart from
the method which has been proven efficient by years of ex-
perience, we should be sure that the new method offers ma-
terial advantages. I do not believe that any such advan-
tages would be offered by the mill tax system, therefore I

28 University of Texas Bulletin

am satisfied to pursue the course laid down by our fathers
and under which we have prospered for all these years.

THE FINANCIAL SUPPORT OF OUR INSTITUTIONS
OF HIGHER LEARNING

BY W. B. BIZZELL, PRESIDENT, A. AND M. COLLEGE OF TEXAS

State supported institutions of higher learning in the
United States are generally financed in one or more of the
following ways:

(1) By direct appropriation of the Legislature.

(2) By a millage tax.

(3) By a combination of these methods.

These methods are supplemented in individual cases by
the income from land-grant endowments, private benefac-
tions, and taxes on mineral resources. In the state of
Louisiana the latter takes the form of a salvage tax and
of natural resources, including timber as well as minerals.

It is almost universally agreed that financial support of
institutions of higher learning exclusively by legislative
enactment is not satisfactory. The reasons are well known
to those who have studied the defects of this plan. It has
been found from experience that support exclusively by leg-
islative action is uncertain and often irrational. The fre-
quent changes in the personnel of legislative bodies prevent
an adequate understanding on the part of the members
of the Legislature of the actual needs of the state supported
institutions of higher learning and an intelligent under-
standing of the problems of financial administration.

As a means of overcoming these difficulties a number of
states have provided either by statute or by constitutional
amendment for supplementing legislative appropriations
through a millage tax. This policy has greatly increased
the administrative efficiency in the institutions of higher
learning in every state where this policy has been adopted.
The states supporting institutions by this method are pro-
vided with dependable maintenance which enables the ad-
ministrative authorities to plan for the development of the

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 29

physical plants and expend the facilities of the institutions
in an intelligent and carefully considered way.

Existing conditions in Texas seem to justify a radical
change in the policy of financing our state supported insti-
tutions of higher learning. The increasing cost of govern-
ment has caused many educators and other public spirited
citizens to feel a deep concern about the future support of
our educational institutions. This concern is enhanced in
view of the fact that the number of students who are seek-
ing admission to our colleges and universities is increasing
faster than present facilities for their education. This con-
dition seems to justify a more comprehensive plan for finan-
cing our institutions than has yet been provided in any ot
the several states.

It is suggested, therefore, that a different policy be
adopted with reference to financing a development of the
physical plants from the policy providing for maintenance
and support. This plan contemplates a bond issue for per-
manent improvements at the several institutions of higher
learning and a millage tax to be supplemented, if necessary,
by legislative appropriation for maintenance and support.

We are reminded that the local political units have al
ready adopted this policy. Hard surfaced roads, city streets,
and public buildings in counties and cities are uniformily
financed through bond issues. Why not extend this policy
with reference to permanent improvements at our state sup-
ported educational institutions? This plan would distribute
the cost over a period of years and either relieve the tax
burden or enable the Legislature to provide more adequately
for the support of the state government.

The objection is raised that it would require a constitu-
tional amendment to authorize the Legislature to provide
such a bond issue and that there is little hope that the
people would endorse a plan of this kind. I am not at all
sure that this argument is valid. If it is valid the same
argument would apply to a millage tax, which will also
require a constitutional amendment. There is reason to
believe that if a constitutional amendment were proposed

30 University of Texas Bulletin

providing both for a bond issue for permanent improve-
ment and a millage tax for maintenance and support, it
would pass, if the people were thoroughly informed concern-
ing the merits of the proposal. At any rate I am convinced
that the benefits that would be derived from such a policy
are so great as to justify submitting the proposal to the
people for their consideration.

MAINTENANCE OF OUR INSTITUTIONS OF
HIGHER LEARNING

BY CLARENCE OUSLEY

As a member of the conference for education in Texas,
during several years, and as a member, first of the board of
regents of the College of Industrial Arts, and then of the
board of regents of the University, covering in the aggre-
gate a period of about fifteen years, I gave devoted study
to the subject of the maintenance of our institutions of
higher learning. I was aided by a somewhat elaborate re-
search by Mr. Arthur Lefevre and by investigations con-
ducted under the leadership of Mr. Will C. Hogg. As a
result of these studies and as a result of my experience upon
the boards of control of these two institutions, I came to th«^
conclusion that a specific mill tax was the only dependable
method, and in the long run was the most economical meth-
od, of supporting the institutions.

A college or a university should have a reasonable as-
surance of a definite maintenance over a long term of years
in order that its executive officers may intelligently plan
for its development. Such planning is impossible under
the present system of fluctuating and uncertain appropria-
tions. I believe that any open-minded man who studies
the subject will come to a like conclusion.

There is some difference of opinion as to whether the mill
tax should be fixed in the constitution or should be provided
by statute. To fix it in the constitution would make it
more certain, but on the other hand a constitutional limita-
tion would make it rather difficult to provide for new in-
stitutions or to make the adjustments among institutions

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 31

as population increases and new educational needs appear.
Therefore I incline to the view that the more expedient
method is to make the mill tax statutory. Experience in
other states shows that where a mill tax is set up by statute
it is rarely, if ever, repealed.

T. H. HARRIS, STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUC-
TION OF LOUISIANA

I am very strongly of the opinion that the constitution
should require a minimum support for state educational
institutions. The constitutional provisions here in Louis-
iana are to the effect that the state university shall he sup-
ported from July 1, 1922 until January 1, 1925 out of the
proceeds of a two per cent severance tax on such natural
products -as oil, gas, sulphur, lumber, etc., up to a maximum
•of five million dollars for the period mentioned, and further,
that the Legislature shall have authority, at its discretion,
to make any additions to this support. After January 1,
1925, the University is guaranteed a minimum support of a
half a mill tax on the state assessment. On present values
this will amount to about one million dollars a year. The
Legislature has authority to add to this tax should it see
fit to do so.

The other state educational institutions, that is, normal
schools, etc., are guaranteed by the constitution a minimum
support of $700,000 a year with the provision that the Leg-
islature may make such additions to this as it may see fit.

My opinion is that these constitutional provisions are
very wise. I have been around legislatures for a good many
years, and I have observed that when a Legislature meets,
all of the interests of the state are there, and that tht-y pre-
sent their claims for financial support very strongly; and
unless guaranteed a reasonable support to the schools these
institutions frequently stand to suffer.

Those in charge of state educational institutions mu^t
make plans that extend through several years, and th^s they
can not do unless the support is certain and permanent.

We find that this is also true of the public schools oroper.

32 University of Texas Bulletin

The constitution guarantees a minimum of both state and
local support which is, it is perfectly safe to say, materially
larger than would be realized by the public schools if such
a provision were not in the constitution.

METHODS OF SUPPORT FOR THE STATE COLLEGES

OF TEXAS

BY ANNIE WEBB BLANTON, STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF
PUBLIC INSTRUCTION

In my opinion the best method of supporting the state
colleges of Texas is by a mill tax provided for in the con-
stitution of the state.

Our constitution and statutes place the government of our
state colleges in the hands of the boards of regents of these
institutions. Members of these boards serve for at least
six years. They have the opportunity of becoming familiar
with the plans of work and with the merits of members of
the faculty. They are able, through their knowledge of the
institutions, to use the money appropriated for their sup-
port, to the best advantage. With the multitudinous other
duties forced upon their attention no legislative body can
do this.

Of recent years the state Legislature has assumed partly
the functions of the board of regents. Instead of appro-
priating for each institution what the Legislature feels that
the state can afford to give to the school, the Legislature has
undertaken to regulate every detail of the expenditures. It
has placed about the funds appropriated, such rigid restric-
tions that it has been impossible for the board of regents
to use these funds to the best advantage of the school.

By this system the boards of regents can not recognize or
reward merit in members of the faculty, and the feeling has
become prevalent in the state schools that the motto that
should be placed above their doors — so far as members of
the faculty are concerned — is "Ye, who enter here leave
hope behind."

No institution can develop as it should without continuity

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 33

of plans and certainty of revenue. It is uncertainty of
revenue that paralyzes progress in our state institutions
under the present plan of legislative appropriation and leg-
islative dictation. No institution should be absolutely at
the mercy of political conditions and political influences.
Petty politics has for years produced more or less stagna-
tion in regard to school advancement in Texas.

By placing in the state constitution a mill tax, the pro-
ceeds of which shall be justly divided among the various
state institutions, and by placing a provision in the consti-
tution that the proceeds of this tax shall be appropriated by
the Legislature, the funds to be under the direction of the
boards of regents of the state institutions, we shall secure
certainty of support and continuity of plans, and an era for
higher education will dawn in Texas.

A notable instance of where this plan is followed in the
Southern States is the state of Louisiana, which has entirely
removed its state institutions from any kind of financial
domination by the state Legislature, and a number of North-
ern States have followed this plan. I am attaching here-
with a statement as to the methods of support followed in
the various states.

There is no more reason why our state schools should be
dominated by having their expenditures itemized for them
by the Legislature than that this should be done for our
city schools. A large city school system spends many times
the amount appropriated for most of our state schools. Its
revenues are absolutely at the disposal of its board of edu-
cation, subject only to restrictions made by the state laws.
Certainly the state board of regents is equally to be trusted
with the city board of regents. The attempt to dominate
the state institutions by the state Legislature has been the
result of political influences, and this kind of practice can
be stopped only by changing the constitution of the state of
Texas.

34 University of Texas Bulletin

SUPPORT OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS IN THE
UNITED STATES

BY THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

In view of the fact that the matter of a special tax for
Texas state colleges is now under discussion, and the State
Department of Education has been called upon for the most
recent statistics as to the support of state colleges in other
states, there was recently sent out by the State Superintend-
ent of Texas to the state superintendent of each of the other
states of the union, a questionnaire in regard to the method
of support of state colleges followed in that state. Replies
have been received from all of these except Alabama, Colo-
rado, Maryland, and South Carolina. Facts as to these four
states were, therefore, gathered from their most recent bi-
ennial reports.

These replies show that nearly all of the states of the
union have some kind of permanent fund, the income of
which goes to the state institutions for higher education.
In addition, these institutions receive support either from a
mill tax or from legislative appropriations.

The following thirty states have no mill tax, and their
state colleges are supported chiefly by legislative appropria-
tions: Alabama, California, Connecticut, Colorado, Dela-
ware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland,
Massachusetts, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hamp-
shire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Caro-
lina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island-,
South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Vermont, Virginia,
West Virginia. Of these, two states, Nebraska and North
Dakota, formerly had a statutory mill tax, for the support
of state colleges, but this provision was repealed.

In the remaining eighteen states, the state schools have
for their support a special tax, the details of which are
summarized below:
Arizona: Tax of one mill for the state university, to be

increased next year to one and three-tenths mills.
Arkansas: Tax of one mill for the state university; tax

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 35

of six-tenths of one mill for the state agricultural
schools; tax of two-tenths of one mill for the state
normal school ; tax of one and two-tenths mills for the
eleemosynary institutions ; tax of two-tenths of one mill
for vocational education; tax of twelve-hundredths of
one mill for colored normal.

Illinois : Tax of three and three-fourths mills for the state
university and agricultural college, which is one in-
stitution.

Indiana : Tax of one-half mill for colleges ; of the proceeds
of this, Indiana University receives two-fifths, Purdue
University, two-fifths, and the state normal schools,
one-fifth.

Kentucky : Tax of seven-fortieths of one mill for the state
university; tax of five-eighthieths of one mill for each
state normal school.

Louisiana : Severance tax for the state university until
January 1, 1925. This is two per cent of the gross
output of mineral resources severed from soil, air, or
water, such as gas, oil, sulphur, salt, etc. After Jan-
uary 1, 1925, the constitution sets aside an annual one-
half mill tax for the support of the state university.
The constitution provides that not less than $700,000
per year shall be set aside for the normal schools and
the eleemosynary institutions.

Maine: The University is not strictly a state institution.
A state tax of three and one-third mills is levied for
educational purposes generally. The state normal
schools and public elementary and high schools receive
support from this tax.

Michigan : Tax of three-fifths of one mill for state univer-
sity; tax of one-fifth of one mill for the state agricul-
tural college.

Minnesota: Tax of twenty-three hundredths of one mill
for the state university. The agricultural college is a
part of the university.

Montana: Tax of one and one-half mills for all state in-
stitutions. These are all under one executive head, the
chancellor, and no specified division of the tax is made
by law.

Nevada: Tax of one and two-tenths mills for state uni-
versity until 1925; after that, one and three-tenths
mills. All state colleges are on one campus, and are
included in the university.

Ohio: Tax of 125 thousandths of one mill for buildings;
legislative appropriations for support. Of the product

36 University of Texas Bulletin

of the mill tax, 72 per cent goes to the Ohio state Uni-
versity, which includes the agricultural college and nor-
mal schools, and the remainder to other state colleges.

Oregon : Tax of one and twelve hundredths mill for the
agricultural college; tax of eighty-four hundredths of
one mill for the state university; tax of one-tenth of
one mill for the state normal school.

Tennessee: Tax of one-half of one mill for the state uni-
versity; which includes the agricultural college.

Utah: Twenty-eight per cent of the entire property tax
goes to the state colleges. Of this, the state university
receives 64.43 per cent; the main agricultural college
receives 28.34 per cent; and the branch agricultural
college receives 7.23 per cent.

Washington : Tax of one and one-tenth mills for the state
university; tax of sixty-seven hundredths of one mill
for the agricultural college; tax of 1659 ten-thou-
sandths of one mill for the state normal school.

Wisconsin : Tax of three-eighths of one mill for the state
university, and one-sixth of one mill for the normal
schools.

Wyoming: Tax of one-half of one mill for the state uni-
versity, which includes the agricultural college and
normal school. Of this, one-eighth of one mill is for
buildings, and three-eighths of one mill, for current
expenses.

JOSEPH D. SAYERS, EX-GOVERNOR OF TEXAS

I strongly favor the movement to secure a steady and an
adequate revenue for the support and maintenance of the
institutions of learning as named, through the adoption
of a constitutional amendment providing for the levy of a
special tax for the purpose; upon the condition, however,
that the movement does not contemplate that the adminis-
tration of those institutions shall be independent of the
legislative and executive branches of the government.

It has been a long and well established principle, based
upon experience, that it is indeed dangerous and unwise,
except for short periods and under exceptional circum-
stances, to entrust a department or an official with dis-
cretionary power in the use and disbursement of public
funds.

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 37

For many years I have been of the opinion that our in-
stitutions of learning should be maintained through a spe-
cial tax, authorized by the constitution and that the pro-
ceeds arising from such tax should be kept separately from
the general revenue. Under such a policy, if the tax rate
be sufficiently large, the income arising therefrom will be
steady and adequate for the support of the institutions and
would increase with the advancement of the state in popu-
lation and material resources.

A steady and an adequate income I regard as a vital
necessity to the welfare and growth of an educational in-
stitution, without which it will become incapable of per-
forming its appropriate functions and pursuing a career
of usefulness.

Beside the advantage that would certainly accrue to the
institutions should this policy be adopted, it would be less
difficult for the Legislature to deal with its appropriation
measures as the general revenue would not be burdened
with these institutions whose requirements would some-
times be greater than the general revenue could bear with-
out disregarding the rightful wants of other branches of the
public service. At no period in our history has there been
greater need for the exercise of intelligent judgment than
at the present time. Problems of the gravest character
and affecting our political, industrial, commercial, social
and domestic life continually present themselves for solu-
tion.

Propaganda, as well for evil as for good purposes, flood
the country.

Visionary doctrines, sometimes emanating from authori-
tative sources, but oftener from minds without an exper-
ience of life in the concrete, are sedulously promulgated
through pamphlets and magazines.

Public opinion — often the opinion of classes and condi-
tions— is becoming more authoritative.

The distinction, that was carefully observed and main-
tained in the exercise of federal and state authority in other
days, is rapidly disappearing, and legislation of a socialistic
character has become altogether too frequent.

38 University of Texas Bulletin

Other, and as convincing, reasons might be given to show
the urgent need of popular education. Our growth in pop-
ulation and material resources has been rapid and great;
but strength and wealth will not compensate for the lack
of knowledge.

An eminent American jurist, in a public address, once
said, "We must educate, we must educate, or we will perish
by our own prosperity."

Having assumed the duty of giving to the people every
reasonable opportunity for the proper education of their
youth, the state will incur a grave and lasting reproach,
if it should fail to rise to the full measure of its respon-
sibility.

Though not called for in your note, I can not forbear in-
cluding in my reply, and as an integral part, the sincere
and earnest hope that the Legislature will, in its considera-
tion of our educational affairs, also submit an amendment
to the constitution providing for an increased ad valorem
state tax for the support of the common free schools.

When it is considered that fully ninety per cent, if not a
larger number, of the youth of the state have only the edu-
cational advantages that the graded and common schools
can give them, and that they will be called upon to dis-
charge the duties of manhood and womanhood, no argument
should be required and no appeal needed to induce such
action as will put these schools in the best possible condi-
tion of efficiency.

There should not be a failure to give a liberal support to
each and all of our institutions of learning — from turret to
foundation.

The dissemination of knowledge among the youth of the
land through institutions of learning has become as neces-
sary as the protection of life, liberty and property, so long
regarded as the highest governmental function and duty.

L. D. COFFMAN, PRESIDENT OF UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA

I do not think that there is any single asitsf actory method
of support for higher institutions of learning. The three

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 39

sources of support upon which state universities must relv
are:

1. The mill tax or direct appropriations.

2. Tuitions and fees.

3. Endowments and gifts.

The advocates of the mill tax have insisted that the in-
come of a university will increase automatically as the
wealth of the state increases. This is true unless there is a
change in the basis of assessment. In that event, the actual
amount of money raised by taxation may be increased or
decreased. Even though the income of the university does
theoretically increase automatically as the wealth of the
state increases, it does not follow that it will increase as
rapidly as the educational needs of the institution develop.
It has been the experience of most states that the mill tax,
when it is first established, is entirely too low. The as-
sumed actual needs of the university at the time the law is
enacted are frequently taken as the basis for determining
the amount of the rate. No millage rate, so far as I know,
has ever been established as the result of an actual study
of the educational needs of a developing and expanding
university. A state institution that must rely for its sup-
port primarily upon money raised by a mill tax will soon
find itself lagging behind the procession, unless it is able
to increase the rate of the tax. We have had a number of
interesting illustrations of this fact in recent years.

One of the strongest arguments of those who have ad-
vocated the millage tax, as over against a direct appropria-
tion by the Legislature for the maintenance of universities,
has been that it made it unnecessary for the representatives
of the state institution to go biennially to the Legislature
for funds. It was assumed that the institutions were thus,
to a certain extent, removed from the political arena. It
gave them more independence and freedom. They could
devote more time and energy to teaching and research and
to general service activities. But the claims are not wholly
justified because the amount of revenue raised annually
by a millage tax, after the first few years, is seldom enough

40 University of Texas Bulletin

to maintain the institution ; and a campaign to increase the
rate must be carried on. Of course, campaigns to raise
money are biennial affairs with those institutions that must
rely on direct appropriations. Institutions that are forced
to rely1 chiefly upon direct appropriations have, over a com-
paratively long period of time, fared just as well as institu-
tions that rely primarily upon a millage tax for their
support.

When state institutions were first established, it was as-
sumed in most cases that they would be free. Gradually,
however, this notion has been dispelled. A recent study of
some thirty-seven state institutions shows that they all
charge fees of one kind or another, and that these fees are
used to support teaching, research, to purchase equipment
and for the actual operation and maintenance of the insti-
tution. Furthermore, student fees are constantly increas-
ing, both in number and amount. This is due directly to
the increase in registration, the expensiveness of laboratory
work and the establishment of professional schools. It is
due, indirectly, to the fact that the states do not always
provide as liberally as they should in light of the growing
needs of their universities. Many persons are now asking
themselves whether the students in professional schools
should not be required to pay the total cost of their educa-
tion. The truth is that education in state universities is nD
longer free. The fees in some cases are becoming almost
prohibitive. It is becoming very difficult for students with
limited funds to secure training in medicine or in dentistry.
The purposes for which technical schools were first estab-
lished are being diverted by the extent that state institu
tions are compelled to rely upon fees and tuitions for their
support.

No state university can expect that the major part of its
support will come from endowments or gifts although the
number of endowments and gifts should increase in the near
future. Theoretically the graduates of state institutions
should be more liberal in providing gifts for the universities
from which they have graduated. Actually, there is some

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 41

psychological factor in the situation which does not work
this way. The graduates of privately endowed universities,
generally speaking, are more liberal in providing gifts than
are the graduates of state universities.

It is obvious to every student of higher education that all
state institutions will soon be facing a crisis, and that it will
either be necessary for them .to place a limit upon their
registration or to find new sources of income. The diffi-
culty is due not merely to the growth of these institutions,
but to the fact that we are clinging in most states to an
antiquated system of property taxation. Every one recog-
nizes that much of the wealth of this country is sequestered
or legitimately concealed in non-taxable securities. New
sources of taxation must be uncovered, such, for example,
as income taxes, inheritance taxes, corporation taxes, taxes
on business or profits, severance taxes, or sales taxes, a fair
share of the income from which would be used for the sup-
port of education.

P. P. CLAXTON, FORMER UNITED STATES COMMISSIONER
OF EDUCATION

1. That the great State of Texas might, purely as a mat
ter of business and because of the increase in material
wealth which it would bring, give to all its institutions of
learning, all the funds which they need for their support
and for their largest possible development in the service
of the state — this apart from all the higher values of good
citizenship, individual culture and high idealism, which are,
of course, more valuable than the more obvious results of
material prosperity. Texas has unbounded resources, and
a population strong, virile and aggressive. With proper ed
ucation and training, there is no limit to the possibilities
of its wealth, prosperity, and culture.

2. The elementary and secondary schools will, of course
be supported in the future, as in the past, by the interest
on invested funds, by appropriations from the treasury of
the state, and by county and local taxes. With proper laws
in regard to taxation, funds may easily be raised thus for

42 University of Texas Bulletin

their generous support. The normal schools and possibly
the College of Industrial Arts at Denton may also depend,
I think, on annual or biennial appropriations from the
treasury.

It is not so clear, however, that the college of agricultural
and mechanic arts and the state university may hope to re-
ceive adequate support in this way. Legislatures are more
likely to play politics in a small way with these institutions
than with the elementary or high schools or with the normal
schools. More than once in recent years the welfare and
further development of these institutions have been jeop-
ardized by the failure of the Legislature to make necessary
appropriations. It would make the support very much
ir?ore certain and contribute to steady and adequate d^velop-
ment of the university and the agricultural college if there
were levied for their support a special tax sufficient to pro-
vide for their up-keep and to enable the trustees to put
aside money for buildings from time to time. In many
states in which the income of the higher institutions of
learning has thus been assured, they have been relieved of
much anxiety and have proved the value of the plan by their
steady and sure development and progress. Another rea-
son for the adoption of this plan is that it ties up the for-
tunes of these institutions with the fortunes of the state
in a way so obvious that it serves as an incentive to them
to render the greatest possible service to the state in its
material development as well as in all its higher interests.

TEXAS INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING

(Extract from an address before the Educational Survey Committee,
April 21, 1922, by J. A. Hill, President of West Texas Normal.)

Should provision for "adequate support and maintenance"
be made by a separate tax for higher educational institu-
tions, or, should it continue under the system of appropria-
tions made from time to time by legislatures ?

There is no doubt that we greatly need a more dependable
revenue upon which to project our building programs. To

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 43

respond to the growing needs of a great state like Texas
institutions must be given an opportunity to develop a policy
and to administer it without interruption from trivial
causes and temporary social or economic conditions. They
should be able to plan in advance and with reasonable cer-
tainty each year's improvements and these in terms of a
general program of development covering a long pe -iod of
years. The hit and miss policy which we are now pursuing
would soon bankrupt any respectable private business enter-
prise. It would seem, therefore, that the mill tax might
offer a reasonable escape from the evils of the present situa-
tion. On the basis of present property values it would bring
a revenue of some three and one-half millions of dollars
which, if properly distributed, would guarantee a steady
and fairly adequate income. In the absence of a better plan
and conceding that an equitable division of the proceeds
can be agreed upon I favor a mill tax for the support of a
general building program.

I do not favor a mill tax for the payment of salaries and
other current expenses. In the first place, it wouM not
produce sufficient revenue for both building and running
costs. A comparison of the appropriations the institutions
of higher learning have received in any recent biennium
with the amount a mill tax would today produce is all the
argument that is needed on this point. If all of our Texas
colleges had to depend on the three and one-half million dol-
lars which .a mill tax would produce, the future would hold
slight promise for our system of higher education.

In the second place, I am not absolutely sure that admin-
istrators and college professors ought to feel entirely inde
pendent of public will as voiced in our legislative bodies.
Official responsibility to the people's chosen representatives
and a measure of financial dependence upon public approval
help us to keep our feet on terra firma. There is nothing
so purifying to one's ambition and so sobering to one's judg-
ment as the knowledge of the watchfulness of the public
eye. Moreover, contact with the Legislature and other of-

44 University of Texas Bulletin

ficial departments of the state government is mutually edu-
cative and facilitates business and administrative transac-
tions. I would not have you believe, however, that I ap-
prove the present system of making appropriations in which
the Legislature undertakes to fix the salary of every em-
ployee from president up to janitor. For example, it hap-
pens that the annual and monthly salary of practically all
of the members of the faculty at the normal colleges is writ-
ten in odd cents — a fact which requires enough ink, energy,
and time at the various schools to pay a pretty good salary.
Legislatures are not competent to fix with just discrimina-
tion the respective salaries of all the state's employees and
it is a ridiculous spectacle to see them undertake it. More-
over, it violates the law which prescribes the duties of the
board of regents and is likely to result in legislative med-
dling with the administrative affairs of our colleges. In
my judgment, the president of the institution, the board of
regents, and perhaps the board of control should agree upon
a salary schedule after the president and regents have de-
termined the number of employees needed. This should be
submitted to the Legislature which should have authority
through the appropriation committee to call for detailed
explanation. If this committee objects to any item and
agreement can not be reached thereon, the total sum to be
appropriated should be so modified as to suit the commit-
tee's objections and then passed as a lump appropriation for
salaries and the same method for equipment and upkeep.
I do not consider it the function of. the Legislature to de-
termine whether Professor Jones should be paid $3,173.331/3
per year, or $3,360.19. If legislatures can not trust college
presidents and boards of regents for an economic and honest
administration of the state's affairs then I fear we are in
poor way to get what we are paying for in the field of higher
education. It seems to me the legislators could better in-
vest their time and their talents in an effort to work out an
equitable tax system that would give the people what they
want in the matter of schools. This is not to be understood
as a criticism of members of the Legislature, but of the

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 45

system under which we are working. Every intelligent cit-
izen who has studied the question of taxation knows full
well that as it is now applied in this state it is wholly in-
adequate to our needs, unjust and dishonest in its prin-
ciples, and exceedingly wasteful in its administration.
Furthermore, every one who has studied the question knows
that we can never have a satisfactory school system in this
state until the tax problem is settled in such a way that the
laws of the state will be in accord with the laws of right.
Fundamentally, our school problem, from whatever aspect
viewed, is a problem in taxation and when the people once
comprehend this there will be some real constructive legis-
lation in Texas that will vitalize our whole educational
system.

In the absence of such public understanding and demand
I wish to submit for your consideration another means for
the support and maintenance of our institutions of higher
learning. I make no claim to originality in the matter and
pass over the question as to how it could be worked out.
Inasmuch as all the institutions are in dire need of large
funds for building why could not the state issue bonds, based
upon a tax levy, for a long period of time and enter at once
upon a consistent program of physical expansion? We bond
our school districts because it is not right for the present
year to bear all the building expense of the next twenty or
thirty or fifty. We bond our cities for paving, our counties
for roads, and nobody ever raises a question as to the matter
of right involved. The nation, without a vote of the people,
issues bonds for any purpose when emergency rises. In
fact, such a procedure has become the established policy of
the whole country. If it is right and expedient that inde-
pendent school districts, cities, and counties shall bond
themselves for their permanent improvements why is it not
also right and expedient that the state should do so? A
$40,000,000 five per cent bond issue covering a period of
forty years would require a tax rate sufficient to produce
$2,000,000 in interest the first year, and $1,000,000 as a
sinking fund. This would be a very small rate on present

46 University of Texas Bulletin

property values and such a sum spent on a building program
covering the next five years would certainly put Texas in-
stitutions of higher learning on the map for at least a quar-
ter of a century.

CARL C. PLEHN, PROFESSOR OF FINANCE, UNIVERSITY OF
CALIFORNIA

The first requisite for a plan of support of a state univer-
sity as of any other university is stability of income. The
second is steadiness of growth of income keeping pace with
the growth of the institution.

Scholars of distinction will not accept appointment unless
assured of permanence of tenure and of salary with due
allowance for promotion in rank and salary. Hence the
need for certainty of funds.

For a state university three plans seem possible, with,
of course, combinations in a system involving parts of
each: (1) a mill tax; (2) an appropriation as nearly un-
repealable as may be; (3) student fees.

The general favor accorded the mill tax arises from its
assumed stability and probable regular growth. There is
also the expectation that once granted it will be permanent.
The dangers lie in: (1) the possibility of a change in the
general tax system; (2) in a possible failure of assessed
valuations to grow as fast as the needs of the institution
grow; (3) the difficulty of meeting extra needs as for
buildings.

An appropriation for general maintenance can not very
easily be given that degree of permanence which is essen-
tial. Although for ten years past in California there has
been such an appropriation increasing 7 per cent each year
compounded annually, and covering a large part of the reg-
ular maintenance. If, however, this had not been supple-
mented by additional appropriations it would have been in-
sufficient. Since there is no state ad valorem tax there
can be no mill tax in this state, hence the above method was
adopted.

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 47

Student fees have a large following and no little equity.
But in general the public objects.

There is something to be said in favor of giving the in-
heritance tax to the university. Argument runs that the
education of the young is an appropriate use of the estate of
a decedent. But the inheritance tax is not regular in yield
and unless used to add to a mill tax or to a permanent ap-
propriation and to be used for extras, i.e., buildings, etc.,
might be unsatisfactory. Sometimes when large estates
fall in the inheritance tax is large, in other years it may be
small. It would be quite possible, however, to provide
some system of averaging the inheritance tax and arrang-
ing to accumulate in fat years a fund to carry over the lean
years. The difficulty would be to put such a plan into con-
tract form.

There is always much to be said in favor of budget or
legislative control of university appropriations as a means
of keeping the institution from dry rot. But as stated
above this defeats its purpose if it results in a repute of
instability, because scholars of distinction will not accept
appointment when a state budget or legislative committee
has the power to disturb the professor's tenure.

Personally I advocate an eclectic scheme with: (1) a mill
tax, or a permanent (growing) appropriation irrevocably
allotted to instructors' salaries; (2) supplementary appro-
priations for building and other special needs and for ad-
ministration; (3) moderate student fees devoted to cover-
ing library, infirmary, laboratory expenses and like costs
which are occasioned directly by the student, or can be more
directly allocated to the student than can instruction. Such
a scheme, if administered under non-political control af-
fords at once the essential stability for healthy growth.

SUPPORT OF STATE INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER
LEARNING

BY HON. LEONARD TILLOTSON, FORMER MEMBER OF TEXAS
LEGISLATURE

Tho measure of support provided for education is a just

48 University of Texas Bulletin

criterion of the progress of organized society. The provi-
sion made by a state for the support of its educational in-
stitutions is to be accepted as a fair expression of the at-
titude of the popular sentiment toward educational develop-
ment in its varying aspects. Peculiar as it may seem, the
popular attitude may be comparatively liberal toward the
advancement of one branch of education, and indicative of
more or less indifference to the advancement of other forms
of educational endeavor. Not only in this state, but
throughout the Union, it may be said that the sentiment
of the masses is united in the most liberal provision for the
support of the commori schools. This is but a natural illus-
tration of the fact that the popular sentiment favors neces-
sary and adequate support for those institutions available
to all classes and to the people of all communities alike. In
many states the public schools are accorded liberal support,
while the higher institutions receive indifferent considera-
tion. In comparatively few of the states may it be as-
serted, without qualification, that the popular sentiment
has advanced to such a degree and crystallized in favor of
equally liberal provision from public funds for the support
and development of the higher educational institutions and
the public schools. In fact, we are never likely to see the
same measure of popular approval for the development of
the higher educational institutions that is expressed in be-
half of the common schools of the country.

There are two phases of provision for the support of the
educational interests of a state. The first is the measure of
the support ; its adequacy to the reasonable requirements of
normal growth and judicious development; and the second
is the degree of permanency given to the provisions for sup-
port, the establishment of a consistent policy in adequately
maintaining each educational activity authorized by the
state.

In this state there is noticeable indifference to the meas-
ure of support to be given our higher institutions of learn-
ing. There is also noticeable difference in the attitude to-
ward different higher educational institutions.

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 49

Public sentiment on the subject of education in its en-
tirety is always undergoing change. This is particularly
true in Texas. Community participation in public school
support is exerting a strong influence. We are likely to
find that provision for education which popular sentiment
would approve this year, would not be considered adequate
provision a few years hence. As a consequence, the char-
acter of provision that should now receive popular approval
should be such as to prove readily adaptable to future re-
quirements with the minimum of change in state policy.

The policy of the state in providing for the support of
the public schools and for the support of the higher educa-
tional institutions, should be as nearly uniform and consist-
ent as is practicable, in view of the scope and character of
the work. No greater error could be made than that of es-
tablishing different policies in the support of the public
schools and the higher institutions. If Texas is to advance
its educational standard, and develop institutions of higher
learning of the first-class of their kind, it may only be ac-
complished by and through the most intimate identification
of the higher institutions with the common schools of the
state. It is the common appeal of educators that such leg-
islation be enacted as will remove the schools from politics.
State schools, both the common schools, and the higher in-
stituti -us, will never be wholly removed from political con-
trol. It is not to be expected that they will ever be placed
in such an attitude, through statutory enactment or even
constitutional provision, that they will not be responsive
to the popular judgment. It would be unfortunate for the
cause of state education, which must broaden greatly with
the years, for it to be removed from the free and ready
expression of the public sentiment.

Provision for education in Texas should embrace a com-
plete revision of existing policy, beginning with the re-
writing of Article VII of the Constitution. Section 3 of
Article VII should be amended by the removal of the limit
which may be assessed for the maintenance of the public
schools, and the Legislature should be authorized at each

50 University of Texas Bulletin

regular session to provide by statute for the levy and col-
lection of such ad valorem tax on the assessed property
valuations of the state as may be found necessary to main-
tain the schools for a minimum number of months, whici
public sentiment places at nine. This would provide a
single state tax for maintenance purposes. It would cost
the people less than the dual system of state and local tax-
ation now in existence. It would eliminate the inequalities
of opportunity for education among the public schools, by
assuring the children of the common school district in the
country the same chance as is accorded the children in the
city schools. Nothing short of this uniformity of support
for the public schools, and the upbuilding of the rural
schools, will ever establish the broad foundation essential
for the greater popularity of higher education in the state.
It may be asserted without contradiction that until there
is no longer a rural school problem in Texas, sentiment
favorable to, and adequate provision for, higher education
in the state will grow all too slowly and prove disappoint-
ing. This fact demonstrates the intimate relationship ex-
isting between the common schools and the higher institu-
tions; and the necessity for a consistent and similar policy
in their support.

In harmony with the suggested change in Section 3 of
Article VII, giving to the Legislature authority to period-
ically adjust the tax levy to the needs of the public schools,
assuring to the school support the flexibility absolutely es-
sential to respond to the growing scholastic enumerations,
those sections of Article VII dealing with the University,
the Agricultural and Mechanical College, and the Prairie
View Normal School, should be amended to give to the
Legislature the authority and direction to make provision
for the support of the higher educational institutions of
the state by tax levy as well as by appropriation. Such
amendments to Article VII should include all state insti-
tutions established since the adoption of the Constitution of
1876, and provision be made for their participation in any
tax levy that might be provided.

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 51

The Thirty-sixth Legislature passed House Joint Resolu-
tion No. 29, which sets out in detail proposed amendments
to Sections 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 of Article VII, sug-
gesting the support of the higher schools by tax levy and by
appropriation. Section 13 of the resolution contains the
authority for the proposed tax levy.

In many states, provision for the support of the higher
institutions has been made by the establishment of a mill
tax. That is, the writing of a provision in the constitution
for a specific tax to be annually levied and collected for the
exclusive support of the higher educational institutions.
There are two objections to be advanced to the mill tax in
this state. The first, and important objection, is that it
tends to remove the state's schools, and it may be said their
educational activities and their development and advance-
ment, from the ready and intimate association with the
popular sentiment, without which there is real danger of
the schools and the public moving in diverging paths. The
second objection to the mill tax, is really embraced in the
statement respecting the first, and is that the public judg-
ment will not approve its adoption, at least at this time.

There is no advantage to the educational institutions in
the constitutional mill tax that may not be found in the
specific statutory tax levy. On the other hand, there are
distinct disadvantages in the mill tax not present in the
tax levy. The constitutional mill tax is an inflexible pro-
vision. In a state whose educational needs are expanding
as in Texas, constant demands would have to be made
for supplementary appropriations, and the public believing
the mill tax in the constitution afforded adequate support,
might look unkindly upon the additional demands, just as it
was for a long time difficult to get a large part of our people
to realize that the permanent public school fund does not
provide sufficient revenue for the support of the public
school and that appropriations must be made to supple-
ment that revenue. A special tax levy directed by statute
in conformity to constitutional authority, for the support of
the higher institutions of learning established by the state

52 University of Texas Bulletin

would not be looked upon by the people as a finality in sup-
port, as would be the case of a fixed constitutional tax, and
supplementary appropriations would be accepted as a nat-
ural accompaniment to the policy. The Legislature could
fix the tax levy for the support of the higher institutions
from time to time, we will say, about every third legislative
session, the needs accruing through growth to be cared for
by supplementary appropriation at intervening sessions.
Only through some such policy as a specific tax levy by the
Legislature from time to time, supplemented by appropria-
tion from the general revenues as occasion demands, may
the support of our higher educational institutions be main-
tained upon a flexible basis capable of being made adequate
at all times, without change of policy, and without the in-
troduction of legislative expedients that give rise to contro-
versy and result in materially hampering the state's edu-
cational development. The people are naturally jealous of
their right to maintain constant contact with and supervi-
sion over those institutions and agencies supported from
the public funds, and in the end it will be found the wiser
policy to adopt such plan of support for the institutions of
learning as will serve to keep the public mind alive to and
abreast of the growing requirements of education. The
public will benefit from such policy, and in the measure the
public receives a benefit will the educational institutions be
advanced and developed.

EXPENDITURES FOR BROADER EDUCATION IN
TEXAS AS COMPARED WITH WISCONSIN

BY TOM FINTY, JR., PUBLISHED IN THE DALLAS NEWS IN

1911

I wish it understood, however, that it is not my desire
nor purpose to belittle the educational institutions of Texas
nor to convey the impression that they are not doing worthy
work. Upon the contrary, it is my profound conviction
that the University of Texas and the Agricultural and Me-
chanical College of Texas — these combining functions cor-
responding to the University of Wisconsin — are doing a

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 53

tremendously important work for this state, and that they
have done surprisingly well considering the investment and
the funds devoted to their support.

It must be apparent, however, from what I have already
written that the people of Texas are not deriving anything
like as much corresponding benefit from their chief edu-
cational institutions as do the people of Wisconsin from
their state university, and we can put over against that
statement of fact that the people of Texas have not, upon
any basis of comparison, devoted as much money to the
support of such educational work as have the .people of
Wisconsin. Here we have both cause and effect in a nut-
shell.

Paying the Fiddler

We can not make the University of Texas "an institution
of the first class," as the fathers of Texas said it ought to
be, merely by saying that it is such. If we desire to receive
from it a quantum of beneficial results balancing with those
received by the people of Wisconsin from their university;
if we would have it reach all of the people, benefiting them
in the present, it is patent that we must give it the same
character of support as the people of Wisconsin give to their
university. "By University of Texas," when used in a com-
parative sense throughout this article, I mean also to include
the A. and M. College of Texas.

We can hardly claim that the difference is due to wide
dissimilarity of conditions, nor to the fact that Texas is a
"new state." It is not a spring chicken as compared with
other Western States.

Texas became a republic in 1836. At that time it had
57,040 inhabitants. Wisconsin was formed as a territory
of the United States in 1836. It had at that time 22,000
inhabitants, one-half of whom, it is estimated, were within
the territory now comprised in the state.

Texas was admitted as a state in 1846 ; Wisconsin in 1848.

The Congress of the United States in giving Wisconsin
territorial government provided for the establishment of a

54 University of Texas Bulletin

university, but the university was not established until the
state was created in 1848.

The Congress of the Republic of Texas provided for the
establishment of a university, and the university was given
a large land endowment, but the institution was not estab-
lished until 1882.

Texas at the census of 1910 had 3,896,542 inhabitants,
and Wisconsin 2,333,860. Both have large undeveloped
areas,

Manner of Support

To make a comparison of the support given the chief edu-
cational systems of the two states is rather difficult, for
the fiscal systems of the states widely differ. In Wisconsin
the university is provided for : first, by a direct tax, levied
by the Legislature for a term of years, so that the officers
of that institution may make plans for the future, certain
of resources with which to carry them out; secondly, by
permanent appropriations, for certain purposes, provided
for by general laws ; third, by special appropriations contin-
uing through as many years as may be necessary. For ex-
ample, in the case of a building which it may require five
years to construct, the Legislature provides for an annual
appropriation for each of five years. In addition the uni-
versity has its income from investment, and its agricultural
fund from the federal government.

In Texas the university has its income from the invest-
ment and from appropriations by the Legislature. The A.
and M. College has its funds from the federal government
and by legislative appropriation. Under our c6nstitution
appropriations can not be made at one time to extend for
more than two years. Obviously, this provision alone places
our institutions at disadvantages.

In presenting the figures below given, it seems fitting to
say that the item of fees and farm sales in the accounts of
the University of Wisconsin ought not be fully considered
in comparison with the Texas accounts which are kept on a

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 55

different basis. In this comparison the income of the Uni-
versity of Texas and the Agricultural and Mechanical Col-
lege of Texas are consolidated, for the reason that the Uni-
versity of Wisconsin also includes the agricultural college
of that state.

Comparison of Income

The income of the University of Wisconsin in the aggre-
gate is approximately $2,000,000 per annum, or 86 cents
for each inhabitant of the state; of Texas approximately
$875,000 per annum for both university and A. and M. Col-
lege, or 20 cents per inhabitant of the state.

Wisconsin University had a very small public land en-
dowment ; Texas University had a large one. Texas income
from rentals and interest is seven times as large as that of
Wisconsin.

The income of Wisconsin University from taxation is
more than double that of Texas University and A. and M.
College from the same source, in fact more than double the
Texa3 income from taxation and from rentals and interest
combined.

Appropriations derived from taxation for the support of
the University of Wisconsin are 73 cents per capita of the
inhabitants per annum; in Texas 17 cents.

Figures in Parallel

Here are the figures for the last biennium and the present
biennium, the latter in part estimates:

Last Biennium

Texas Wisconsin

Total income $1,686,689 $3,623,445

From taxation 1,162,900 2,717,197

Rentals and interest 289,025 42,316

From United States Government 152,263 129,000

Fees, etc 82,501

Fees and sales from farm 734,931

56 University of Texas Bulletin

Present Biennium

Texas Wisconsin

Total income $1,790,872 $4,307,247

From taxation 1,308,905 3,401,000

Rentals and interest 288,000 42,316

From United States Government.... 143,967 129,000

Fees, etc 51,000

Fees and sales from farm 734,931

Perhaps, in order that the comparison should be entirely
fair, we should add to the Texas figures the expenditures
upon account of the College of Arts for Girls, the work of
which parallels in part to that of the University of Wiscon-
sin. The appropriations for this college were for the last
biennium $76,680 and for the present biennium $168,950

k Certainty of Income

It will be seen from the foregoing that the University of
Wisconsin not only has a much larger income than have the
institutions of Texas engaged in like work, but also that it
has greater certainty of income. It has a larger plant and
more equipment and a larger staff. Its salaries are higher.
Texas University every now and then loses a good man
because of the inability to pay better salaries.

A RESOLUTION BY THE EX-STUDENTS' ASSOCIA-
TION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS

To the Members of the Senate and House of Representa-
tives.

At a meeting of the Ex-Students' Association represent-
ing more than 20,000 ex-students of the University of Texas,
and of other friends of education in Texas, the following
resolution was unanimously adopted, and we are directed
to submit it to your honorable bodies.

Reposing full confidence in both branches of this Legis-
lature and with full assurance that neither the Senate nor

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 57

the House has any purpose to take any action that will
injure the University of Texas or impair its efficiency and
usefulness to the people of the state, we nevertheless re-
spectfully but earnestly protest against the recent action
taken by the House on the University appropriation bill,
especially in sustaining what is known as the Bonham
Amendment, and in support of this protest we respectfully
submit the following:

Salary Reductions

The salary standard, as adopted by the Board of Regents
and embodied in the appropriation of the Thirty-sixth Leg-
islature at the first called session, provided for a maximum
annual salary of $4,000 for a full professor. It was not
intended at that time to fix the maximum limit, but it was
contemplated and recognized as necessary that at the next
session of the Legislature the Board of Regents would be
authorized to increase the maximum to probably $5,000.
Because of conditions that arose during the war, the Board
of Regents asked the Legislature for authority immediately
to increase the salary standard at the University of Texas
so that the maximum salary of a full professor would be
$5,000 a year. This was intended as a permanent increase
by the University authorities.

The increase allowed was $143,144 for necessary increases
in salaries, and $63,105 for necessary additions to the staff
for the past year. These two items added to the total car-
ried by the general appropriation bill for salaries at the
Main University, $585,930, make a total of $792,179 which
the Board of Regents had available from the general rev-
enue for salaries at the Main University for the past scho-
lastic year.

The bill as reported by the joint committee of the present
House and Senate, and as adopted by the Senate, provides
a total of $791,000 per year for salaries for the ensuing two
years. The Bonham Amendment as adopted in the House
carries a total for salaries at the Main University for the

58 University of Texas Bulletin

same period of $444,527 per year for salaries at the Main
University.

That there is no necessity for cutting $425,000 from the
University budget in order to stay within the state's esti-
mated revenue for the next two fiscal years is made abso-
lutely plain by the statement of Chairman Satterwhite of
the appropriations committee appearing in the Austin
Statesman of this date (which we quote with full confi-
dence) to the effect that by allowing all that is carried in
general appropriations as adopted embraced in the com-
mittee report, the state at the end of the fiscal year August
31, 1922, would have $3,155,640 to the good, while at the end
of the fiscal year August 31, 1923, there would be an esti-
mated surplus of $7,210,000.

Any such reductions or any reductions below the standard
now in force is not permissible if the University is to secure
and hold competent professors. This is evident from the
fact that in all of the western states at all comparable in
size, population, and wealth with the State of Texas, that
is, the states of California, Iowa, Illinois, Michigan, Minne-
sota, Wisconsin, and Ohio, the maximum salaries of full
professors average over $6,000, while the present maximum
in the University of Texas is only $5,000; and the average
maximum salary of nine privately endowed institutions, in-
cluding two in the State of Texas, is $6,944.

The statement made in some quarters that the average of
maximum salaries is less than $3,500 is unfair, because the
average is obtained by including scores of colleges that do
not aspire to the standards of the University of Texas.
Manifestly a fair comparison can only be made between in-
stitutions of like character and doing like work.

No Increase Provided For

Let it be borne in mind that even on the basis of the bill
as adopted by the Senate there is no provision for increase

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 59

in the teaching staff to make provision for increase in at-
tendance shown by past experience to be approximately 11
per cent compounded.

Ill

Summer School

The practical effect of the Bonham Amendment is to
abolish the summer school. It is manifest that such will be
the result if the amendment should finally prevail, for the
reason that it was intended that this department would be
maintained and carried on through the means of the avail-
able fund of the University, which, under this action of the
Senate would be at the disposal of the regents for such pur-
pose. Under the amendment the available fund can not
be used by the regents except for building purposes, there-
fore it follows, there being no specific appropriation for the
summer school, that it must fail if such amendment finally
prevails.

The disastrous effect of eliminating the summer school
from the work of the University is obvious. It is perhaps
the most important single factor in the service of the Uni-
versity to the people. In the present year there were 2,300
students in the first term and 1,284 in the second, coming
from all parts of the state. Most of them are teachers or
students preparing to teach in the city or rural schools.
We have said that it is perhaps the most important single
factor of university work, because through it the teachers
from the rural districts, now some 2,300 in number, attend
this school and the best thought and inspiration of the Uni-
versity is carried directly back to the rural schools and to
the pupils who attend them. Any action which through
lack of appropriation deprives the people of this vital aid
to education is of necessity disastrous to the best interest
of the state.

60 University of Texas Bulletin

Bureau of Extension

The right and authority to control the general available
fund of the University being taken from the regents and
no other provision being made for the Bureau of Extension,
it also must fail and with it will fall another most important
branch of University work as shown by the following brief
review of the work it has done in the past.

Number of people reached during 1920-21, more than one
million. Correspondence courses given, 2400, mostly to
teachers. Package libraries distributed, 7536, covering 600
subjects and distributed to 222 counties, mostly in smaller
towns and rural communities.

Visual instruction slides in actual service, 12,000, in-
cluding historical and geographical groups for Texas schools
and on the wild flowers of Texas, distributed to every cor-
ner of the state. Lectures to accompany the slide sets are
prepared by experts on the various lines represented.

Home economics, number of peop?e reached through child
welfare clinics, health lectures, and development of home
and school, more than 15,000, mostly school children, teach-
ers, and parents.

These figures do not include the many thousands reached
by bulletins, letters, and printed matter in general of the
bureau.

This takes no account of the many thousands reached by
the University Interscholastic League.

Bureau of Economic Geology

The Bureau of Economic Geology and Technology which
is in like manner abolished, has helped to develop the re-
sources of the state and is estimated to have attracted cap-
ital and to have induced the 'development of the resources

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 61

of the State of Texas in amount greater than the total ex-
pended for the University from fU beginning. It has lo-
cated and investigated deposits of oil, potash, kaolin, fullers
earth, quicksilver, manganese, sulphur, coal, and iron. The
abolition of this department will be a disaster to the state.
It is not necessary to remind the Legislature that the con-
stitutional mandate and the will of the people of Texas as
well demand that the state shall have a University of the
first class. We respectfully submit that legislative action
which prevents the University from obtaining talent to fill
its professorships in competition with other institutions of
like rank prevents it from reaching the children of the rural
schools through the teachers that attend the summer school
and the people at large through its Extension Department,
and that prevents its aid to people of the state in the devel-
opment of its physical resources through its Department of
Economic Geology and Technology practically eliminates
it from the category of a university of the first class and
materially impairs u not substantially destroys the purpose
of its creation.

We, therefore, submit with confidence the issue of the
future of the University, believing that the patriotic mem-
bers of the Legislature will see that the will of the fore-
fathers shall be carried out and a university of the first
class be maintained.

D. A. FRANK, Dallas
DAYTON MOSES, Fort Worth
ASHER SMITH, Laredo
A. M. FRAZIER, Hillsboro
Miss LULA HOGG, Fort Worth
LINTON S. SAVAGE, Corpus Christi
ERNEST THOMPSON, Amarillo
GEO. C. HOLMGREEN, San Antonio
JOHN W, BRADY, Austin
W. D. CALDWELL, Fort Worth
MRS. D. C. WEBB, Fort Worth
L. A. CARLTON, Houston

Resolutions Committee

62 University of Texas Bulletin

Extracts from "A Tentative Report to the Virginia Education Com-
mission on a Mill Tax for the Educational System of the State."
By Chas. G. Maphis, Secretary, Charlottesville, Va., October
7, 1910. (Bulletin of the Virginia Department of
Education, 1912.)

There are four methods of support now being used :

(1) Biennial appropriations.

(2) Annual appropriations for a term of years.

(3) An appropriation of a fixed percentage of the total
gross revenues of the state.

The latter method is used in but one state — Tennessee.

It is my belief that an appropriation based on property,
commonly called a mill tax, is the best of these methods.

Sixteen states have adopted this method of support for
one or more of their educational institutions, and twenty-
one out of eighty-three state universities and other institu-
tions of higher education are supported in whole or in part
by a mill tax.

Summarized and briefly stated, the arguments for the
mill tax method of support are as follows :

1. Experience proves that the millage method is the best
one. Sixteen of the most progressive states, supporting
twenty-one of the most prosperous1 institutions, have adopt-
ed it, and after having an experience with it, pronounce it
the best.

2. It enables the institutions or system thus supported
to have a fixed policy which shall be in force for an indefinite
period, and to make far-seeing and wiser plans for future
growth and needs. No consistent educational policy can be
carried out without some degree of dependence upon a cer-
tain income. The administrative officers must have some
reasonable anticipation of the funds which can be com-
manded for use, if they are to plan wisely and economically.

Private institutions have an endowment and hence an
assured income, which, while not often sufficient, is always
certain. The mill tax amounts to a permanent endowment
with the state behind it.

3. It produces a constantly increasing revenue, while

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 63

private endowments, desirable and helpful as they are, pro-
duce decreasing returns on account of lower rates of in-
terest.

The revenue from a mill tax is certain to grow somewhat
from year to year and to grow very considerably when long
periods of time are taken into consideration. In Minnesota,
for instance, it has doubled in the last ten years.

Experience in other states has shown that the amount
of revenue will increase with the increase in the wealth of
the state and in proportion to the growth and needs of the
school system. It does not always keep up with them,
but nearly every state which has had a mill tax for any
length of time has not only continued it, but has increased
it, one or more times as the needs have demanded. A fixed
appropriation continually becomes inadequate, and it is diffi-
cult to get it increased.

4. It gives stability to the business efforts of a school
system, which could not be expected at all if it depended
on annual or biennial presentation of the needs of the
Legislature.

5. It provides a stable support in times of financial de-
pression and eras of politicalism, such as we had in 1879,
when the total school revenue fell |from $1,000,000 to
$512,000, and is, therefore, a scientific and practical method
of support.

6. It prevents constant and undignified lobbying through-
out the session of the Legislature, and avoids the unseemly
biennial scrambles and unpleasant rivalry among the sev-
eral state institutions before the legislative committee.

7. It saves much time and annoyance to the legislators
themselves by relieving them of the importunities of a most
persistent and numerous class of lobbyists, and prevents
"log-rolling" and "wire-pulling" among representatives of
different parts of the state when one institution is, as it
usually is, played against another located in a different part
of the state. These rivalries often lead to unnecessary
duplication of work intended only to appeal for an appro-
priation.

64 University of Texas Bulletin

8. It adds to the dignity and self-respect of the school
men themselves by relieving them of the necessity of en-
gaging in this unwilling, unpleasant, but necessary struggle
for existence, which is an unwise use of the time, energy
and ability of the president, trustees and friends of an in-
stitution, and puts a premium on political leadership rather
than educational leadership. The general progress in this
country is toward academic freedom and the elimination
of politics from education.

Dr. Webster Merrifield, for twenty-five years president
of the University of North Dakota, writes as follows: "I
was chiefly responsible for the passage of the mill tax in
North Dakota for the support of the university and other
state schools, and was at the head of the University of North
Dakota during ten years of operation under the tax. My
opinion as to the superiority of the mill tax is (1 ) Certainty ;
(2) Avoidance of unseemly scrambles between the several
state schools before the appropriation committees of the
Legislature ; (3) Increase of income from year to year fairly
proportional to the growth of the state in wealth and the
growth of the university in numbers and needs. Before
the passage of the mill tax we never knew before-hand
whether or not the university was going to receive a fairly
adequate appropriation for maintenance. There was a re-
currence each biennial period of unpleasant rivalry between
the different state schools. There was need of almost con-
stant and always undignified lobbying throughout the ses-
sion of the Legislature. I am. confident, too, that the uni-
versity has habitually received a larger annual income from
the tax for maintenance than it could have hoped to receive
during the same time from direct biennial appropriations.
Few members of the Legislature of 1899 which passed the
mill tax realized or ventured to say how large an income
it would bring to the several state schools. Almost every
year the Legislature is raided by special institutions for
appropriations. They maintain skilled lobbies, and but for
the presence on the statute books of the permanent mill tax,
would often divert to themselves a portion of the state's

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 65

total income which now goes to the schools. After ten years
of operation under the fixed appropriations for state schools,
neither the schools nor the members of the Legislature
would be willing to go back to the old system. The legisla-
tors themselves are spared almost endless 'pulling and haul-
ing' by individuals whom some of them are fond of alluding
to as 'those educational sharks,' and are measurably relieved
of the importunities of a most persistent, if not the most
numerous and unscrupulous class of lobbyists. For the
school men, too, the gain is enormous. I was conscious of
an immediate and tremendous gain in self-respect after
being relieved of the necessity of engaging in a, biennial
scramble for existence, institutionally speaking. And if
now the fixed tax for maintenance could be supplemented
by another for building purposes, I should feel that the life
of a state university president is as nearly ideal as is often
realized on this earth."

President Charles Van Hise, of the University of Wiscon-
sin, writes in reference to the mill tax : "The fundamental
argument which we used in its advocacy was that in a
rapidly growing state a fixed appropriation continually be-
comes inadequate because the university grows in propor-
tion to the growth of the state. I showed that this theory
was in accordance with the facts, that the growth of the
university has been more rapid than the increase in income,
and that in consequence, it was becoming increasingly diffi-
cult to keep our work up to a high school standard. These
ideas were finally accepted by the Legislature and we were
granted two-sevenths of a mill tax, which, when it went into
effect, raised our income approximately $200,000 per an-
num. Since that time the increase in assessed valuation
of the property of the state has increased our income an-
nually not less than $33,000, and the increase in 1908 is
$63,000."

A mill tax is seemingly so slight that it does not raise
the violent opposition to be found in an attempt to pass
direct appropriations, and again the proceeds of the mill

66 University of Texas Bulletin

tax continue to increase as the property of the state in-
creases. The mill tax in the State of Minnesota has doubled
in the last ten years — $135,000 in 1900, $265,000 in 1910.

Dr. J. K. Patterson, president of the State College of
Kentucky, whose institution has been supported by a mill
tax of one-twentieth of a mill for the past twenty-seven
years, writes that he prefers this method of support because
it is less subject to the caprice of the Legislature. He states
that the mill tax is not likely to be repealed in Kentucky.

Dr. Charles A. Lowry, president of the State Agricultural-
College, Fort Collins, Colorado, writes that the mill tax for
his institution and that of the other state institutions is for
support and buildings, if the money is not all needed for
support. The advantage of the mill tax lies in the fact that
the authorities always have a definite basis to figure on.
The Legislature is more or less a changeable body, and
unless a definite amount is provided, the authorities and the
state institutions never know what to count on. Very often
hardly enough is appropriated for maintenance. Again, a
great deal is appropriated so that work can be started which
must later be given up, when an economical Legislature
comes into power.

Mr. E. W. Stanton, secretary of Iowa State College, writes
that his institution received the proceeds of a tax of one-
fifth of a mill for building purposes which yielded in 1909-
1910, $135,000. The tax runs for five years, but has been
renewed twice, and he hopes to have it extended for another
live-year period in 1912. Since the first tax came into effect
in 1900, the total income by the close of 1912 will be some-
thing more than $1,400,000. The buildings on the college
grounds are inventoried at something over $1,600,000 of
this value. Prior to 1900 the department buildings were
temporary structures utterly inadequate to meet the grow-
ing needs of the institution. The millage tax lifted the col-
lege out of these temporary buildings into fireproof, durable
structures that last for generations. This result could not
have been accomplished by direct appropriations from the
general revenues of the state. The millage tax enables

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 67

trustees and faculty to plan wisely in the matter of build-
ings, and has helped in no small measure to the symmetrical
development of the institutions, the fund for their support
must be taken out of the general revenues, and this is al-
ways insufficient. Under the tax method the income grad-
ually increases with the increase of the wealth of the state.

Excerpts from the "Report of H. S. Pritchett, Chairman of the Car-
negie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. 1909."

The most impressive feature of the advance of the tax-
supported institutions is the generous support accorded to
them by their respective states. Several states now con-
tribute annually a million dollars each to the support of
their respective state universities, and in some states the
bulk of this income comes in the form of a mill tax which
is rendered without action of the Legislature and which in-
creases automatically with each revaluation of state prop-
erty. A million dollars a year is, however, a very modest
sum for a great and rich state like Wisconsin, or Illinois, or
California to spend on its state university. These institu-
tions may confidently expect incomes far larger than any
privately endowed universities can hope to enjoy. It is
clear that state support of education in a commonwealth
educated to that ideal is the most generous and constant
source from which such support can be drawn. . . There
is one feature of state support of education which is worth
noting. In the earlier days the state university president
was expected to lobby for his annual appropriation. In the
better institutions that day has gone by. The state univer-
sity president goes before committees of the Legislature
with his budget. He appears there not as a beggar but a&
a state officer, exactly as the head of a government bureau
goes before the committees of appropriations of Congress.

Excerpts from "A Counsel of Perfection: A Plan for An Automatic
Collection and Distribution of a State Tax for Higher Educa-
tion." By J. G. Rosengarten. Reprinted from the Proceedings
of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. 52, No. 209,
April, 1913.

68 University of Texas Bulletin

Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Montana, Wisconsin, are among
the western states which have state universities. In their
state constitutions provision is made for an automatic as-
signment of a small part of the state taxes for their support.
Thus all appeal to the state Legislature for support is made
unnecessary. In Wisconsin, and in many other universi-
ties, colleges, etc., the United States Land Grant is made
part of the endowment of the state university, and for agri-
cultural and technical schools. Iowa has recently put all
its educational institutions under a single governing board.
All the western universities have out of the increasing
wealth and revenues of their states provided incomes grow-
ing in proportion to their needs, and their activities keep
pace with them.

Dr. James B. Angell, President of the University of Mich-
igan, gives the following reasons for preferring a mill tax :

"1. When several items are named, great difficulty for
legislative committees, two to three of which in each house
have to act ; difficult to make some members appreciate need
of some items.

"2. A university should know approximately some few
years at least in advance what it can depend on, in order
to have a policy.

"3. As one Legislature can not bind its successors, it has
happened to us to have one provide for establishing a de-
partment and when professors and apparatus have been
secured and students have come, the next Legislature has
failed to continue it and much embarrassment has followed,
e.g., our school' of mines.

"Whereas, our experience shows that once the mill tax is
adopted, the disposition of legislatures is to increase it, not
to abolish it.

"Begin with a modest rate, and trust the future for
growth."

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 69
SUMMARY OF POINTS IN FAVOR OF A MILL TAX

Adapted from a bulletin issued by the University of Kansas in 1912,
entitled, "A Plea for a Mill Tax"

1. A mill tax would benefit the state's higher educational
institutions. It would ensure a more healthy growth of
such institutions, because normal growth in an educational
institution is possible only when plans providing for such
growth can be made, extending over a number of years,

2. It would make it less easy for other universities to
take some of the best teachers from Texas, as they have
been doing, because of the greater permanence of these
universities in the matter of income, and the greater cer-
tainty with which their teachers can depend on the contin-
uance of their work.

3. It would make it possible to take better care of the
details of the schools' administration. Under the present
system, the university budget for the expenditures in June,
1917, had to be compiled in the fall of 1914 — almost three
years ahead. With a permanent income, each year would
be provided for as occasion required and the administration
would know definitely what to count on.

4. It would have the time of administrative heads and
members of the faculty who are compelled by their duty to
the interests entrusted to them by the state to go to Austin
and exert their efforts to have these interests understood
by the Legislature, in order to prevent the doing of some
serious injury to some branch of the educational or state
service work through oversight or lack of knowledge.

5. It would relieve administrative heads from the hu-
miliation of being criticised for attending committee ses-
sions at the Legislature and doing the necessary legislative
work to which their devotion and duty to their institutions
obligates them.

6. It would put Texas among the states which have
already given their educational institutions the advantage
of permanent incomes by fixed tax : Iowa, Ohio, Wisconsin,

70 University of Texas Bulletin

Michigan, Minnesota, Colorado, California, Indiana, Illinois,
Nebraska, and others.

7. It would remove all temptation from educational in-
stitutions to save their interests by resorting to political
methods. No state institution would ever be drawn into
politics.

8. It would put the maintenance of the higher educa-
tional institutions on a permanent basis, removing them
from the danger of having their revenues curtailed by
caprice or financial depression, and enabling the administra -
tion to pursue a definite business-like policy.

9. It would insure the gradual and proportionate in-
crease of the revenues for education as the value of the
property in the state increases, providing automatically the
larger means of meeting growing needs.

10. It would emphasize the insignificance of the cost of
education to the individual taxpayer. If he pays taxes on a
valuation of $10,000 the mill tax would cost him $10. Would
any man question that the presence in the state of educa-
tional institutions, doing an immense amount of state serv-
ice work, adds not one but many dollars to the value of each
thousand dollars worth of property that he possesses ?

11. A permanent tax would relieve the legislator from
the responsibility of the present large total of appropria-
tions, removing from his shoulders the burden of practically
the entire educational budget of the state. It would also
relieve him from the well-meant but sometimes over-zealous
importunities of the advocates of the, various institutions.
It would save the time of legislators who are now compelled
to study the intricacies of appropriation bills while occupied
with scores of other legislative matters. To understand
thoroughly the details of the university appropriation bill
alone would require all the time that the ordinary legislator
can devote to the duties of the legislative session.

12. It would build up more creditable institutions. By
eliminating competition it would make towards a better co-
operation among the various schools, and a consequent in-
crease of efficiency and value to the state.

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 71

13. It would result in a more economic administration of
the educational institutions because systems based on a
stable and calculable income always mean economy.

14. It would be to the advantage of the taxpayers be-
cause it would insure their getting the greatest possible effi-
ciency out of the state schools, the greatest possible value
for their money, since only with a fixed and permanent in-
come can an educational institution do its best work.

THE TAX LEVY AND BUDGET SYSTEM

Extract from 1920 Biennial Report of the Board of Regents of the
University of Texas

We heartily approve the tax-rate levy, instead of specific
appropriations, as a means for obtaining the necessary
funds to finance the university, and the budget system as a
method of applying these funds to the needs of the separate
departments. The former enables us to know with reason-
able certainty the financial resources for each biennial term,
and the latter secures the application of the fund for the
specific purposes needed and still leaves sufficient flexibility
to meet the ordinary unforeseen contingencies. Since the
budget was fixed, it was found imperative that compensa-
tion of the faculty be increased if the university was to re-
tain the services of those competent to maintain the stand-
ard of efficiency in instruction which the institution deserves
and the state desires. During the same period the ordinary
expenses of administration have not escaped the increased
burdens incident to every operating enterprise! Yet, not-
withstanding these demands, which could not be fully antic-
ipated, it is with pride and pleasure that we report to you
that the university is within its budget and asks no de-
ficiency appropriation. By reference to the budget and the
Comptroller's system of accounting, which has received the
most favorable commendation of both state and federal
officials, we have at all times been able to ascertain the con-
dition of the university fund as a whole and of each separate
department. In our judgment, to depart from the tax-rate.

72 University of Texas Bulletin

levy as a fund-producing system and the budget as a method
of applying and expending it, would be unwise and injurious
to every interest of both the state and university.

THE LEGISLATURE AND LEGISLATION

Extract from the final message of Dr. S. E. Mezes to the Board of
Regents of the University of Texas in 1914

I have spoken of the Legislature as one of the governing
boards of the university, and so it is. It governs the uni-
versity by determining biennially what funds shall be avail-
able for the carrying on of its activities ; and, in performing
this function, it from time to time at least prevents things
from being done which its colleagues, the regents, believe to
be desirable, or even all but necessary. Moreover, in meas-
ures besides the money bills, the Legislature exercises con-
trol over the university. If this function is exercised in a re-
sponsible spirit, the Legislature can greatly help the insti-
tution both negatively and positively.

The corollary is that the Legislature can greatly injure
and hamper the university. It seems plain that a body of
men, many of whom are serving their first term, and none
of whom have any continuous or intimate knowledge of the
workings of the institution, can not, with profit to the state,
attempt to direct its aif airs in any detail.

At the same time, the Legislature can not escape the duty
of giving some directions to the university ; and it is to be
hoped that it will, in time, devise some method of perform-
ing this duty that will enable it to deal with so important a
matter in a manner less casual than it has heretofore adopt-
ed. I believe it would be a good plan for the Legislature
to employ, every few years, a small expert commission,
made up of two leading educators, from without the state,
of national prominence and competence, and of one first-
class business expert, this commission being charged with
a thorough detailed study of the institution and the formula-
tion of a report, with criticisms and constructive sugges-
tions.

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 73

If the university is to serve Texas as it should, its income
must be greatly increased — in fact, more than doubled. A
modern state university can not operate efficiently on less
than two millions a year; and, in a huge state like Texas,
it should, in the near future, be provided with three mil-
lions annually. Three universities in states much smaller
are expending nearly the latter sum today, to the great
benefit of their constituencies.

In addition, the following measures of legislation would,
I believe, be very helpful to the university in the perform-
ance of its duties of service, and correspondingly helpful to
the state as a whole : ( 1 ) a statutory measure levying a
special tax for the support of the institution ; (2 * an amend-
ment repealing the portion of Section 14 of Article VII,
of the constitution prohibiting appropriations of tax levies
for the erection of university buildings ; and (3) a statutory
measure, if the constitution permits that method, authoriz-
ing the issuance of bonds, with interest and sinking fund
payable out of the available university fund, for the con-
struction oi buildings and the purchase of additional ground
to enlarge the campus.

The special tax has been so often and fully discussed that
little need be said here. It costs no more to support the
university ou: of the proceeds of a special tax than out of
biennial appropriations. The chief advantages of the tax
are two: (1) the regents will know what they can depend
upon in the matter of support, and can lay their plans ac-
cordingly in a far-sighted and business-like way; (2) the
university will be withdrawn further from the disturbing
and perilous contact with politics into which the method of
biennial appropriations unavoidably draws it.

The university is the only institution in Texas and the
only university in existence which is prevented by state
constitution from constructing buildings out of moneys ap-
propriated from the general revenue or proceedings from
tax levies. The prohibition was the chance enactment of a
busy convention; has not the shadow of reason for its ex-
istence ; does no particle of good ; and should unquestionably
be repealed at the earliest moment possible.

74 University of Texas Bulletin

The briefest study of the question makes it plain that
those who object to authorizing the issuance of bonds under
reasonable restrictions for the construction of buildings do
so because they have' given the question no study. The ad-
vantages of the plan are palpable, and there are no serious
objections to it if the measure is properly drawn. It is a
plan that has been adopted by every large private enterprise
that is intelligently managed ; the plan that has been adopt-
ed in constructing practically all the existing school build-
ings in Texas and in other states, as well as by most counties
and cities here and elsewhere. Its convenience arises from
the fact that buildings are costly, and that it lias been at
no time possible in Texas to provide large enough buildings,
good enough buildings and a sufficient number of buildings
to meet the needs, if their total cost is to be borne by the
taxpayers of a single year. Its equity arises from the fun-
damental maximum of taxation, that those who enjoy the
benefits derived from the proceeds of tax levies should pay
the taxes, and that it is unfair for only a portion of those
enjoying such benefits to meet the entire tax. Properly
constructed buildings should last from thirty to a hundred
years; their cost should be borne by the people enjoying and
receiving the benefit from them at least during the thirty-
year period.

MILL TAX SYSTEM OF UNIVERSITY SUPPORT

Extract from an address delivered by Edward G. Smith, President of
the West Virginia University Ex-Students' Association in 1914

The paramount need of the university is adequate finan-
cial support, as by a separate, continuing mill tax, legisla-
tive and constitutional.

It requires no great penetration to discover how univer-
sity support could be liberalized, better secured and better
utilized in a system of separate, continuing mill tax, than
in the caprice of biennial legislative appropriations, often
made grudgingly, sometimes reduced to sums tbat are nig-
gardly, sometimes transferred to other uses, always subject

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 75

to political necessities and political uncertainties, never
made according to any definite and continued system of far-
sighted vision and therefore always wastful and inefficient,
Bryce in his American Commonwealth, brieflv describing
the appropriation system and the mill tax system and pre-
ferring the latter, says :

"Many of the state universities of the West re-
ceive a grant from the state treasury, voted an-
nually or biennially by the Legislature, but a
preferable plan, which several states have recently
adopted, is to enact a permanent statute giving an-
nually to the university some fraction of a mill (1-
1000 of a dollar) out of every dollar of the total
valuation of the state. This acts automatically,
increasing the grant as the resources of the state
increase."

Under the existing biennial appropriation system our uni-
versity has never been able to be liberated from political
embarrassments.

Governor Jackson, believing after his namesake, "Old
Hickory," that "to the victor belong the spoils," treated the
university as among his political spoils. In this respect he
differed neither from most of his predecessors nor from
most of his successors.

Dr. I. C. White, of the chair of geology, and Professor
T. M. Jackson, of the school of engineering, assumming
there was no reason why the Pennsylvania oil field should
stop with Mason and Dixon's line at Mt. Morris, took their
classes on the ground and ran levels and traced the oil field
far into West Virginia and located the great Mannington
pool. This is a kind of work students need. To this day
the faces of those boys beam with joy at the remembrance
of that experience. In a professional way on chat survey
from Mt. Morris to Mannington they saw a new light. That
light is with them yet.

And what an inestimable service to the state !
In a few years after this, neither of these distinguished
men was longer connected with the university.

Dean Hogg but recently tried to connect his school of law
with practical work on West Virginia textbooks and code

76 University of Texas Bulletin

and living cases including the already celebrated Virginia
debt case.

Hogg's practice books and Hogg's code are on the desk
of every West Virginia practitioner. Hogg is stili connected
with the debt case but is now entirely disconnected from
the university.

It is a well known fact in legislative circles, that two years
ago (as, since before the days of Governor Jackson, had
been, for political reasons, the rule), the appropriation bill
was first placed before the Legislature on the last day of the
session, in the afternoon of that day. In the remaining
fragment of the closing day of the session, what opportunity
had the friends of the university on the floor of either house
to take care of her needs ?

It is an equally well known fact that the last Legislature
appropriated for buildings and lands, for normal schools
and university, $300,000, and that by reason of other de-
mands on the state treasury, deemed by a part of the execu-
tive branch of the state government more urgent than edu-
cation, the appropriations were not, for about i year and a
half after the close of the session, by the executive depart-
ment, "released" for educational use.

A few years ago after President Raymond had quickly
but undiplomatically done so much more for the advance-
ment of the university than many of his predecessors, com-
bined, there arose, in certain quarters outside his faculty
and board of regents, an envious wave of unpopularity, and
the appropriations for the university were made available
only upon his removal.

Four years ago a professor of the university, employed to
teach Greek, never supposing he had sold his political integ-
rity for a professor's salary, criticized a certain political
policy and thereupon his dismissal was demanded and the
then pending appropriation bill for the university was not
passed until his dismissal was accomplished — a circum-
stance which, by way of a contrast to make every West
Virginian blush, calls to mind the long continued and mag-
nanimous indulgence of the absolute despotism of Russia

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 77

towards the greatest opposition teacher among its subjects,
Count Tolstoi, and calls to mind the recent incident of
Harvard sustaining the political integrity of a professor at
the definite cost of a $10,000,000 legacy. .

In these practices it is not to be supposed that one polit-
ical party differs widely from another, nor is it to be sup-
posed these practices are confined to a single state, nor to a
few states of the Union. But, however regrettable that
may be, it is gratifying to know that under a system such
as the mill tax system suggested, financial support for the
university would be as secure as it ought to be and profes-
sional seats in the university would be as secure as they
ought to be and the university would be set free from pol-
itics.

Under the existing system of biennial appropriations the
university has no fixed or certain base for definite plans
projected far into the future.

Not only must there be freedom from political interfer-
ence but there must be foresight. There must be certainty.
There must be plan. There must be perspective. The uni-
versity authorities must know in advance, not two years, but
many years what they will have to spend in order to know
how to spend it to the best advantage, in systematically
building up a greater institution. In no other way can they
so plan and work by plan as to eliminate waste, to secure
efficiency, to attain harmonious development, ard to obtain,
generally maximum results.

The point may be illustrated in university architecture
by the noble harmony on the campus at Charlottesville, the
result of Jefferson's plan, contrasted with the want of it
elsewhere.

How can the management evolve their schools or equip
the university in accord with any high degree of excellence
upon biennial contingencies? Uncertainty must be elim-
inated and the university placed upon some financial foot-
ing at least as certain, permanent and automatic as is the
rest of our free school system.

When the taxable values in the state are fixed and the

78 University of Texas Bulletin

number of mills per dollar or per hundred dollars to be set
apart to the university equipment and maintenance are de-
termined, no element of uncertainty remains except what
may be due to changing values from one valuation period
to another which presumably would increase with the in-
creased needs of the university. These give a definite base
upon which to plan a university and all its departments and
for apportionment among the respective departments. They
form a base for plans designed to cover a long period of
years such as may not be evolved in two-year periods or
ten-year periods or a generation. These long time plans,
based upon fixed assets available, and certainly to become
available, make for proportion and harmony in development,
make for economy in expenditure and make for efficiency.
In fine, they make for maximum results and have nothing
but contrast with the present hand-to-mouth system, or
want of system, wasteful and inefficient.

Another consideration of the system proposed is its at-
tractiveness to the best teaching talent in the country. It
would not only retain our best talent at home but would
invite the best talent and genius from abroad. Men of
talent and genius are willing to work for much smaller
financial remuneration if they can only be assured of an op-
portunity to do their best work, often requiring many years,
often requiring a life-time, for its accomplishment and only
possible in universities which can make permanent plans
covering a long period of years and with reasonable cer-
tainty of their due execution, in an atmosphere of freedom.

The mill tax system of whole or partial university support
has been adopted for many leading institutions in more than
a dozen states in this country, including the universities of
Wisconsin, of Michigan and of Illinois, and the annual and
biennial appropriation system is already antiquated.

Show me a state university now dependent entirely upon
annual and biennial appropriations and I will show you a
cripple.

At the last June meeting of the Alumni Association it
unanimously adopted a resolution introduced by President

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 79

Gore of the Harrison Club, favoring an arrangement for
permanently financing the university by means of a contin-
uing mill tax. Under date of July 31, I had a letter from
Mr. Shawkey, state superintendent of free schools and pres-
ident of the board of regents, committing himself unre-
servedly to that resolution. At a recent meeting of the
board of regents at Wheeling it committed itself to the
substance of that resolution and it now seems a very op-
portune moment to present the proposition to the business
men of the state through this state board of trade and I
most earnestly hope for your very careful and your very
favorable consideration of it.

For we are convinced the answer to the second inquiry is :
The required means for university support may be made
certainly available by means of a continuing mill tax, legis-
lative and constitutional, and this may be brought about by
the policy suggested respecting our distinguished men, our
alumni organization and a loyal efficient, university service
extended to the general public.

ADVANTAGES OF THE MILLAGE— STATE
INSTITUTIONS HAVING IT

t^O^/
Extract from the Report of George E. McLean, President of the /°. 11

State University of Iowa, for 1911-1913

Experience proves that the millage method is the best
one. Twelve of the most progressive states, supporting
twenty-one of the most prosperous institutions, have the
millage system as one of the means for support or build-
ings, or both.

There can be no better illustration of the advantages of
the millage system over the hit-or-miss special appropriation
method for buildings than in the history of the University
of Iowa. Excluding the Old Capitol, the first building at
the university, originally a gift from the United States,
from the beginning of the university up to the first install-
ment of the millage tax in 1896 there were erected ten build-

80 University of Texas Bulletin

ings, of cheap construction, without architectural merit, at
an original expenditure of $234,375. These buildings were
not fireproof, and three of them were destroyed by fire, with
great accompanying loss of their equipment, apparatus, and
valuable specimens, to say nothing of the interruption of
the work of the university. Under the millage, including
the buildings erected and contracted for, with the two build-
ings for which a special appropriation was granted, there
will have been erected 18 buildings since the beginning of
the millage in 1896, or twice as many buildings as were put
up from the beginning of the university during nearly a
half century. The total cost of these buildings was $1.093,-
050, as compared with the total original cost of the earlier
nine buildings of $234,875. The buildings under the mill-
age, with two exceptions, have been fireproof, of stone,
built to last for all time, harmonious in architecture, chaste
in their simplicity, and unsurpassed in their adaptation to
their uses. They have been erected with the future in
view, combining artistic and economic effects. Olmsted
Brothers of Boston, have been consulting landscape archi-
tects. They and other experts and educators, who have
visited the university declare that it has unique advantages
for its buildings and campus. These advantages come from
the university entering upon its building era later than sis-
ter universities, enabled by the millage to adopt consistent
and economic building policies, and having unusual phys-
ical advantages in the location of the university on the slope
in connection with the Iowa River.

The greatest benefit from the millage to the university,
much as the public is impressed by the buildings, is the de-
velopment of the real work of the university. Some times
the building era of a university -is at the expense of its
school work. Just the contrary has been the result at this
university. The tide of migration of Iowa students outside
the state has in part been turned by the sight of the build-
ings and by knowledge of the state's consistent policy under-
lie millage, of equipping the institutions. The positively
unsanitary conditions for the professors and students in

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 81

the form of overcrowded and unventilated buildings have
been removed.

The underpaid staff of instruction in part has been held
because of the facilities and equipment given them in these
buildings. The quality of the instruction, so dependent in
these days, even in the literatures as well as the sciences,
upon the laboratory methods has been improved. Many
lines of research (the very essence of a university) requir-
ing proper housing have been strengthened and the graduate
college made possible. The new buildings have made it
possible for the university to serve the public welfare; for
example, the state bacteriological laboratory in service of
the public health, the psychological laboratory in service of
the schools, etc. In short, one of the original chief factors
contributing to the recognition of the university has been
due to the millage tax.

MILLAGE TAX

Extract from the Report of the Iowa State Board
of Education for 1911

Some months ago the board ordered a careful investiga-
tion for the purpose of deciding whether or not the Legisla-
ture should be asked to continue what is known as the mill-
age tax, the proceeds of which have been used for the erec-
tion of buildings at the several institutions. As a result
of this investigation, the board has unanimously decided to
ask for the continuance of this tax for an additional five-
year period.

We find that this method of providing for buildings is
the one in vogue in California for the state university of
that state, in Colorado for the state agricultural college and
school of mines, in Indiana for the state university, in Ken-
tucky for the University of Kentucky, in Michigan for both
of its institutions of higher learning, also in Minnesota,
Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Wisconsin and Wyoming.
It is a fact easily demonstrated that the institutions as they
now exist have practically been created out of the proceeds
of this levy.

82 University of Texas Bulletin

Buildings Erected at the State Teachers' College

At the state teachers' college the tax has performed a like
service. President Seerley has tersly summed up the situa-
tion in general, as follows : "The creation of the first millage
in 1902 opened the way for a satisfactory system of con-
struction, enabled plans to be carefully made, and began a
possibility for creditable educational institutions in the state
of Iowa. Up to that time the cheapest form of construc-
tion had been used, the poorest kind of architecture was ac-
cepted, and the equipment was beggarly and insufficient to
permit the work that such institutions were supposed to
undertake and to pretend to accomplish. Without this im-
provement in the construction of buildings for higher edu-
cation, the Iowa institutions would have been among the
weakest and most unattractive in the whole United States.
With the present policy continued the time is not very dis-
tant when Iowa will be on a par with any of the states."

ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST A PROPOSED MILL

TAX AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF

CALIFORNIA WHICH WAS SUBMITTED TO

THE ELECTORS OF THAT STATE ON

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 1920

The state is suffering from a crisis at the university for
financial reasons. Its revenue must be placed upon a more
sound and permanent basis. It is specifically urged :

(1) The tax here sought is not new in principle. A
similar legislative measure in force from 1893 to 1910 en-
abled the university to be of the greatest service in its his-
tory, and was emphatically favored by legislatures and the
public alike. This tax was impliedly repealed in 1910 by
Constitutional Amendment No. 1.

(2) The university is now financed upon the basis of
1910. Yet from 1910 to 1920 the students at Berkeley
alone increased in numbers from 3300 to 9800 — an increase
of 200 per cent — the recently inaugurated branch at Los

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 83

Angeles has an additional 1300, the professional colleges
and farm schools throughout the state are growing rapidly,
and the 1919 registration for extension work alone was
16,000.

(3) Classroom and housing facilities utterly fail to take
care of the increased numbers. Classroom facilities have
increased only 20 per cent. New buildings are essential for
the general sciences and the new school of education. Stu-
dents can not get housing accommodations, and dormito-
ries must be built. At the opening of each college year
these problems become acute.

(4) Classes are much too large. A student can not re-
ceive the necessary individual attention from his instructor
in a class of hundreds.

(5) Compensation of the teaching force must be in-
creased. There has been an increase of but 25 per cent in
salaries in the past ten years. In consequence, the problem
of getting competent instructors grows increasingly diffi-
cult. The best experts are either sought by other institu-
tions which offer higher compensation, or go into private
business. These men must have spent at least seven years
of non-remunerative time in order to qualify for their posi-
tions, and for some time past only loyalty to the university
has kept many of the best men there. The threatened loss
of our best experts in farming, irrigation, mining, engi-
neering and the other arts and sciences must be avoided
at all hazards.

(6) Under the present system, the university must ask
for aid each legislative session. Our legislatures have been
generous, but even this experience in the past can not take
away the constant uncertainty for the future. No compre-
hensive plan for growth and expansion can now be made.
The proposed plan will remove this uncertainty and avoid
the necessity of a scramble for funds.

(7) Other states, sixteen in number, have recognized this
principle of the automatic tax as being the best method of
supporting a state university.

(8) By this measure every taxpayer who has property

84 University of Texas Bulletin

subject to assessment of the assessed value of $1,000 will
pay $1.20 per year for the support of the university and all
its branches. The university may remain a free institution,
without tuition fees, and its services to our agricultural,
mining and other interests can grow from year to year to
meet the growing needs of the state.

WARREN GREGORY,
President Alumni Association of the
University of California,

Argument Against State University* Ad Valorem Tax

This measure to raise funds for the state university is
fundamentally wrong. It is unjust from the standpoint of
taxation. It violates all the traditions and practices con-
trolling and safeguarding the handling of public funds. In
violation of the present provisions of the constitution it
places a yearly burden of over four million dollars upon the
home, the farm, the business and the industry and relieves
public service corporations from paying any portion of the
tax. This measure places this large sum, which increases
yearly at the rate of about seven per cent, without reserva-
tion in the hands of the board of regents of the university.
The people will have no control of this money either through
the Legislature or by initiative legislation, unless they again
amend the constitution. Therefore, this ad valorem tax
now proposed is not the same as the old ad valorem tax
which was formerly levied for the university. The old tax
was levied by the Legislature and subject to positive control
by the Legislature and responsive to public desire and de-
mand. For years California provided a mill tax for the
university and at this time other states provide mill taxes
for their universities, but the public funds so raised were
and are properly safeguarded by provisions which are en-
tirely lacking in the measure now before the people. This
measure sets aside public funds not only beyond control of
the people, but in excess of the present necessity of the uni-
versity. At present there is annually appropriated to the

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 85

university out of public funds slightly over two rand one-half
million dollars. This measure adds to that the sum of one
and one-half million dollars, while the actual additional
needs of the university have been stated by friends of the
university to be not in excess of one million dollars a year.
This measure places the university in a much favored posi-
tion ahead of the public schools, of the courts, of the state
functions for public safety, and ahead of the support of our
dependents and the care of our widowed mothers and or-
phaned children. It is preposterous that a measure of this
kind should be presented for public approval. Surely the
voters of this state will not approve a measure which levies
upon the man unequal and unjust tax, which places public
funds beyond proper control, and sets such funds aside re-
gardless of other equally meritorious or more necessary
needs. The measure should be defeated.

CLYDE L. LEAVEY.

EXTRACT FROM AN ADDRESS DELIVERED BY GEO.

SPENCER WRIGHT TO A MEETING OF THE

EX-STUDENTS' ASSOCIATION, AUG., 1921

Seventy-six years ago the builders of this great common-
wealth directed the Legislature, as soon as practicable, to
establish and provide for the maintenance and support of a
"university of the first class." At that time Texas was
thinly settled and poor in resources. Since then it has
reached the position of the fifth state in population and
among the first in material resources, and yet this univer-
sity trails behind the educational institutions of states with
smaller population and resources.

The universities of Iowa, Indiana, Michigan. Minnesota,
Missouri, Nebraska, Wisconsin and other smaller states
have received for many years larger legislative appropria-
tions than the Texas University. Michigan, Minnesota, and
Nebraska point with pride to their great universities built
from generous appropriations and direct taxation encour-
aged, if not demanded, by a people eager to build universi-
ties of the first class.

86 University of Texas Bulletin

For almost three quarters of a century Texas has been
so parsimonious with its university that many young men
and women have gone to other states for their education,
and hundreds of our university students have borne the heat
of our torrid summers and the cold of our varying winters
in wooden shacks that mar the beauty of the campus and
which would reflect but little credit on an ordinary "wild
cat" oil development camp.

The total amount necessary for the support of all the state
educational institutions, as estimated for each year of the
next legislative biennium, is, in round figures, $9.500,000.
The estimated taxable values in the state for the next two
fiscal years amount to approximately $3,400.' >00,000 and
$3,500,000,000 each year. If the amounts necessary for the
support of all the educational institutions were placed
roughly at $10,000,000 per annum a fixed tax of 3i/2 mills
for each year would, on the basis of an increased valuation
from year to year, provide the revenue desired by these
institutions. If the constitution should be amended so as
to provide for a tax of 3% mills per year, solely for the
support of these educational institutions, and permit the
Legislature to increase the millage basis every five years,
the funds necessary for all these institutions and the build-
ing of a university of the first class would be provided.
Among the states that have provided this character of tax
are the following: Arkansas, Colorado, Illinois, Indiana,
Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Ne-
vada, Ohio, Oregon, Tennessee, Washington, and Wisconsin.

One-third of a cent on the taxable values of Texas each
year for the support and maintenance of these institutions
would not appear as too much to ask the people »»f this state.
If you and I shall do our full duty in a movement for this
tax, if the subject shall be placed fairly and fully before the
people, they shall be ashamed to vote against it. Permit nie
to suggest that we begin now a concerted movement for this
constitutional amendment, and that each of us pledge our
services in the movement until it shall become i part of the
organic law of this state.

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 87

If we, as the beneficiaries of the university, saall succeed
in securing funds for the upbuilding and support of a uni-
versity of the first class, we shall render distinct service
to the university, the state and posterity; and when such
amendment has been adopted, we shall return here to cele-
brate a new day, the University of Texas Independence Day
— her independence of sordid politics, independence of leg-
islative appropriations, an independence that shall permit
it to stand, not second, third or fourth, but as a "university
of the first class."

FACTS CONCERNING THE CRISIS AT THE STATE

UNIVERSITY, AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE AND

NORMAL SCHOOL, AS COPIED FROM THE

OFFICIAL VOTERS' PAMPHLET OF THE

STATE OF OREGON

Submitted by R. S. Bean, President of the Board of Regents
of the University of Oregon ; J. K. Weatherf ord, Presi-
dent of the Board of Regents of the Oregon Agricul-
tural College, and Ben W. Olcott, President of the
Board of Regents of the Oregon Normal School.

1. Higher Educational Institutions Forced to Appeal

for Relief

A financial crisis is upon the Oregon Agricultural College,
the State University, and the Oregon Normal School. It
is due to causes over which they have no control. Upon
this crisis, the joint ways and means committee of the last
Legislature held a hearing. The committee found the three
institutions in desperate need. It found that they should
not wait even until next year. Accordingly it recommended
to the Legislature an additional levy of 1.26* mills for sup-
port, beginning in 1921, and an appropriation of like amount
for this year alone. The Legislature itself was barred by
the six per cent tax limitation from making the levy and
appropriation, so it referred the bill te the people, and di-
rected that two pages be set aside in this pamphlet to

88 University of Texas Bulletin

explain the facts to the voters. The voters are to decide
May 21, and as many of the facts as can be contained in two
pages will now be set forth.

2. One Cause of Crisis Is the Remarkable Increase in
Number of Students

Since the original millage bill went into effect in 1913
the number of full-time residence students at the agricul-
tural college and the state university has increased one
hundred and fifty per cent. At the agricultural college in
1913 there were 1364 full-time students; there are now
3378. At the state university in 1913 there were 691 full-
time students; there are now 1745. The institutions have
tried hard to make income meet maintenance costs in the
face of this remarkable growth, but have been unable to
do so.

4, Meanwhile Their Income Is Further Reduced by
i*. Great Upheaval of Costs

Not only has the number of students increased one hun-
dred and fifty per cent, but in the same seven years the
cost of supplies and equipment has doubled. (This is not
true of faculty salaries, which have necessarily been in-
creased very little.) The buying power of the dollar of
1913 is today about 45 cents. The experience of the three
institutions has been the same as the experience of every
Oregon family. It is as if a family of four in 1913, with an
income of $2000, has been increased to a family of ten in
1920, with an income of $900. And with the attendance
one and one-half times as great, and the buying power of
the existing income cut squarely in two, the millage tax
revenue has remained almost unchanged.

4. Millage Income Little Changed Because of Policy on
Assessed Valuations

The millage tax revenue has stood almost still because as-
sessed valuations in Oregon remain about on the same basis

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 89

as they were in 1913. It was the expectation of the Leg-
islature, of the tax commission, and of all concerned, when
the present millage support was passed, that the annual rise
in assessed valuations would equal increase in maintenance.
How conspicuously it has failed to do so is shown by the
following table :

1913 ' $954,282,374

.1914 932,413,080

1915 934,495,032.

1916 878,763,944

1917 928,605,570

1918 987,533,896

1919 990,435,472

That is, the increase in the state's assessed valuation since
the millage bills were passed in 1913 has been three and
eight-tenths per cent, while the increase in student enroll-
ment has been one hundred and fifty per cent, and the in-
crease in operating costs about one hundred per cent.

Further, the number of students described, totaling about
5400 at the three institutions, includes only full-time stu-
dents, and does not include the many thousands who take
winter short courses, summer schools, extension classes,
or correspondence study. All of these also have to be
financed, however, from the millage tax income, and their
number, too, has increased tremendously.

5. When Expressed in Terms of Dollars Crisis
Becomes Apparent

In actual dollars the state university is receiving only
$10,846 more than it would have received in 1913 from the
millage tax income, but it has 1054 more full-time students.
The agricultural college is receiving only $14,462 more,
but it has 2014 more students. The normal is receiving
only $1445 more.

Had it not been for thrifty and far-sighted administra-
tion, the three institutions would long before now have been
turning students away. A pre-war report of the United

90 University of Texas Bulletin

States Bureau of Education gave the average cost per stu-
dent per year at $325 in the great number of American uni-
versities and colleges that entered into the calculation. At
the state university this year, however, in spite of the rise
in prices, the cost per student is $203, and at the college
$180. Even with the new millage bill in effect the cost in
Oregon would still be below the average for institutions
of similar grade. The annual student cost at the agricul-
tural college, as an example, would still be $70 a year below
the annual student cost at a typical group of five agricul-
tural schools in the Middle West and the West — those of
Michigan, Iowa, Kansas, Indiana, and Washington. (Note:
In addition, the costs of the five colleges mentioned were
taken from a four-year period preceding the war, when
costs were about one-half what they are now.)

6. They Find Themselves Unable to "Make Ends Meet"

Any Longer

The state university, agricultural college, and normal have
at last "come to the end of their rope." The war piled on
burdens that made universities and colleges everywhere
stagger. • It not only raised prices to the breaking point
for them, just as it did for every man's household, but it
compelled them to add branches of study, to intensify their
work, to whip up their speed ; for few agencies rose to meet
the call of the war as did the universities and colleges of
the country. The war also showed hundreds of thousands
of men the wonderful value of a college education. Nearly
1500 ex-service men have hurried to the state university
and the agricultural college alone. Welcome as they were,
they have nevertheless helped to create a problem that can
not be met without more aid from the state.

7. Shortage of Classroom Space Is as Great as Shortage

of Maintenance Funds

Classroom conditions at the college and university are
almost impossible. It is natural that they should be when

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 91

it is remembered that the buildings of 1913 were even then
insufficient, and that the number of students has increased
ten times faster than classroom space. Out of the dozens
of possible illustrations there is room in these two pages
for one or two only. At the university the sciences have the
laboratory and classroom facilities sufficient for an institu-
tion of about 700, instead of one of 1745. The university
library was built when the student body numbered 400,
and has study facilities for 211 at one time. At the agri-
cultural college students are shifted all over the campus to
find room at all, then are constantly crowded into wholly
unsuitable quarters. The teaching efficiency of the two in-
stitutions is fast being broken down by lack of classrooms
and laboratories.

8. Salary Conditions Result in Steady* Loss of Best
Faculty Men

The cost of living has risen probably about 90 per cent
in Oregon since 1915. Faculty salaries at the university,
college and normal have advanced about 20 per cent since
that time. The result has been a steady loss to the state
from its best faculty material. Teachers can not be ex-
pected to stay on indefinitely out of loyalty when they have
to borrow from banks, or dip into previous savings to keep
their families supported. At the agricultural college alone
there have been forty-five faculty resignations since July,
1919. Some go to the branches of industry in which they
are specialists, for one of the great lessons of the world war
was the unrealized value of the technical training of the
university and college professor. Others go to states that
have already met the crisis in their higher educational in-
stitutions by providing more adequate funds.

Yet it is vitally important that many of these faculty
members be kept in the state, and in particular the technical
specialists. Professors of agriculture, horticulture, dairy-
ing, animal husbandry, education and child study, journal-
ism, commerce, engineering, forestry, and such practical

92 University of Texas Bulletin

branches, come to their highest worth in a state only after
years of service. New men can not learn Oregon in a sea-
son or two.

9. Why Higher Education Pays in General and

Why It Pays in Oregon

Higher education puts dollars into the pockets of thou-
sands of Oregon citizens. The feat of the agricultural col-
lege in increasing the grain output per acre has alone added
more to the wealth of Oregon for each year than the entire
cost of higher education for the same year. So has the
work of the college in reducing the fruit pests. So has its
achievement in raising the egg-laying average and in im-
proving the livestock. In a less visible but no less direct
way the university and the normal are making +heir contri-
butions to the wealth of the state.

Higher education is a safeguard against anarchy on the
one hand, and against aristocracy and reaction on the other.
Nearly all the inventions that helped win the war were con-
tributions of college professors or college-trained men.
Educated men and women produce more and save more.
The arrival in the business and industrial world in the last
fifteen years of a great number of young men of broad uni-
versity training has helped make America the business and
industrial leader of the whole world. It has helped bring
the worker and the employer closer together, and to improve
the social and financial position of the former. Higher ed-
ucation in Oregon has been one of the strongest factors in
bringing in settlers to populate a vast region that at the
present averages only nine persons to the square mile.

10. What the Effect on Taxes Would Be, if You

Happen to Be a Taxpayer

Assessed valuations in Oregon usually vary from one-
third to two-thirds of the so-called "cash valuation/' which
in its turn is generally lower than the "asked price/' A

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 93

man paying on $1000 of assessed valuation would have
$1.26 added to his annual statement. As the prevailing tax
levies run, including the special levies for roads and towns
and local schools, his increase would usually range from
one-twenty-fifth to one-fortieth.

That is, it would add from two and one-half to four per
cent to his annual taxes to have the agricultural college, the
university and the normal of his state placed on a footing
that would let them remain the equals of the higher educa-
tional institutions of neighboring and Middle West States,
and make it possible for him to educate his boy and girl at
home, without going to the far greater expense of sending
them away from the state.

11. If You Were the Person Responsible for Higher Edu-

cation, What Would You Do?

Imagine yourself to be responsible for the carrying on
of higher education in Oregon. The institutions for which
you have this responsibility have been created by the people
for the education of their boys and girls, for the spread of
good citizenship, for educational extension to the state gen-
erally, and for the perpetuation of the Republic's free in-
stitutions.

Suppose that you have been provided by the people with
what they expected at the time would be an adequate mill-
age income. Unexpectedly to them and to you, however,
the income fails to meet growth, fails to meet the unfor-
seen conditions created by a world war. In fact, the income
stands almost still.

Meanwhile your costs begin to go up, up, up. They double
in seven years. Your dollars become worth 45 cents of
their old buying power. Your buildings are depreciating
Your equipment is wearing out.

And, on top of it all, your student enrollment jumps
one hundred and fifty per cent.

12. What Would You Do if These Things Happened to You?
Would you close up your doors? Or would you let your

94 University of Texas Bulletin

whole educational system break down ?

Or would you go frankly before the people, make the facts
known to them, and ask for the increase in income that has
been necessary in every other activity?

If you would do this last, it is then your consistent duty
to vote for the Higher Educational Tax Act.

(Note: Just before this copy went to the Secretary of
State, on March 1, the Higher Educational Tax Act was en-
dorsed by the State Taxpayers' League at its annual meeting
in Portland. The measure had previously been endorsed by
the Oregon Newspaper Conference and by the Oregon Retail
Merchants Association. Many other organizations were
preparing to endorse it, and dozens will doubtless do so
between this date, March 1, and May 21.)
(Signed) R. S. BEAN,

President, Board of Regents,

University* of Oregon.
J. K. WEATHERFORD.
President, Board of Regents,

Oregon Agricultural College.
BEN W. OLCOTT,
President, Board of Regents,
Oregon Normal School.

THE CRISIS

Extract from Worker's Handbook, published by the Montana Univer-
sity Funds Campaign Committee in July, 1920

No longer can the university institutions of Montana, in-
cluding the State University at Missoula, the State College
of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts at Bozeman, the State
Normal College at Dillon and the State School of Mines at
Butte, perform efficiently the tasks which have been as-
signed to them. Their present income is wholly insuffi-
cient. They find themselves confronted by long accumu-
lating needs for more buildings for instruction and supple-
mentary student activities, for more books and scientific
apparatus and technical equipment, for better libraries and

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 95

laboratories, and for more and better living accommoda-
tions for the students.

They a*re confronted also by an acute situation resulting
from:

1. A greatly increased number of students.

2. The need for higher salaries to attract and hold strong
teachers and able investigators under present living costs.

3. Rapidly rising costs of all supplies.

4. Demands for new types of service — extension work,
correspondence classes, boys' and girls' club work, mining
bureau service.

None the less urgent are the needs of those institutions
which have been established for the care and education of
th defective, delinquent and dependent children of the state :
the Orphans' Home at Twin Bridges, the State School for
the Deaf and Blind at Boulder, the State Industrial School
at Miles City, and the State Vocational School for Girls at
Helena. The demands upon these institutions greatly ex-
ceed the facilities now provided. The educational system of
Montana will be sadly lacking until all these wards of the
state are given their rightful opportunity to be educated
as far as possible for self-supporting citizenship.

Most serious of all, in the face of the needs above indi-
cated, the state institutions are threatened with a reduction
in their present inadequate state income. This reduction is
due to the constitutional provision that when the valuation
of the real and personal property in the state amounts to six
hundred million dollars ($600,000,000), a total already
reached, the tax levy for state purposes, unless otherwise
voted by the people, shall be reduced from 2 1/2 mills to 2
mills. Out of the present tax levy of 2% mills the state
government, boards and bureaus, the penitentiary, the in-
sane asylum, and the welfare institutions require approx-
imately li/2 mills; the university institutions receive for
maintenance approximately 1 mill. As the former group
can be operated at this time only with increased cost, it is
clear that the funds available from taxation for the state

96 University of Texas Bulletin

schools will be greatly reduced unless the people vote other-
wise. The reduction in the state income for next year is
estimated at $300,000.

The Relief

Relief in this crisis can come only from the people. It
can not come from legislative action. For, under the con-
stitution, any increase in the constitutional state tax levy
or any bonded indebtedness must be voted by the people.

Hence two laws have been initiated to be voted on in
November. (A) No. 18 provides for a maintenance tax for
the university institutions. (B) No. 19 provides for a bond
issue to erect buildings at all the state educational institu-
tions.

'Initiative Measure No. 18
Maintenance Tax Law

This measure provides that each year for the next ten
years the levy on all taxable property for state purposes
shall be increased to 3% mills — that is one mill more than
the present state tax. The proceeds from one and one-half
mills of this levy shall be appropriated by the State Legis-
lature for the maintenance of the university institutions —
the State University at Missoula, the State College of Agri-
culture and Mechanic Arts at Bozeman, the State Normal
College at Dillon and the State School of Mines at Butte.

Initiative Measure No. 19
Bond Issue Law

This measure provides for the issuance of state bonds,
under the authority of the State Board of Examiners, to the
amount of five million dollars ($5,000,000) to draw interest
at the rate of not more than 5 Vfc per cent, to be sold at not
less than par, to be payable in twenty years, and to be re-
deemable at any time aften ten years. The proceeds of

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 97

these bonds are to be used only for the construction, repair,
and equipment of buildings; three million seven hundred
and fifty dollars ($3,750,000) at the four university institu-
tions named above, and one million two hundred and fifty
thousand dollars ($1,250,000) at the four non-university in-
stitutions, also under the direction of the State Board of
Education — the State Industrial School at Miles City, the
State Vocational School for Girls at Helena, the State Or-
phans' Home at Twin Bridges, and the State School for the
Deaf and Blind at Boulder. This measure carries a state
tax of not to exceed 10/12 mill for interest and sinking fund.
This tax has been computed at a rate which will pay the
interest and principal of these bonds within ten to twenty
years.

The immediate result of the passage of Initiative Measure
No. 18 will be to increase the state's maintenance funds by
one-half mill and to increase the present one-mill appro-
priation for the university maintenance to li/2 mills. This
will afford with the income from the federal government,
a conservative sum for the maintenance of the four univer-
sity institutions and by taking off the pressure upon the
state levy for general purposes, will indirectly provide for
the growing maintenance needs of the four non-university
institutions and of the other state activities.

The immediate result of the passage of Initiative Measure
No. 19 will be to supply a reasonable sum for the long post-
poned and urgent building and equipment needs of all the
state educational institutions, both for those in the univer-
sity and for the four non-university institutions.

No other measures have been proposed which would pro-
vide a proper increase in the state revenues whereby the
higher and special schools may be kept in effective operation.

The Effect on Taxes Fully Explained

The two proposed measures, No. 18 and No. 19, carry a
total increase of the state tax levy of 2Vi mills, l*/2 mills
in the university maintenance tax law (No. 18) and 10/12

98 University of Texas Bulletin

of a mill in the educational bond law (No. 19). The con-
stitution provides that when the property valuation of the
state reaches six hundred million dollars ($600,000,000),
the state tax levy shall be reduced from 21/2 mills to 2 mills.
Since it is certain that this year the property valuation has
exceeded six hundred million dollars ($600,000,000), the
actual increase in the state tax, provided by Measure No.
18 and No. 19, will be 1 5/6 mills more than that now
actually in force.

Some Further Reasons
Measures Are Financially Sound

The plan of a millage tax for the support of the university
institutions is now followed in fifteen of the most impor-
tant states of the West and may be called a standard method
in these states where the educational institutions are most
successf ul.Among them are Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Ilinois,
Wisconsin, Minnesota, Nebraska, Colorado, Washington,
and Oregon.

The issuance of bonds for the construction of buildings
has also been widely employed. The issue of bo/ids for this
purpose is good business, and it is social justice. It is the
height of absurdity to make the current reveiues of the
state pay for capital investments that will serve the people
for generations to come. The dividends from these invest-
ments will be great, but they will accrue mainly to the fu-
ture, for the simple reason that they are educational in-
vestments. Our sons and daughters will thank us for mak-
ing these investments, and will pay them glad'y — and far
more easily by virtue of the training they get in these
schools.

Montana Is Losing Money

Montana loses a quarter of a million dollars a year, it is
said, through the young people who seek a college education
outside the state. The estimate has been made that 250

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 99

students a year spending on the average $1000 each are
attending the educational institutions outside the state
Some of these go outside for family reasons, but many of
them would stay in the state if the institutions were better
equipped and supported. Many of them, if not most of
them, are attending state-supported schools.

Take the University Institutions Out of Legislative
Competition

In order to secure funds the university institutions must
now compete before the Legislature with the other interests
and undertakings of the state. To most persons this seems
unfair to the university institutions and tends to lower their
dignity, and limit their efficiency.

The common schools and the high schools do not have to
go before the city councils and the county commissioners
and compete for support against roads, poor houses, jails,
health officers, county deputies, etc. They have their own
fixed funds raised for them and not subject to political trad-
ing or to competition with other public purposes, which,
however meritorious, are often less essential.

These two measures will place the state institutions in the
same relation financially to their constituency, the people of
the state, that the local schools are in to the people of the
district, the town, or the county.

Bring the University Up to the Standard of the
Montana Public Schools

The recent survey of the -school systems of the United
States placed those of Montana in the lead. This was due
solely to the excellence of the grade and high schools. The
children coming from these schools in increasingly greater
numbers should not experience a lowering in standards in
passing to the institutions of higher learning. Yet this must
result if the people of the state do not support the state
schools as the public schools are supported by the commu-
nities in which they are situated.

100 University of Texas Bulletin

Since January 1, 1920, Ouster County has voted more
money for a new county high school building, and the Mis-
soula city school district has voted more money for new
grade school buildings than any of the university institu-
tions has had for permanent buildings during the last ten
years. These examples are not exceptions but are to be
found at place after place throughout the state. If the
people of the state desire that their children should go to
college in Montana, the physical standards of the university
must be brought up to the grade of the public schools.

An Opinion Worth Reading
The Efficiency Commission

The Sixteenth Legislative Assembly (1919) created a
state efficiency commission to investigate the financial and
business policy of the state. The members of this commis-
sion were Hon. Frank Eliel of Dillon (chairman), Hon. N.
T. Lease of Great Falls and Hon. W. 0. Fisk of Hamilton.
After visiting all the state educational institutions the com-
mission reported to the Governor :

"The ambitious youth of Montana has a right to demand
that the state provide the opportunities and facilities for
obtaining higher education. Under present conditions the
state is failing to perform, effectively, the duty which it owes
to our young manhood and womanhood. Many of our most
promising boys and girls belong to families of most limited
financial resources. The state will not be fair to the youth
of Montana if it fails to place the opportunities for higher
education within their reach. ,

"It is a matter of general observation that many of our
young men and women leave this state in seeking their uni-
versity training. This entails an annual drain of a consid-
erable sum of money from the productive channels of the
state. Many of the most competent of these young men and
women are lost to the future of Montana, since they take
up their life-work elsewhere.

"This condition can not be corrected as long as our edu-

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational -Institutions' : 101

cational institutions are dependent almost entirely upon
appropriations for the money necessary, not only for main-
tenance, but also for the erection of buildings. The rev-
enues of the state are insufficient and can not readily be
increased. It will be necessary to go to the people them-
selves for authority to supply the needed funds.

"The needs (i.e., building and equipment) of the educa-
tional institutions may be provided for either by a bond
issue or by a special tax to be levied during a definite term
of years. Either plan would require the approval of the
people. Of the two the former commends itself to this
commission as the more desirable.

"This matter is of such a fundamental character, it is so
intimately connected with the future welfare of the state
that the members of this commission have no hesitancy in
giving their full and unqualified endorsement to the propo-
sition of asking the people to authorize the necessary bond
issue."

EXTRACT FROM AN ADDRESS BY EDWARD C.

ELLIOT, CHANCELLOR OF THE UNIVERSITY

OF MONTANA

More than a quarter of a century ago when forward-
looking men were engaged in laying the permanent founda-
tions for this commonwealth of Montana, it was fore-
ordained that a system of free public education was to be
set up. As an integral part of this system, and in comple-
tion of the guarantee of equality of opportunity for all the
youth of the state there were created four higher institu-
tions— The State University at Missoula, The State College
of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts at Bozeman, The State
School of Mines at Butte, and the State Normal College at
Dillon.

From simple and modest beginnings these institutions
have in their growth and expansion reflected the general
progress of the state. In 1916 the four higher state schools
were organized as component units of the University of

102 University of Texas Bulletin

Montana. The immediate results of the centralized organ-
ization were coordination and harmony of educational effort,
economy and effectiveness of financial operation, and the
elimination of those partisan and provincial influences
which for many years have led to disturbing and handicap-
ping controversies.

During the past year there were enrolled in the four
University of Montana institutions approximately three
thousand students, each seeking with that ambitious fore-
sight, ever characteristic of our western youth, to become
fit for service to self and state by liberal education and pro-
fessional training in law, or forestry, or agriculture, or en-
gineering, or journalism, or business administration, or
pharmacy, or teaching. In this connection it is pertinent
to call attention to the fact that during the past decade the
resident student attendance at the several university insti-
tutions has increased several times — at the State University
more than four times, at the College of Agriculture and
Mechanic Arts nearly twice, and at the Normal College
nearly four times. During this period there had been but
little increase in buildings and equipment for instructional
purposes.

In addition to the teaching of students there has been
maintained the Agricultural Experiment Station at Boze-
man with its four branch stations at Havre, Moccasin, Hunt-
ley, and Corvallis. Through the agricultural extension serv-
ice no less than sixty thousand people, chiefly of the coun-
try regions, have had carried to them through agricultural
experts, home demonstration agents, and leaders of boys'
and girls' clubs, practical assistance and inspiration of in-
calculable social and economic benefit to the entire state.

Through the State Bureau of Mines, the services of the
expert mining engineers of the State School of Mines have
been made available to hundreds of our people. The teach-
ers' service division of the Normal College has continued to
stimulate hundreds of teachers to undertake better prepara-
tion for their work. It is more than a mere figure of speech

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 103

to say that the campus of the university now includes the
entire area of the State of Montana.

Three forces, however, have recently operated to neutral-
ize the gains from the improved administrative machinery
for the university, and to create a crisis which today threat-
ens the very existence of the university and its works. This
crisis may be easily and briefly described.

Since the time of their establishment state funds provided
for the support and the material expansion and equipment
of the higher educational institutions have been wholly in-
adequate. In making this statement I am not overlooking
the outstanding fact that our people have had, during this
period of our phenomenal development from pioneer begin-
nings, to bear many large public burdens. Higher educa-
tion was but one among many essential public enterprises
demanding the attention of legislatures and the taxpayer.
Nevertheless, the insufficiency of past support can not be
ignored. While the state, during the decade preceding the
war enjoyed unprecedented growth in population and in
the development of her great natural resources, it is fair
to remember that during this same time the state made no
provision whatever for buildings for educational purposes at
any of the educational institutions. And what is more to
the point during these years these institutions doubled and
trebled in student attendance.

The appropriations from state taxation for the mainte-
nance of this comprehensive and manifold undertaking dur-
ing the fiscal year amounted approximately to the revenue
equivalent of one mill. The university expense can not now
be met from the limited income.

The prime question before the people of Montana today is
whether or not the university enterprise shall be maintained
in a manner that will enable it to serve as it should the in-
terests of a progressive, productive state ; or whether Mon-
tana, which has recently been awarded first rank among all
the states of the Union for its support of elementary and
secondary schools, shall follow a narrow and destructive

104 University of Texas Bulletin

policy towards its university. Shall the state provide more
revenue or be content with less university?

Chief among- the disastrous results of the Great War is
the world-wide diminished purchasing power of money.
Here at least is a case where familiarity had not bred con-
tempt.

Keeping in mind the insufficient pre-war resources, it is
but natural that the post-war depreciated dollar has become
a real menace to the life of our educational institutions.
The appropriations made by the last Legislature were based
upon estimates made during the summer months of 1918
when the tide of victory ebbed and flowed, and when there
was a recognized necessity for economy in public as well
as private affairs if we were to furnish the means for the
victory for which we were struggling.

Will there be any wonder or resentment on the part of
rational men when I say that the university would have been
unable to keep its doors open to students and to meet the
demands for service from the citizens of the state this year
on the funds appropriated ? I estimate an operating deficit
of about one hundred and fifty thousand dollars at the end
of the current fiscal year. This deficit has been offset by
withholding practically all of the appropriations for build-
ings made by the Sixteenth Legislature.

The germ of the financial crisis of the university is to be
found in the fact that today the State of Montana is not
raising sufficient revenue to meet its governmental and in-
stitutional needs. Our present state tax of two and one-
half mills is the lowest state tax of any of the neighboring
northwestern states. The difficulty in which we find our-
selves is compounded by the fact that under the constitution
the state tax will next year be automatically reduced from
two and one-half mills to two mills. Instead of increased
revenue we are faced by the prospect of increased poverty.

It is the firm conviction of myself and those associated
with me in the administration of the university in its several
institutions, divisions and departments that we were obli-
gated to the people of the state to inform them of the grave

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 105

situation in which this important educational enterprise
finds itself. The people, and the people alone, have it with-
in their power to decide the issue at stake. Therefore we
have proposed and have presented through the initiative
procedure, two measures carefully designated to afford re-
lief. The first of these, Initiative Measure No. 18, provides
for a state tax of three and one-half mills — one mill more
than the present tax — proceeds of one and one-half mills of
which shall be appropriated by the Legislature for the oper-
ating support of the university institutions. The second
measure, Initiative Measure No. 19, provides for the issu-
ance of state bonds to the amount of five millions of dollars,
the proceeds of three-fourths ($3,750,000) of which shall
be utilized for buildings and equipment for the university
institutions, and the remainder ($1,250,000) to be devoted
to buildings at the several state institutions for defective
(Twin Bridges), dependent (Boulder), and delinquent
(Helena and Miles City) children.

The passage of these measures will give the university a
chance to do its work in an effective manner, and will secure
to the unfortunate children, who have become the special
wards of the state, an opportunity to which they are justly
entitled.

EXTRACT FROM FIFTEENTH BIENNIAL REPORT

OF THE BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE

UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS

Need of Maintenance by Special Tax Levy

The $655,000 recommended for the first fiscal year and
the $720,000 for the second, may be provided either by ap-
propriation from the general revenue, or from the proceeds
of a special tax levy. We believe that the latter is the better
method.

106 University of Texas Bulletin

deliberately decided upon, providing for an orderly devel-
opment stretching over a series of years. Such conduct
of affairs is impossible under the system of biennial appro-
priations. What will be done by legislatures and governors
two, four and six years in the future can not possibly be
foreseen. This situation compels the regents to pursue a
"hand to mouth" policy, inconsistent with the interests of
the university, and destructive either of prudent or eco-
nomical management.

The entanglement of the university in factional politics
constitutes, if possible, a graver objection to the system of
biennial appropriations for its maintenance. The officers
of the university should not be called upon to lobby, however
important the end to be attained or unexceptionable the
methods employed. Men engaged in educational service
should be free to devote their best energies to their high
functions. Above all, the university itself should be so sup-
ported as to be wholly independent of partisan caprice.

The plan of supporting the university from the proceeds
of a special statutory tax has been adopted by practically
all the strongest state universities of the country, and we
recommend that the present legislature employ this method
of providing for the support of the University of Texas.

In determining the rate of such a special tax, two factors
are to be borne in mind, the assessed valuation, and the re-
duction for cost of collection and unpaid taxes. For the
current fiscal year the state's assessed valuation amounts
to $2,532,710,050. The estimates of the Comptroller, based
upon the experience of many years, is that only 80 per cent
of any tax levy reaches the state treasury. Bearing these
two facts in mind the rate that will produce the average
of the amounts recommended for the two years is 3.4 cents
on the $100 of assessed values. The gross yield of the tax
would be $861,121.41. Deducting 20 per cent for cost of
collection and unpaid taxes, the net yield would be $688,-
897.13. The assessed values could not be expected to in-
crease sufficiently to provide the sum recommended for the
second year ; the values are lower this year than last. But

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 107

the regents would have the advantage of knowing what to
expect for that and subsequent years.

The following table, taken by permission, from a bulletin
of the Hogg Organization, will show that the rate mentioned
is low in comparison with that of other state universities,
below which the University of Texas should not stand.

Additional

Institution Rate Appropriations

by Legislatures

California 3 $ 301,783.00

Colorado 8 127,869.00

Illinois 10

Michigan 4.75 74,000.00

Minnesota 2.30 1,060,377.00

Nebraska 10 110,000.00

North Dakota 5.33+ 222,817.00

Wisconsin .- 2.85+ 444,135.00

Average 5.78 334,426.00

It will be noted that the rates shown in the tables have
proved too low in the states, enumerated, with the exception
of Illinois. All the other universities mentioned have had
to appeal biennially to the state legislatures for supplemen-
tary appropriations, which they have received in the
amounts shown in the table. Such a situation is unfort-
unate, and should not be allowed to exist in Texas. The
removal of the State University from the scramble for ap-
propriations is one of the main purposes of a special tax,
and this purpose is in large measure defeated in the states
mentioned. The mistake of these other states should not
be repeated in Texas. It can be avoided by means of the
moderate tax mentioned. With any rate lower than 3.3
cents, the number of students in attendance by 1915 will
require an appeal to the Thirty-fourth Legislature for sup-
plementary appropriations or for an increase in the tax
rate. We believe that the rate recommended is a small
price to pay for a permanent removal of the university from
the domain of political contention.

108 University of Texas Bulletin

SIXTEENTH BIENNIAL REPORT

RECOMMENDATIONS IN DETAIL FOR THE SESSIONS OF
1915-16 AND 1916-17

Running Expenses

Provisions for a sure and adequate annual income for
running expenses is the most serious problem that the au-
thorities of a university must face. Scholarly teachers,
books in sufficient numbers, and modern laboratory equip-
ment for a large and growing educational institution cost
money. And this money must be expended, particularly
that which is paid out for salaries, without giving evidence
of immediate tangible results. Governors and legislatures
naturally like to leave evidence in brick and mortar of the
public money they appropriate. The fact that appropria-
tions are easier to secure for buildings than for running
expenses is borne out by the testimony of governing boards
of most state universities. The money that goes for salaries
seems to disappear, while the buildings remain monuments
to the generosity of those who allow the appropriations.

Of the two, men to train the minds of Texas boys and
girls or stately buildings in which to house them, it is ev-
ident, on a moment's thought, that teachers are the first
essentials. Classrooms, so long as they give adequate pro-
tection from heat and rain and cold, may be located in pine
shacks, without great detriment to the substantial progress
of earnest students. For stately buildings worthy of Texas
and its university, we can, if it is imperative, wait; highly
trained instructors in sufficient numbers to care for the
youths of this state who desire a university education, we
cannot do without. We therefore request, first, that the
legislature grant from the general revenue, or by a special
tax levy, sufficient support to maintain properly a competent
faculty, as well as to provide necessary books, laboratory
supplies, and incidentals. We earnestly urge the legisla-
ture to grant the sums asked for in the budget recommended,
which was drawn up on a very economical basis.

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 109

Four years have elapsed since the Main University has
been permitted to use any of its income from lands or
other sources for erecting permanent buildings. Since that
time the attendance at the university has been increased by
nearly one thousand students ; and, for absolutely necessary
class-rooms, we have been forced to erect temporary pine
shacks on the campus. About one-fourth of the work of
the University is now conducted in these cheap temporary
structures, containing a floor space of 58,774 square feet.
These twelve buildings are designated and used for the fol-
lowing purposes : A Hall, Agriculture and Botany ; C Hall,
Chemical Laboratory; D E Hall, School of Domestic Econ-
omy ; F Hall, University Commons ; G Hall, class-rooms ; H
Hall, Department of Education, School of Business Train-
ing; I Hall, Department of Extension; J Hall, School of
Journalism, School of Institutional History; K Hall, class-
rooms, including large lecture hall ; L Hall, laboratories for
Schools of Zoology and Geology ; M Hall, School of Manual
Training; N Hall, Woman's Gymnasium.

Need of Maintenance by Special Tax Levy

The amounts recommended for the biennium may be pro-
vided either by appropriation from the general revenue, or
from the proceeds of a special tax levy. We believe that the
latter is the better method.

It is generally agreed that the plan of relying on appro-
priations from the general revenue, made biennially, is open
to grave objections. A university, of all institutions, should
be managed reasonably and prudently, on the basis of plans
deliberately decided upon, providing for an orderly develop-
ment stretching over a series of years. Such conduct of
affairs is impossible under the system of biennial appropria-
tions. What will be done by legislatures and governors,
two, four, and six years in the future can not possibly be
foreseen. This situation compels the regents to pursue a
"hand-to-mouth" policy, inconsistent with the interests of
the university, and destructive either of prudent or of eco-
nomical management.

110 University of Texas Bulletin

The entanglement of the university in factional politics
constitutes, if possible, a graver objection- to the system of
biennial appropriations for its maintenance. The officers
of the university should not be called upon to lobby, however
important the end to be attained or unexceptionable the
methods employed. Men engaged in educational service
should be free to devote their best energies to their high
functions. Above all, the university itself should be so
supported as to be wholly independent of partisan caprice.

The plan of supporting the university from the proceeds
of a special statutory tax has been adopted by practically
all the strongest state universities of the country, and we
recommend that the present Legislature employ this method
of providing for the support of the University of Texas.

In determining the rate of such a special tax two factors
are to be borne in mind : the assessed valuation and the re-
duction for cost of collection and unpaid taxes, ^or the cur-
rent fiscal year, the state's assessed valuation amounts to
$2,686,129,989. The estimates of the Comptroller, based
upon the experience of many years, is that only 80 per cent
of any tax levy reaches the state treasury. These two facts
being borne in mind, the rates that will produce the amounts
recommended for the two years, respectively, are 3.33 cents
and 3.95 cents on the $100 of assessed values. The gross
yield of the tax would be $894,481.28 and $1,061,071.34.
Twenty per cent for cost of collection and unpaid taxes being
deducted, the net yield would be $715,585.03 and $848,857.02.

Buildings

Unless the work of the university is to be very seriously
hampered, the whole income that can, under the constitution,
be expended for buildings must be used for that purpose.
Enlightened public opinion in Texas will not for many years
allow the state's highest educational institution, the cap-
stone of its public school system, the University of Texas,
to continue being housed in rough pine box houses. These
temporary houses should be replaced, at the earliest possible

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 111

time, by permanent fireproof buildings, and should be built
of sufficient size to accommodate a growing student body for
at least the next ten years. Probably the first buildings
that should be erected for the university are not accommoda-
tions for education classrooms and laboratories, as urgent
as the need of them appears to be. The most crying need
is for the immediate erection of dormitories in which the
young women of the university may be properly cared for.
During the session of 1913-14, 740 young women attended
the university. At least 500 of these should have been cared
for by the institution, instead of being forced to hunt
throughout Austin for private houses that would take them
as roomers and boarders. A scarcely less urgent need is
felt for suitable dormitories for young men. Such dormi-
tories should be provided sufficient to accommodate not less
than 1500 persons. The following fireprof buildings should
be erected as soon as the Legislature can provide the neces-
sary funds :

Five dormitories for girls, $50,000 each $ 250,000

Education and practice School , 175,000

Chemistry Building 150,000

Biological Sciences Building 150,000

Domestic Science Building 125,000

Dining Hall and Kitchen 100,00*

Fifteen dormitories for men, $50,000 each 750,000

Total $1,700,000

Such an expenditure would exhaust the available univer-
sity fund for the next eight years. This fund, coming as it
does from land leases, interest on land sales, interest on
bonds, matriculation fees, etc., should be left by the Legisla-
ture as a sacred trust for the purpose of caring for the build-
ing needs of the institution. The amount necessary for
these absolutely pressing building needs should be provided
t>y bonds issued on the university's permanent income. Such
a provision is possible by a simple act of the Legislature,
and the act could be so framed that the bonds would never
become a charge on the people. The sale of bonds offers one

112 University of Texas Bulletin

of the fairest means of providing money for buildings, as it
distributes the cost of the buildings more equitably over the
period during which they are used. It is much fairer that
all the people who enjoy the buildings for thirty years should
share in their cost, rather than that their cost should be
borne only by the people living during the one year pre-
ceding their construction. Only by this means can the de-
mand for permanent fireproof buildings in the State Demo-
cratic platform be satisfied, so far as the university is con-
cerned.

Other buildings are necessary to have a "university of the
first class," and should be provided as early as possible,,
namely: a medical laboratory building, physics building,
gymnasium building, museum of Texas history and products,
museum of natural sciences, administration building, engi-
neering building, and a building for fine arts. The urgent
need of these buildings must be apparent to anyone who will
visit our campus and consider thoughtfully the difficulties
under which we are laboring.

On more than one occasion state Democratic platforms
have recommended the removal of the inhibition existing
against the university only, among all the state institutions,
prohibiting making appropriations out of the general rev-
enue for the erection of buildings. Under the present con-
stitution, if the university is swept by a fire while without
the protection of adequate insurance, the situation would be
appalling. The men who framed the present constitution
could not possibly foresee the necessities of a large and
growing university; and it certainly was never the inten-
tion of the founders so to limit the income of the university,
originally most generously provided, or that there would
ever be serious danger of its work being stopped. Under
the present condition, such danger exists, and we should
cease blinding ourselves to the situation. Either the state
university of one of the largest commonwealths in the Union
must continue its existence, housed in utterly unsuitable
buildings, in imminent danger of being stopped altogether
by fire, or the Legislature and the people must remove from

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 113

the constitution the bar to our progress. If this were done
and an adequate special tax voted, then the university would
be free from the situation that stifles its growth, impedes
its progress, and absorbs the energy of the men who have
been appointed to guide its destinies educationally rather
than to be solicitors of funds for its daily existence.

How inadequately the University of Texas is supplied
with buildings, both in Austin and in Galveston, appears
from the following table, which is based upon the same data
as the preceding ones. The table gives the present invest-
ment, by the states mentioned, in plants for their higher
educational institutions.

TABLE V.— VALUE OF PLANT*

California . . .
Minnesota . . .

Iowa ,

Michigan

Ohio

Wisconsin . . .

Illinois

Colorado ,

Kansas

Missouri

Indiana

Nebraska . . .
North Dakota

Average

Texas . .

— $9,865,000

8,531,000

. 7,355,000

6,885,000
6,714,000
6,444,000
3,896,000

. 3,560,000

.— 3,412,000

2,880,000
2,399,000
2,289,000
.— 1,626,000

, 5,066,000

1,644,000

The amount credited to Texas represents the university's
investments in buildings, a disproportionately small amount,
considering the institution's relatively large student body —
according to the best estimates, more than 2400 for the
current regular session, and from 4000 to 4500 if summer
school and correspondence students are included

The inadequacy of the university's buildings and campus
may also be judged by the following table, which gives the
value of the plants of a number of universities, divided by
the number of students in the regular session, f or the year
1913:

114 University of Texas Bulletin

TABLE VI. — VALUE OF PLANT PER STUDENT IN LONG SESSION

Minnesota $2,305

California — 1,833

North Dakota — 1,760

Wisconsin 1,521

Ohio — 1,316

Iowa 1,279

Colorado 1,210

Missouri 1,132

Michigan 1,069

Kansas 903

Illinois — 831

Nebraska 690

Indiana 669

Average . 1,257

TEXASf 695

*For University and A. and M. College combined.
tFor University of Texas only.

EIGHTEENTH BIENNIAL REPORT

It is humanly impossible to forecast for two years, or
even one, many hundred items of expenditure, especially
when a majority of those items are concerned with the sal-
aries of the members of a staff that is continually shifting
and changing. Under the circumstances, substitutions and
changes in the individual appropriations are absolutely nec-
essary. Positions and salaries are fixed with reference to
the attainments and abilities of the individuals, and must
vary accordingly. Only in exceptional cases is the univer-
sity able to fill a vacancy through the appointment of a man
whose training and achievements warrant precisely the
same rank and salary as those of his predecessor.

Lack of elasticity in the appropriation for the current
biennium has forced the Board to expend for operating ex-
penses approximately $100,000.00 out of the available fund,
that might otherwise have been saved for permanent im-
provements. The difficulties of administration which have
been experienced during this biennium have, of course, been
somewhat abnormal ; yet, at the same time, the probabilities

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 115

are that, as soon as settled conditions once more obtain
throughout the country, the stimulus to education which has
been given by the policies of the War Department will great-
ly increase the attendance at the University, and make the
administrative problems of the next biennium more difficult
than any we have yet experienced.

The matter of conserving the available fund of the uni-
versity for permanent improvemnts is one of prime im-
portance at the present time. Definite steps must be taken
in the near future looking toward the provision of an ade-
quate physical plant for the institution. Fully one-fourth
of the work of the University is now being conducted in
temporary pine shacks. The Main Building, in which a
majority of the classes are held, is daily occupied at a risk
of life to the students that can not be exaggerated. The
university auditorium has been condemned by the State
Fire Marshal, and has been closed for the past two years.
Unless the work of the University is to be seriously ham-
pered, stately fireproof buildings worthy of Texas and of its
university must soon be provided. The urgent need of such
permanent buildings must be apparent to any one who visits
the campus and thoughtfully considers the difficulties under
which the institution is laboring.

The board has carefully canvassed the needs of the uni-
versity for additional buildings and grounds, and has
reached the conclusion that, for the proper conduct of the
institution, upon the basis of the present attendance in Aus-
tin and in Galveston, the expenditure of at least $5,000,-
000.00 is necessary to provide an adequate physical plant.
There is perhaps no other institution in the United States
that is undertaking to do the amount of work that is being
done by the University with an equipment so far below its
actual needs. The effect of this inadequate equipment is
two-fold : (1) It seriously hampers both students and facul-
ty in the spirit with which their work is done; (2) it re-
tards the growth of the University in point of numbers.
Annually the State of Texas sends to universities and col-
leges of other states more than 3,000 young men and women,
many of whom would be attracted to the University of Texas

116 University of Texas Bulletin

if an adequate plant were provided. Numbers of individual
instances have been brought to the attention of the Board
where parents, for reasons of sentiment, advantageous as-
sociation, or state pride, have desired to send their sons and
daughters to the University, but have hesitated to do so on
account of the lack of proper facilities here, particularly in
the way of adequate residential quarters. The Board be-
lieves that with the expenditure before indicated, running
over a brief course of years, the disadvantages under which
the university now labors will be largely eliminated.

The inserted table, based upon figures contained in the
United States Bureau of Education Bulletin 1917, No. 55,
Statistics of State Universities and State Colleges, and in
the United States Bureau of the Census bulletins Estimates
of Population of the United States, 1910-1916, and estimated
Valuation of National Wealth, 1850-1912, will reveal the
relative economy with which the University of Texas is be-
ing conducted. In comparison with other states, Texas
spends very little for higher education, either per inhabi-
tant, per unit of wealth, or per long-session student. The
table also shows that the number of students per teacher is
too great for efficiency, and must be lowered if the boys and
girls attending our state institutions of higher learning are
to receive the advantages enjoyed by the no more worthy
boys and girls of other states. How inadequately the Uni-
versity of Texas is supplied with buildings in indicated by
a comparison of the value of other state university plants
with that of our own.

EXTRACTS FROM THE REPORT OF THE CENTRAL
INVESTIGATING COMMITTEE OF THE THIRTY-
FIFTH LEGISLATURE

UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS
Physical Plant

The physical plant of the University of Texas consists
of forty acres of land in the city of Austin, valued at

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 117

$500,000 ; and nine brick buildings from one to five stories
in height and twelve temporary frame buildings, all of
which are inventoried at $1,319,901.79, and to which inven-
tory is to be added a balance of $77,908.85 on the new Edu-
cation Building estimated to cost $250,000, practically all
of which cost has been paid ; and which inventory of build-
ings includes an equity in the remodeling of the Old Blind
Institute, now being used for the School of Military Aero-
nautics.

Auditorium

The auditorium on the third floor in the Main Building
has been condemned by the State Fire Marshal as unsafe
for use. It has a seating capacity of about 1750. For more
than a year the room has been closed and is of no value to
the university. The fire marshal questions the advisability
of endeavoring to use the auritorium through the construc-
tion of fire escapes leading from each qf the windows to the
ground.

Shacks

The so-called "shacks," of one-story frame construction
for class work a.re really serviceable beyond expectation,
and while it is regrettable that the highest educational in-
stitution in the state should find it necessary to employ such
structures, it seems likely they will serve a valuable purpose,
in addition to the accommodation provided, in making pos-
sible practical studies in the better arrangement of perma-
nent buildings, particularly with reference to laboratory
work.

Policy of Administration

The views of institutional needs entertained by the ad-
ministrative head and the governing body, naturally will
differ from the views of the legislative body, resulting, as in

118 University of Texas Bulletin

the University of Texas, in there being a legislative budget
setting out in detail the items of maintenance, and a budget
of the board of regents covering like items as well as other
items for expansion not provided for in the legislative appro-
priations, and upon the policy of which the Legislature may
or may not have expressed itself. The possession of inde-
pendent or available funds, it will thus be seen, represents
a constant opportunity and incentive to institutional ex-
pansion, carrying the activities and expenditures of the in-
stitution beyond the limit of legislative sanction, and not
infrequently beyond popular needs and public approval.
The freedom with which the university has exercised its
ability to extend the scope of its efforts and increase its ex-
penses has brought upon it more or less of criticism.

The need would seem to be for a clearer conception by
the university administration, and a clearer expression by
the people of the state, of the scope of educational work
legitimately to devolve upon this institution and the meas-
ure of responsiveness of such work to the popular need, to
the end that it may fulfill the purpose for which created,
that of developing a university of the first class. Such ac-
tivities and policy having once been clearly defined there
would seem to be comparatively little reason or opportunity
for criticizing the expenditures of the university, made in
the carefully directed effort to effectuate this controlling
purpose.

In this connection, the committee feels justified in direct-
ing attention to the fact that had the Legislature, recog-
nizing the limitation on appropriations from the general
revenues for university buildings, inaugurated the policy
of appropriating the income from the permanent university
endowment, as the constitution permits, for the specific and
only purpose of constituting a fund from which to con-
struct permanent buildings, the university might now pos-
sess a building equipment of considerable value. The con-
stitution expressly provides that the income from the per-
manent endowment shall be subject to appropriation by the

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 119

Legislature for the purposes of establishing as well as sup-
porting the university. The Legislature must bear its part
of the responsibility for the lack of building equipment at
the university, for which it was possible to provide. The
university management, however, must likewise bear its
share of the responsibility for failing to outline and ad-
vance such a building program, and for not making it pos-
sible to carry out such a program by the exercise of rigid
economy in expenditures for maintenance purposes, instead
of being led into the policy of supplementing legislative ap-
propriations from the general revenue for maintenance pur-
poses by moneys taken from its available income.

The committee finds that the policy permitted in some in-
stitutions, and to some extent permitted heretofore in the
University of Texas, of granting leave of absence to mem-
bers of the faculty for varying periods of time on full pay,
or part pay, has been discontinued, and no member of the
faculty has been granted leave under such conditions since
the beginning of the present school year. The practice,
also, which caused some criticism of permitting members
of the university faculty, when delivering lectures and ad-
dresses to clubs, organizations, schools, or teachers' insti-
tutes, accepting special compensation, has been discontin-
ued, and no one is now supposed to accept such benefits.
The committee is confident from assurances of the univer-
sity administration that such policies will not be resumed.

Retirement on Reduced Salary

The committee in its study of conditions calculated to
inure to the advantage of the university has been led to
inquire into the advisability of some plan looking to the
retirement of members of the faculty on reduced salaries
after they have given to the institution many years of faith-
ful service and have reached that age at which the capacity
to serve the institution has been appreciably diminished.
It is unquestionable that the establishment of such policy
would be calculated to increase loyalty, create a feeling of
security, lessen the loss of the service of capable men, and

120 University of Texas Bulletin

tend materially to strengthen the interest in and perma-
nency of faculty organization. Every great institution
must solve this problem at some time, and the committee
believes that the time has come in the history of the Univer-
sity of Texas when the board of regents should seriously
give consideration to such a policy. A discussion of the de-
tails of plans calculated to accomplish the purpose would
seem scarcely within the province of this inquiry, the com-
mittee contenting itself with commending the question to
the board of regents and to the Legislature.

* Building Requirements

The administrative authorities of the Agricultural and
Mechanical College have outlined their estimate of the needs
of that institution for buildings covering the next ten years,
and places such estimate for that period at approximately
$2,500,000, and this, too, in the expectancy of the State
adopting the policy of junior agricultural schools teaching
agriculture and animal husbandry, which will in some
measure restrict the ratio of increased attendance at the
College. To this sum must be added an estimate for the
decennium of approximately $500,000 to $750,000, for per-
manent improvements at the Prairie View Normal and In-
dustrial College for colored youths.

The committee does not believe this estimate at all ex-
cessive; and further believes the general policy pursued
heretofore of erecting buildings especially designed for de-
partmental service, preferable to the construction of fewer
and larger structures intended to accommodate unrelated
departments is calculated to secure more advantageous re-
sults.

In the State Agricultural and Mechanical College, Texas
may justly claim possession of one of the most progressive
colleges devoted to vocational instruction in the Union. It
is neither as large, nor is its equipment as good, as a num-
ber of similar institutions in other states, but the spirit and

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 121

policy, it may be confidently asserted, are second to no col-
lege in thd country covering the same field.

(Signed) LEONARD TILLOTSON,

Chairman.
OSCAR DAVIS,
House Subcommittee. No. 9.

I. E. CLARK,
Chairman, Senate Subcommittee No. 9.

COLLEGE OF INDUSTRIAL ARTS
Inadequate Dormitory Facilities

We found in course of construction two fine dormitories,
but these will still fall short of caring for the student body
by at least three hundred. At present, six hundred girls
are cared for outside the dormitories, and while the school
and city authorities co-operate in every way, and the
splendid citizenship of Denton help all they can, this con-
dition ought to be remedied as soon as the public purse will
permit.

The average cost per student to the State is lessening,
having come from $1.16 per capita per day in 1913 to 97.76
cents per day in 1916-17.

There was but one salary increase for teachers for the
year 1917-18. A teacher who had been absent studying for
a year at her own expense, was allowed a raise of $200 per
year upon her return, her present salary being $1,600.

The school had 186 pupils its first year, 1903-04. This
year it has about 1,250. Then it had one small administra-
tion building ; now it has two splendid building for instruc-
tion, and with the two now being built, four large dormi-
tories, besides other buildings for laundry, dairy, poultry,
photography, hospital, etc.

Salaries Too Low

Your committee believes the salaries of the teachers too
low, and states that we lost to other schools last year ten

122 University of Texas Bulletin

trained teachers we could ill afford to lose; but they were
offered more pay than we gave them or could give them
under our appropriation. Twelve teachers get less than
$1,200 per year, and only one gets more than $2,000 per
year. Your committee strenuously opposes extravagance,
but affirms that the best teachers in the world in their special
lines are not too good for Texas girls. It is worth while to
pay a good salary to a teacher who can so teach a graduat-
ing class that every girl can make her own graduating
dress, beautiful dresses, too, and make it so that its total
cost is less than $5.00. It is worth while to pay a teacher
who can teach a girl to cook so that her husband goes to his
work fit for it, and her children can grow up fit physical
citizens of Texas. A remarkable showing of a school, not
one of whose graduates has been a party to a divorce suit,
or has brought into the world a defective child.

Respectfully submitted,

(Signed) R. F. Spencer.
Chairman, Subcommittee No. 1.
0. S. LATTIMORE,

Chairman, Senate Subcommittee No. 1.

Educational Council Recommended

In order that the work and development of each institution
may be directed along the lines assigned by law and to avoid
the possibility of needless duplication, and expenditure, and
friction, the Committee would suggest the creation by
statute of an educational council to be composed of one mem-
ber of each of the governing boards and one member of
each of the faculties, both to be appointed by the president
of each board, of the University of Texas, the Agricultural
and Mechanical College of Texas, the College of Industrial
Arts, and the State Normal Schools, together with the State
Superintendent of Public Instruction, nine in number. The
specific duties of such a council to be:

(a) To consider all questions relating to possible du-
plication of educational work, both in extension work and
the major lines of instruction of the institutions; and

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 123

(b) To perform the general duties of a budget commit-
tee in the consideration, adjustment and recommendation
to the legislature of the needs of the several institutions.
No system of state education, and no state policy for the
advancement of education, either in the common schools or
in the colleges and the university, is possible of the most
useful development unless it recognizes every institution as
a necessary and integral part of the one indivisible whole,
and provides for intelligent co-operation. The policy here-
tofore-permitted of leaving each institution to besiege suc-
cessive legislatures with separate demands based upon in-
dependent plans of expansion, and conceived in absolute ig-
norance of the popular need, as expressed in the growth
and demands upon the educational service of other institu-
tions, is as wasteful in the useless expenditure of public
funds and misdirected effort, certain to lead to the identifica-
tion of the educational institutions of the state with political
activities, as it is inexcusable in an intelligent and public
spirited citizenship to tolerate such a system.

With the adoption of the proposed constitutional amend-
ment and the authorization by the legislature of a tax levy
to be equitably allotted by statute among the institutions
named; and with statutory authorization for the employ-
ment of the permanent endowment of each institution as
the basis for a fund with which to provide permanent
buildings, such a central council would be relieved of much
of the responsibility for consideration of the financial re-
quirement of the institutions, inasmuch as the provisions in-
dicated would allow for a building program and for a min-
imum maintenance income for each class of institutions.
The danger, however, would be that without some controll-
ing agency which would co-ordinate the growing needs of
the institutions, there might develop the same incentive as
heretofore for the different institutions to appeal to the
legislature for appropriations supplementing the allotted
income from the tax levy. By submitting the needs of each
institution, in excess of, the tax levy, to such a council, act-
ing as a budget committee, would effectively prevent the re-
currence of the condition which it is now sought to overcome

124 University of Texas Bulletin

through the adoption of this amendment and the authoriza-
tion of a tax levy for maintenance purposes, and would har-
monize the work of the different institutions in their respec-
tive fields of educational activity. Without some such
agency as will be provided through this council, there would
be constant danger of each successive legislature readjust-
ing the allotment under the tax levy and thus disturbing the
harmonious relationship of the various institutions. It
might be that a limitation on the time in which such change
in the division of the amount of the tax levy should be made
would best be incoporated in the constitution, but the com-
mittee does not feel this to be the better policy, preferring
the more elastic plan of leaving not only the authorization
of the tax levy, but the division of its proceeds and the care
of all additional needs to the legislature. The members of
such a council might confidently be relied upon to make
such an equitable recommendation for such funds as would
be required to meet the needs of the different institutions
from year to year in excess of the allotment under the tax
levy. In this way a building program would be provided
for the University and the Agricultural and Mechanical Col-
lege, and maintenance would be provided for the university
and branches, the Agricultural and Mechanical College and
branches, the College of Industrial Arts, the Normal Schools,
and the Prairie View Normal, and all these institutions will
be kept constantly in harmonious relationship, each supple-
menting in its sphere of activity the work of the others,
preventing unnecessary duplication in educational work,
and preventing the unnecessary expenditure of funds in the
undue expansion of either of the institutions comprising a
part of the system of higher education of the state.

Future of the University and of its Constitutional
Branches

Under legislative interpretation and the policy hereto-
fore adhered to, it is too apparent for discussion that the
present constitutional provisions controlling the university
and its branches are hampering the development of both the

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 125

University and the Agricultural and Mechanical College in
a degree that should not be permitted to continue longer
than is necessary to amend the constitution. While legis-
lative policy has construed the constitutional limitation on
appropriations from the public revenues as restricted to
the prohibition against provision for permanent buildings
at the University in Austin, it, can be considered little
more than a legal fiction that permits appropriations for
the Agricultural and Mechanical College, the Prairie View
Normal, and other constitutional branches of the Univer-
sity. Not alone adequate, but intelligently controlled and
utilized, financial provision is essential to the development
and maintenance of any educational institution. The per-
manent university endowment must be construed as be-
longing in part to those institutions constitutionally de-
clared to be a part of that institution, and this fund will
never, under conditions of public sentiment respecting the
independent status and organization of the University and
the Agricultural and Mechanical College, be utilized in ac-
cordance with a commendable business policy, nor will it
be possible for it to contribute in a material way to the
advantage of the institutions considered until the equity of
each has been made available for separate control and use
and it is readily apparent that, until such action is taken,
there must be a spirit of apprehensive solicitousness among
the partial friends of each institution interested concerning
each act and policy of the main institution in the control
and individual utilization of the benefits of the fund, cal-
culated to create discord where co-operation is demanded
by every requirement of service to the public. In justice to
itself and the position of popular esteem it must establish
and maintain to fulfill its mission of public usefulness, the
University should be freed from all suspicion that any in-
fluence connected or identified with its direction is opposed
to the early and satisfactory settlement of the question in-
volved in the interest of its branches in the permanent
university endowment. Admitting without discussion, that
the policy of the state in creating institutions independent

126 University of Texas Bulletin

in administrative organization and charged with distinct
educational activities, rendering them independent centers
of popular favor, may not have been the wiser plan from the
standpoint of an ideal system of higher education in which
the university should be the one head and all other educa-
tional provisions by the state parts of an intelligently ar-
ticulated whole, the situation confronting us now is that the
state has, through its establishment of different classes of
institutions, such as the Agricultural and Mechanical Col-
lege, the College of Industrial Arts, and the system of state
normal schools, committed itself to the policy of separate
identity and direction of the institutions created to perform
these different educational functions. Our task, therefore,
is plain. We must take these more or less loosely organized
institutions, free them from such limitations under the
organic law as prevent development of an intelligent policy
for educational progress, and correlate them in as harmo-
nious a system as it may be possible to establish, capable
of rendering the maximum of service to the people. This,
in the judgment of the committee, can only be accomplished
through a change in the constitution, and in this view we
recommend the submission to the people by the rext regular
session of the Legislature of the accompanying proposed
amendment to the constitution.

In brief, this proposed constitutional amendment would
contain the following specific provisions:

(1) The constitutional identity and location of each of
the following institutions, namely, the University, the Med-
ical College, and the School of Mines as branches of that in-
stitution ; and the Agricultural and Mechanical College, the
College of Industrial Arts, and the Prairie View Normal
and Industrial College.

(2) The general character of educational work of each
institution.

(3) For the separation of the Agricultural and Mechan-
ical College and the Prairie View Normal as branches of the
University of Texas; and for the sale of the university
lands and division of the permanent university endowment,

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 127

two-thirds to the University and one-third to the Agricul-
tural and Mechanical College, from which one-Vhird of the
claims of the Prairie View Normal shall be cared for as
may be provided by law.

(4) That the respective parts of the permanent endow-
ment allotted to each institution become the permanent fund
of each, to be invested as authorized by law in bonds having
the taxing power for their security and redemption.

The committee indulges the belief that the adoption of
such an amendment to the constitution, supplemented by
judicious statutory enactment, would give to Texas some-
thing in the nature of a definite, as well as comprehensive,
state educational policy, reasonably correlated and coordi-
nated to meet the requirements of higher education and vo-
cational training.

Disadvantages in Handling Land Endoiument

The endowment of the University, splendid as it is in its
possibilities for the development of the institution and its
branches, is yet, under the constitution, of comparatively
small practical value as an asset in the proper equipment
and development of the university. While it is probable
that a policy rigidly adhered to by the board of regents, set-
ting aside the available fund represented in the income from
the permanent endowment would have resulted by this time
in the construction of a considerable number of modern
buildings answering the requirements of the institution,
such policy has not been uniformly observed; and in view
of the normal growth and general conditions which have
prevailed and are likely to continue to prevail in the ad-
vancement of the institution, this income may not be relied
upon to provide even in reasonable part for the building
needs of the Main University, to say nothing of the claims
of its constitutional branches. This endowment, consisting
mainly of 2,079,520 acres of land, now yields, under the
control of the board of regents, through its state land agent,
an annual income estimated, on the basis of existing leases,

128 University of Texas Bulletin

to be for the year 1918, $195,360.88. All of this revenue is
used by the Main University, none of it going to the other
constitutional branches of the institution.

Proceeds from Sale of Lands Needed for Building Purposes

The constitutional limitation strictly construed in the
legislative policy of the state to prohibit appropriations for
the construction of permanent buildings at the Main Uni-
versity, while sanctioning more or less liberal provisions for
appropriations for the constitutional branches of the Uni-
versity, creates a condition which may not be much longer
permitted, if the public expectation of the usefulness of the
institution is to be met. The popular sentiment is, that,
with an endowment of the proportions of that possessed by
the University, some practicable policy should be established
by which this endowment may be utilized as the basis for
securing the construction of necessary permanent buildings
and permanent improvements not only of the Main Univer-
sity but of its constitutional branches, relieving the state
to some extent at least of the necessity of making provi-
sions for such improvements by appropriations from the
general revenues of the state.

Salaries

The salaries of the faculty of the Agricultural and Me-
chanical College are comparatively low, the average salary
for the entire college faculty being approximately $2000;
and where work is done in the summer school for short
periods, no extra compensation is allowed. The last ap-
propriation bill carried an item for salary readjustments
for the college of $10,000, which was used to add to the pay
of those receiving the smaller salaries, and being so dis-
tributed that the increase was from $100 to $300, only
one or two receiving the latter sum. It is probably true
that the college loses a larger percentage of its teaching
force each year by resignation than any other institution

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 129

in the state, due, it is claimed, to the active demand for
capable instructors in vocational studies and the salaries
paid being insufficient to hold them, the unsatisfactory hous-
ing conditions being a contributing cause.

Need of More Land

The college has 3000 acres of land, but to carry on its
work in agriculture in connection with the state experiment
station, and to maintain the live stock essential to proper
instruction in animal husbandry, it will need more territory.

Building Requirements

The administrative authorities of the Agricultural and
Mechanical College have outlined their estimate of the needs
of state institution for buildings covering the next ten years,
and places such estimate for that period at approximately
$2,500,000, and this, too, in the expectancy of the state
adopting the policy of junior agricultural schools teaching
agriculture and animal husbandry, which will in some meas-
ure restrict the ratio of increased attendance at the college
To this sum must be added an estimate for the decennium
approximately $500,000 to $750,000, for permanent im-
provements at the Prairie View Normal and Industrial Col-
lege for colored youths.

The committee does not believe this estimate at all exces-
sive ; and further believes the general policy pursued here-
tofore of erecting buildings especially designed for depart-
mental service, preferable to the construction of fewer and
larger structures intended to accommodate unrelated de-
partments is calculated to secure more advantageous results

In the State Agricultural and Mechanical College, Texas
may justly claim possession of one of the most progressive
colleges devoted to vocational instruction in the Union. - It
is neither as large, nor is its equipment as good, as a number
of similar institutions in other states, but the spirit and

130 University of Texas Bulletin

policy, it may be confidently asserted, are second to no
college in the country covering the same field.

(Signed) LEONARD TILOTSON, Chairman.
OSCAR DAVIS, Chairman,

House Subcommittee No. 9.
I. E. CLARK, Chairman,

Senate Subcommittee No. 9.

COPY OF THE COMMITTE REPORT IN REFERENCE
TO A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT PRO-
POSED BY THE LEGISLATURE IN 1913

Committee Room, Austin, Texas.

February 8, 1913.

Hon. Chester H. Terrell, Speaker of the House of Repre-
sentatives.

Sir: Your Committee on Constitutional Amendments
having appointed me to make a full report on House Joint
Resolution No. 18, proposing and submitting to a vote of the
people of Texas an amendment to Sections 49 and 52 of
Article 3, of the Constitution of the State of Texas, authoriz-
ing the issuance of bonds and levying of a tax to pay the
interest and sinking fund on same for public improvements.
Said resolution as introduced provided for amending two
separate sections of the constitution, the committee decided
to separate the amendments and report each favorably, and
this report is on Section 49, Article 3, which the resolution
seeks to amend so as to allow the issuance of bonds by the
state for public improvements. On account of the present
limitations in the constitution no bonds can be issued for
this purpose and practically all of the state institutions
have to depend on appropriations by the Legislature for
permanent improvements. The legislature cannot make
sufficient appropriations at any one time, without raising
the tax rate to such an extent as to cause general dissatis-
faction. If bonds are issued, much needed improvements
can be made and the tax to pay the interest and create a
sinking fund will not be felt. I earnestly hope this resolu-
tion will receive the approval of the Legislature.

CALVIN.

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 131

REQUEST CONTINUANCE OF PRESENT UNIVER-
SITY TAX-LEVY RATE

Extract From the Report of Walter E. Clark, President of the
University of Nevada, for 1920

Unless there be heavy unforeseen emergency expenditures
and unless there be appreciable lowering of the total state
valuation assessable for taxation within the coming bien-
nium, the University will be able to cover its general run-
ning expenses if it be granted the same tax rate which was
granted by the legislature of 1919. It seems unlikely that
the total assessable valuation of the state will be materially
increased during either of the coming two years. If the
same tax rate be granted to the university and if the assess-
able valuation is not materially increased, the university
affairs will have to be managed with the most rigid econ-
omy in order that the university may report to the legisla-
ture of 1923 without deficit.

The retention of the tax-levy system as a means for rais-
ing most of the university revenue from the state is clearly
preferable as contrasted with direct appropriations to cover
all state grants to the university. The tax-levy system en-
ables the university to transact its biennial business with-
out a wretched gap of two months when no state funds
would be definitely available. The tax-levy system makes it
less likely that the university affairs will become entangled
in the play of legislative politics. One of the surest ways
to keep a state's university out of politics is to grant to the
university regularly a tax-levy rate ample to secure to the
university a sum sufficient to cover its general running ex-
penses so far as these are met from state funds.

STATEMENTS BY VARIOUS STATE UNIVERSITIES
AND COLLEGES

Collated by Miss Octavia Rogan, Legislative Librarian

The University of Nebraska.

The University of Nebraska is financed by biennial ap-
propriations. It was supported by endowment income,

132 University of Texas Bulletin

university cash, specific special appropriations and grants
from congress, from its founding 1869 up to 1899. The
legislature, 1899, enacted a one mill levy law for the ben-
efit of the university. From time to time since then the
state has made additional specific appropriations for lands
and buildings and also for maintenance and for particular
objects.

The legislature of 1921 repealed all mill levy laws of every
nature, except the levy for the erection of a new capitol, and
threw all items in the budget, except the capitol, into the
general fund. This plan is new and we do not know what
advantage the university or the normal schools will find in it.

THe University of Minnesota.

The University of Minnesota is financed by biennial ap-
propriations and a mill tax. The mill tax is subject to
variation with every change in assessments, due to changes
in law or valuations. We are fortunate this year in not
being dependent upon mill levy. Reduction in valuations,
and removal of automobiles from general property tax
would have been serious if we were on millage basis. We
are and should be answerable to the representatives of the
people at each session of the legislation. Any institution
that is not willing and able to submit to an accounting to
the people is not entitled to further appropriations.

The University of Michigan.

The University of Michigan is financed by biennial ap-
propriations and mill tax. The mill tax brings an annual
revenue of three million dollars. We find this adequate,
supplemented as it is at present by special appropriations
for the Comprehensive Building Program. The last ses-
sion of the legislature made $4,800,000 available for the ex-
tension of the physical plant. The mill tax gives an income
which can be readily estimated. The university is at no
time uncertain as to how much the legislature will actually
grant. Also the mill tax increases with the taxable value
of the state, which of course is one of the indications of a

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 133

growth in the state and consequent necessity for increase
in the facilities of the Institution. The governing body of
the University of Michigan is the Regents of the University
of Michigan, a constitutional corporation. The people have
direct control through their franchise in the election of the
regents. The courts have decided that it is the duty of the
legislature to provide funds to maintain the university;
however, under certain circumstances, the legislature may
direct how specific funds are to be spent. In these cases
the people would of course have a double check.

The University of Kansas.

The University of Kansas is financed by biennial appro-
priations. We believe that in normal times it is better to
have the mill tax arrangement whereby a stated tax will be
used to provide for the higher education in the state, and
will continue from year to year unless changed by vote of
the legislature. I have never yet known a state institution
to admit that it had adequate revenue. My own theory is
that the legislature is the proper judge in a democracy as
to what constitutes adequacy of revenue. It is the business
of the institutions so to make their work function as to con-
vince the state that they need the revenue which they ask
for. An institution whose appropriation comes from the
legislature which is elected on a partisan ticket, and whose
board of administration is appointed by the governor who
is also elected on a partisan ticket, cannot be free from po-
litical influence, but let it be clearly understood, however,
that tax supported institutions cannot be free from political
influence.

The University of Indiana.

The University of Indiana is financed by biennial appro-
priations and a mill tax. The mill tax enables the presi-
dent and board of trustees to know approximately what the
income will be for a long series of years. In that way they
are able to make their plans with assurance that they can

134 University of Texas Bulletin

be carried out. We have found our system very satisfac-
tory in practice in every way. There would be many dis-
advantages in relying on specific appropriations.

The University of Kentucky.

The University of Kentucky is financed by biennial ap-
propriations and a mill tax. The mill tax provides a steady
income and avoids the necessity of calling on the Legislature
at frequent intervals. It guarantees permanency of in-
come ; but it does not handle building programs when large
sums are needed occasionally. In our case th3 income is
small and we can not provide for a building program out of
mill tax.

The University of Oregon.

The University of Oregon is financed by biennial appro-
priations and a mill tax. This is reasonably satisfactory,
because more permanent in nature than legislative appro-
priation. But some method of providing for regular in-
crease in income commensurate with increase in students
and costs would be suggested as an improvement to this
method. Mill tax income is practically stationary. It is
more advantageous than biennial appropriations because
more permanent in character, obviating the necessity for
frequent appeal to Legislature, and making possible more
definite plans for the future. The tendency of assessors to
keep down assessed valuations keeps tax income stationary,
instead of increasing with the growth of the university and
increase of actual wealth of the state, as was expected when
tax was instituted.

The University of Colorado.

The University of Colorado is financed by biennial ap-
propriations and a mill tax. The great advantage of a mill
tax is a definite income to work to; but mill tax is hard to
get, consequently income is likely to be too small.

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 135

The University of North Dakota.

The University of North Dakota is financed by biennial
appropriations. It has its "ups and downs." Some legis-
lative assemblies give us fair treatment, others make ap-
propriations that are inadequate. We have been trying to
obtain a mill tax.

The State University of Montana.

The State University of Montana is finaced by biennial
appropriations and by the mill tax. The mill tax would be
satisfactory under normal conditions, but durirg the pres-
ent biennial period the reduction of assessed valuation of
the state brings us in an inadequate income. Mill tax has
only been in operation during the present fiscal year, but
certainly will afford us under normal and stable conditions
a uniform and slightly increased income, to which may be
added state approriations as necessary.

The University of Wyoming.

The University of Wyoming secures state support through
a three-eighth mill tax for current expenses and a one-
eighth mill tax for building purposes. We think we have a
fairly good method. This relieves us from the necessity of
going before each Legislature and asking for our appro-
priations.

University of Nevada.

This year, 1922, the University of Nevada begins a new
plan — being wholly financed by mill tax, so far as state ap-
propriations are concerned. We believe this better than the
mixed mill tax and direct appropriations plan ?n effect the
past seven years. It gives as great revenue as this state
can at present fairly grant to its university. Under the
plan income will proportionately increase as assessed prop-
erty increases. We are just beginning the pi re mill tax
plan. We believe, first, it will minimize danger of political
difficulty during legislative sessions; second, it will permit
growth of university's income pari passu with growth of

136 University of Texas Bulletin

state's assessable property; and third, it will enable the
university to plan more definitely as to future developments.
The seven years preceding we had partial mill tax— partial
special appropriations. We preferred the mill tax and
therefore asked for its adoption as the sole source of state
revenue for the university. The only possible disadvantage
we note for mill tax is, that, the state's total assessable val-
uation might be suddenly and possibly arbitrarily lowered.
We should expect in such event to secure a grant of an in-
creased rate for the university.

The University of South Carolina.

The University of South Carolina is financed by annual
appropriations. The appropriations are inadequate. The
university has no endowment or funds of any kind except
annual appropriations and fees. We suggest for the im-
provement of our method of support : first, tax Deform, and
second, a mill tax supplemented by annual appropriations.

Miami University of Ohio.

The Miami University of Ohio is supported through bi-
ennial appropriation with a mill tax for building purposes.

We have not had a mill tax levy for some time. The
great trouble with mill tax is that it is nev^.r adequate.
The growth of the institution carries it beyond the funds
provided by any tax levy. We do find the mill tax for a
building fund exceedingly satisfactory. Under the old sys-
tem money was appropriated for a building, )ften an in-
adequate amount, and we had to make a particjlar appeal
tor the need of a particular building. Last year the Legis-
lature set aside a mill tax for a building fund for state in-
stitutions of higher learning each of which gets a certain
per cent. This will give us $350,000 for the biennium for
new buildings, and we are allowed to build such buildings
as we seet fit, with the approval of the controlling board.
The mill tax levy method of support unsupplemented by
special appropriations unless exceedingly liberal, more lib-
eral than one could reasonably expect to pass, will not in all
probability keep up with the growth of the student body.

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 137

State Normal and Industrial School of North Dakota.

The State Normal and Industrial School of North Dakota
is financed by biennial appropriations. Our method is un-
satisfactory. We have to run gauntlet of appropriations
committees of the Legislature every two years. A fixed
millage or standing appropriation over a period of years
would be an improvement. It produces enough to survive
without allowance for expansion or growth. Legislative
appropriation is supplemented by institutional collections
yielding some $5,000 to $10,000 a year. The old mill tax
in vogue up to 1915 yielded a fairly definite income, without
the necessity of legislative action, but it is not as easy to
get special appropriation for special needs when the mill
tax plan is employed.

The mill tax plan is quite in favor with the heads of
educational institutions in this state, but the Legislature
has not deemed it best to go back to that method

East Tennessee State Normal School.

The East Tennessee State Normal School is financed by
biennial appropriations and by an appropriation of a fixed
percentage of the total gross revenue of the state. Our
operating appropriation comes from a fixed percentage of
gross revenue. Our building program is cared for by legis-
lative appropriation. A fixed percentage has advantages:

1. It gives a definite increasing budget.

2. It eliminates legislative lobbying.

3. It takes it out of politics.

4. It unites all institutions sharing in the percentages.
State Normal School, Oneonta, N. Y.

The State Normal School of Oneonta, N. Y., is financed
by biennial appropriations. Our method is satisfactory.

The Oklahoma College for Women.

The Oklahoma College for Women is financed by biennial
appropriations. We are forced to go to the state legisla-
ture every two years and spend much time for two or three
months pleading for enough money to run our school. But

138 University of Texas Bulletin

we never get enough. Over two hundred girls were turned
away last fall because our institution did not have sufficient
room. We asked for $145,000 annually for running ex-
penses and got $118,750. There is no ^ay to improve our
method unless we can secure the method of the mill tax.

The Indiana State Normal School.

The Indiana State Normal School is financed by biennial
appropriations. Our method is unsatisfactory. We never
know, from biennium to biennium, where we are. We
can make no plans until the legislature has adjourned. The
objection to a mill tax is found in the fact that in times of
economic depression, the mill tax returns may go down ; and
the increase in the millage tax is seldom large enough to
keep pace with the growing needs of the educational insti-
tutions of a state.

The State Normal School , Troy, Alabama.

The Alabama State Normal School is financed by biennial
appropriations. Our method is unsatisfactory. We are
trying now to pursuade our people that a fixed percentage
is the only correct way of supporting the higher institutions.

(1) It operates automatically.

(2) When the pro rata is acceptable to all units of a
system, it avoids unseemly scrambles before the legislature
by the different units, each trying to get more than the
others or more than its share.

Michigan State Normal College.

The Michigan State Normal College is financed by biennial
appropriations. Our system of biennial appropriations i&
not satisfactory, especially since we have the budget plan
which makes appropriations for specific schedules. The
reason is that some schedules get exhausted and others have
favorable balances, but the funds cannot be transferred
from one schedule to another without permission from the
State Administrative Board.

The normal schools of Michigan are trying to get a mill

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 139

tax for all expenses except special appropriations for build-
ings, etc. Our reasons for thinking the mill tax advisable
are as follows :

1. It saves the biennial thrashing over of old straw, or
new so far as that is concerned, with the legislature.

2. As the valuation of the state increases the income
would increase proportionately.

3. We have every reason to believe that the mill tax
would come into the hands of the State Board of Education,
to be handled according to its discretion.

Of course, if the mill tax should not be adequate we would
be no better off; but if it should be of sufficient size, we
should undoubtedly be better off. The University of Michi-
gan and Michigan Agricultural College are on the mill tax
basis, and their governing boards have full control of their
funds.

The Northern Arizona Normal School.

The Northern Arizona Normal School is financed by bi-
ennial appropriations. Under our new law, compelling the
Governor to submit a budget to the Legislature, we are
very well taken care of.

The University of Arizona went to the mill tax basis,
last winter ; at that time, the normal schools had an offer to
get in on the same plan, but we rejected it, and I think very
wisely, because a special session of the Legislature is now
necessary in order to enable the university to finish the
year. At the end of the year, its income yielded under the
mill tax will probably be sufficient to pay all expenses of
the year, but due to the fact that it has no reserve fund,
to the fact that the December taxes were ten per cent de-
linquent, and to the further fact that its building program
concentrated its expenses in the first few months of the
year, the university finds itself without money and without
credit. The normal schools have been in better position,
because while their funds have been exhausted, state war-
rants have been issued which our banks will accept.

140 University of Texas Bulletin

Central Michigan Normal School.

The Central Michigan Normal School is financed by bi-
ennial appropriations. We do not have, and have not had
the mill tax. Our institution is run by appropriations made
every two years by the State Legislature. We do not find
this a satisfactory method for many reasons.

First: We have to convince the Legislature each year
of our needs.

Second : The budget system is not elastic enough to take
care of increased attendance, etc.

Third: We feel that politics is mixed up in the matter
more than should be in educational institutions

The loiva State Teachers College.

The Iowa State Teachers College is financed by biennial
appropriations. We have had no experience with the mill
tax, except for building purposes for ten years, but each
amount appropriated needed to be acted upon by succeeding
legislatures which approved plans of building purposes and
amounts to be expended for each building.

State Teaching College, San Diego, California.

The California State Teaching College is financed by bi-
ennial appropriations. Our revenue is adequate for 1921
to 1923, but appropriations alone are uncertain. We would
prefer combination of mill tax and biennial appropriations.

The Indiana State Normal School.

The Indiana State Normal School is financed by a mill
tax. Our method is satisfactory. It gives definite income
which is known in advance. The mill tax is the only method

we have ever had.

The Arkansas State Normal School.

The Arkansas State Normal School is financed by biennial
appropriations and a mill tax.

1. Our normal school gets by legislative action one-fifth

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 141

of one mill annually of state taxes for the support and main-
tenance of the institution. This is definite and the govern-
ing board can make its plans definitely.

2. Before this millage tax can be spent by the school,
a biennial appropriation is made by the Legislature, as pre-
pared and suggested by the governing board of the school.
This gives the people who pay the taxes, through the Legis-
lature, a chance to know for what purpose the money is
being spent, and a chance to stop any misuse or diversion of
funds.

3. Apparently the only improvement we could suggest
would be an increase in millage so as to take care of grow-
ing institution.

4. Under our former method, our appropriations de-
pended on the mood and will of the Legislature, and the
amount appropriated depended largely on the activity of
interested parties in getting the needs before the Legisla-
ture, which resulted in undue political influence.

State Normal School, Salem, Massachusetts.

The State Normal School of Salem, Massachusetts is
financed by annual appropriations. Our method is unsatis-
factory. We are subject to the whims as well as other
conditions which influence a supervisor of administration,
a Governor and a Legislature, annually. The disposition
to secure a low rate of state tax often prevents a legitimate
and wise investment in education.

The Colorado Agricultural College.

The Colorado Agricultural College is financed by bien-
nial appropriations, a mill tax, and tax for buildings. Our
method is very satisfactory, for we always know within
a few dollars how much money we will have to spend for
years in advance. The mill tax prevents us from having
to go to the Legislature every session for money, and it also
enables us to make plans for years ahead. It assists in
keeping the institution out of politics, but it is not flexible
enough to meet every need.

142 University of Texas Bulletin

The Western Illinois State Teachers College.

The Western Illinois State Teachers College is financed
by biennial appropriations. Our method is unsatisfactory,
because we must depend each two years on the General As-
sembly for our support. Sometimes they are liberal and
sometimes they are not. We never know what we are going
to get. We ought to have some sort of millage tax because
a permanent charge against the State ought to have a
permanent support. We have had no experience with the
millage tax in the normal schools in this state. The state
university is so maintained and it is able to get a great
deal better support than are the normal schools. The only
disadvantage of the mill tax is that it fails to meet any
emergency which may fall upon an institution unexpected-
ly. If a sufficient amount, however, is provided through the
millage for new buildings a school can usually meet all
emergencies in that respect unless burned out completely.

The Eastern South Dakota State Normal School.

The South Dakota State Normal School is financed by
biennial appropriations. We must depend upon whatever
the Legislature decides to give. A mill tax, if adequately
apportioned, would be more satisfactory. We should then
know what funds were to be available and could plan ahead
for enlargements as funds became available. We have
never tried the Mill tax. We are dependent entirely upon
the attitude of the state legislature which meets every two
years. There is a budget board which makes recommenda-
tions to the legislature as to the amount of appropriation
in their judgment that should be made to each institution.
The legislature is free to differ in this recommendation.
The board of regents and the head of each institution rec-
ommends to the budget committee the amount that is needed
for each institution.

The Spearfish Normal School.

The Spearfish Normal School is financed by biennial ap-
propriations. Our method is not entirely satisfactory.

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 143

We are at the whim of any legislature which can cripple or
destroy us if it chooses. We should like a mill tax for run-
ning expenses at least.

The Ellensburg (Washington) State Normal School.

The Ellensburg State Normal School is financed by bien-
nial appropriations and a mill tax. Our method is satis-
factory. The mill tax provides the funds annually and the
biennial appropriation makes the fund available and at the
same time leaves the control in the legislature. It gives
stability and enables plans to be made extending a few
years ahead — at least four years each mill tax period. It
tends to lessen "political jockeying" and in the end contri-
butes much more consistent results to the state due to con-
servative and constructive administration. The advantages
greatly outweigh the disadvantages. With the interest
fund to act as an equalizer to meet emergencies, the disad-
vantages are at a minimum.

The Montana State College.

The Montana State College is financed by biennial appro-
priations and a mill tax. The mill tax was passed in 1920
and is effective for the first time in 1921. We therefore are
in no position to judge its permanent effectiveness. Our
method provides for certain incomes from a mill tax but
this is not large enough to provide suitable operating funds
so we go to the Legislature for direct appropriations. As
stated before, the mill tax plan is new and we therefore
have no experience to record.

DATA IN REGARD TO 28 STATE-SUPPORTED COLLEGES
AND UNIVERSITIES

By Department of the Interior, Bureau of Education
(George A. Zook, Specialist in Higher Education)

Comparative Enrollments
1921-1922

Estimated

Name of Institution 1919-20* October Total for

15, 1921 the Year

University of California 11,903 12,882 14,170

University of Colorado 1,927 2,366 2.700

Colorado Agricultural College 669 824 600

144

University of Texas Bulletin

University of Illinois 7,935 8,984 9,400

Indiana University 3,783 2,808 3,700

State University of Iowa 4,361 5,749 4,714

University of Kansas 3,477 3,661 4,102

Kansas State Agricultural

College 2,560 2,391 2,600

University of Michigan 8,652 9,082 9,682

Michigan Agricultural College 1,425 1,619 1,650

University of Minnesota 10,369 7,637 9,900

Mississippi Agricultural and

Mechanical College 1,169 1,350 1,450

Mississippi State College for

Women 965 865 900

University of Nebraska 5,248 4,740 5?000

New Hampshire College of
Agriculture and Mechanic

Arts 817 865 920

University of North Carolina 1,437 1,600 1,700
North Carolina College of
Agriculture and Engineer-
ing 796 785 900

Ohio State University 7,151 7,600 8,000

University of Oklahoma 2,608 2,963 5,000

Oklahoma Agricultural and

Mechanical College 1,314 1,063 1,500

Oregon State Agricultural Col-
lege 3,442 3,140 3,500

University of Oregon 1,889 2,006 2,200

Pennsylvania State College.. 3,294 3,130 3,200

University of Texas 4,418 4,462 4,700

Agricultural and Mechanical

College of Texas 1,549 1,400 1,500

State College of Washington. 2,184 1,718 1,900

University of Washington 5,520 4,442 5,200

University of Wisconsin 7,146 7,418 7,800

INCOME OF 28 STATE-SUPPORTED COLLEGES AND UNI-
VERSITIES FOR RESIDENT TEACHING

Institution

Federal Students All Other
State Government Fees Sources

University of California $3,620,000 $ 50,000 $ 550,000 $1,205,408
University of Colorado. 380,000 175,000 120,000

*The figures for this year were taken from the Bureau of Education Bulletin
No. 48, 1920. They may not correspond exactly with those in the other two
columns of this circular.

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 145

Colorado Agricultural
College

210 000

69 000

16 000

Qn (\o(\

University of Illinois...
Indiana University. .

3,321,865
816316

313,408
7 351

550,000
196 903

192,800
131 508

State University of Iowa

1,901,647

University of Kansas..
Kansas State Agricul-
tural College. . .

1,000,500
709,000

900
50 000

200,000
100 000

112,000
380 000

University of Michigan.
Michigan Agricultural
College

3,150,000
1 000 000

38,416
120 000

964,100
150 000

1,729,250
200 000

University of Minnesota
Mississippi Agricultural
College

2,845,460
259 000

95,750
22200

562,000
23 000

369,000

Mississippi State College
for Women

142,681

4,125

606,880

University of Nebraska.
New Hampshire College
o f Agriculture and
Mechanic Arts
University of North Car-
olina

1,620,300

282,401
900,000

55,500
663,625

200,000

60,000
131 204

450,000
73,017

North Carolina College
of Agriculture and En-
gineering

275,000

41,000

375,000

Ohio State University. .
University of Oklahoma

1,809,224
843,252

50,000

350,000
150,000

1,000,000

Oklahoma Agricultural
and Mechanical Col-
lege.

465,250

45,000

5 500

85 000

Oregon State Agricul-
tural College

980,053

71,500

45,000

University of Oregon . . .

847,340

54,000

17,700

Pennsylvania State Col-
lege

853,000

113,000

270 000

University of Texas ....
Agricultural and Me-
chanical College of
Texas. .

1,297,000
730 134

8,000
37 500

115,000
71 500

210,000
264 000

State College of Wash-
ington

613,982

50,000

46 100

40 220

University o f Wash-
ington

973,504

77 916

35 000

University of Wisconsin

2,958,185

50,000

611,895

440,425

oo
oo

ooooooo
ooooooo

o
o

«l

ooooocooo
o o o p o co o p
ooo^o'cooo

LOOO^CMCOOO

t-ifjTH^o^T-^co^o^

ooo
ooo

rH C- T^«
r-J^ 00^ T-J

CO*" CM" CO

ooooooo
ooooooo

8§§

§"ooooo"o"oooo*
ooooio-^oooo
o^cop^cot-p^o^iooo^co^
co" CM" CM" co" CM" CM" CM" CM" co" CM" co"

o o o o

p p p p

o co' o o

10 co o o

ooo
ooo

oo
o

ooo

LO o O

• o • o
-o -o

O CO

10 oo

lot-

o o
o o

§§'

t> o^

CM" co"

§§ §

s§

°°. ^

g§§

ooo
ooo
o o o o o o
o o o o o o

00 O CM O 00^ p^

CM" CM" CM" co" i-T co"

ooooooo
o o o o o o o

ooooooo
o o o o o to o

1C ^t 10^ 00^ ^ CM^ ^

<>f co" co" co" co" co" co"

ooo

co o o

0
0

LO
CM

§
0

0
10
CM

o
t>

0
0
0

7-1

o
p

0
0
CO

887.00

"tf

oooooooo
oooooooo

oo
oo

§8

O O O O

poop

o" o o o o o o

ooooooo

o co ^ oo n^ tq^ oo^

co" co" CM" CM" CM" CM" co"

o o o,

o p o

o o d

co" CM CO

§•§-§§
§§§§

§OOOO
poop

o o o o o
o o o o o

ooo
pop

O O C)

ooo
co p^ p^
co" co" 10"

o o
o o

; o o o o o o o

; o o 10 o o o o

• p^ ^ "^ °^ °^ ^ ^

• \£$ "^fi CO XO ^J* "^ ^^

c <y

S I

1 .3

" g-s^

oma
ral and

bit)
A

*s ^

a> -tf

•M
SI

Universi
Oklahom

p g
.s S

<J °

^•8

^^
'g

<n
>•

g'S
o P

o
5

(2 is

^ M

^3 aJ

I g
^H

Value Total
of Working
Buildings Income

$11,506,932 $5,844,464

Mill Receipts
Tax from
Rate Mill Tax

1,110,000 647,225

2/5 $ 500,000

755,000
4,866,749
1,392,481
3,179,223
2,395,000

766,196 1/5
3,916,249 2/3

927,205 28/100

2,378,839

1,149,409

1,078,684 1,604,646

1,300,000
6,249,502
6,319,776

1,443,426 1/5
3,875,735 3/8
4,408,436 23/100

860,895 899,652

530,500
2,653,139

950,000
987,990

699,995
3,177,293
1,218,754

1,282,453

1,227,712
1,111,871

1,975,386
1,582,810

461,709
470,687

790,082

2,622,924

942,096

122,059

2,535,000

638,127

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 147
PROPERTY AND INCOME OF 29 STATE UNIVERSITIES

By the Department of the Interior, Bureau of Education

Name of Institution

University of California

University of Colorado. .

Colorado Agricultural
College

University of Illinois...

Indiana University ....

State University of Iowa

University of Kansas. .

Kansas State Agricul-
tural College

Michigan Agricultural
College

University of Michigan

University of Minnesota

Mississippi Agricultural
& Mechanical College

Mississippi State College
for Women

University of Nebraska

New Hampshire College
o f Agriculture and
Mechanic Arts

University of North
Carolina

North Carolina College
o f Agriculture and
Engineering

Ohio State University. .

University of Oklahoma

Oklahoma Agricultural
and Mechanical Col-
lege

Oregon State Agricul-
tural College

University of Oregon . .

Pennsylvania State Col-
lege r

University of Texas . . .

593,578

1,818,750

590,851

175,461

2,395,856 1 848,095

1,130,320 4/10 198,087
1,077,511 3/10 297,130

1,622,781
1,436,809

148

University of Texas Bulletin

Agricultural and Me-
chanical College o f
Texas

College of Industrial
Arts (Texas)

State College of Wash-
ington

University o f Wash-
ington. . 1,212,514

2,098,929 1,876,516
858,528 445,209
1,455,294 1,227,973
1,479,034

University of Wisconsin 5,102,637 3,483,640

(6)

(7)
3/8

450,332

903,731
1,525,600

THE TEACHING FORCE IN 29 STATE UNIVERSITIES AND
STATE COLLEGES FOR THE YEAR 1919-20

By the Department of the Interior, Bureau of Education

Names of Institutions

Professors and Instructors
Men Women Total

University of California 739 189

University of Colorado 205 29 234

Colorado Agricultural College 56 21 77

University of Illinois 822 126 948

Indiana University 169 28 197

State University of Iowa 206 57 263

University of Kansas 247 64 311

Kansas State Agricultural College 151 69 220

University of Michigan 449 5 454

Michigan Agricultural College 145 26 171

University of Minnesota 712 102 814

Mississippi Agricultural and Mechan-
ical College 103 9 112

Mississippi State College for Women 6 60 66

University of Nebraska 268 70 338

New Hampshire College of Agricul-
ture and Engineering 56 11 67

University of North Carolina 112 18 130

North Carolina College of Agriculture

and Engineering 64 20 84

Ohio State University 46 27 73

University of Oklahoma 160 20 180

Oklahoma Agricultural and Mechanical

College 102 35 137

Oregon State Agricultural College. . . 163 49 212

University of Oregon 120 36 156

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 14°>

Pennsylvania State College 185 26 211

University of Texas 234 48 282

Agricultural and Mechanical College

of Texas 132 ... 132

College of Industrial Arts (Texas) ... 20 84 104

State College of Washington 127 38 165 .

University of Washington 188 37 225

University of Wisconsin 460 92 552

Rank of the states in which the universities and colleges shown
in the previous tables are located, according to population, 1920
Census.

Pennsylvania 8,720,017

Illinois 6,485,280

Ohio 5,759,394

Texas 4,663,228

Michigan 3,668,412

California 3,426,861

Indiana 2,930,390

Wisconsin ! 2,632,067

North Carolina 2,559,123

Iowa 2,404,021

Minnesota 2,387,125

Oklahoma 2,028,283

Mississippi 1,790,618

Kansas 1,769,257

Washington 1,356,621

Nebraska 1,296,372

Colorado 939,629

Oregon. . 783,389

New Hampshire 443,082

A MILL TAX FOR THE HIGHER EDUCATIONAL
INSTITUTIONS

PREPARED BY DR. E. T. MILLER

Advantages Claimed for a Mill Tax.

1. Steadiness of income. Does away with uncertainty.

2. Will increase with the wealth of the state, and will
thereby be a guarantee of minimum support.

3. Permits planning for the future, and will therefore
result in more economical and efficient administration.

4. Does away with the annual or biennial struggle with
the Legislature and the Executive for support.

5. Institution will be less in politics.

Disadvantages Claimed for a Mill Tax.

1. Inadequate by itself.

2. Possible failure of revenue to grow in proportion to
the growth of the needs of the institutions. Assessed val-
ues may decrease, as they did in Texas in 1922.

3. Possibility of a change in the tax system; for ex-
ample, the substitution of an income tax for the tax on
personal property, or the adoption of a classified property
tax, or the adoption of separation of sources of state and
local revenues.

4. Difficulty of meeting emergencies.

5. Necessity of going to the Legislature for extra needs,
thus making necessary the annual or biennial struggle.

6. In case the proceeds of the tax are subject to appro-
priation by the Legislature, there is the recurrent struggle.

7. In case there is one levy for all of the higher educa-
tional institutions, there is the possibility of a scramble
among the institutions and a struggle with the Legislature
or with the board which makes the apportionment.

8. Without a state board of equalization of assessed tax
values and without a modernized tax system a mill tax
simply aggravates the existing inequalities and injustices

-IJ
03
Q

•1

(N rH CO
OS OS OS

TH TH TH

*-•«»-

OS 00 ,> OS OS OO OS
TH TH |> TH TH *H iH
IP

10 OS 00 o <O t>

t- oo oo os t- oo

t- U5 O
C- t- (M

hit

> T3 ,£ TH

'S S C -

w p

§6

2 ^

-c

£ 00 TH

^ t- IO

00 »0 00

oo 52 S

^v Oi Oi

TH 1C 10

^ o o
oo n!

O TH ^^

f §

> P3

co g o

—, ~, -J-3 ^ C

«§. » 42

§ 1 c 3 §

TH r-T tQ •— i Q; e<O f—

1—4 ^ fj H •—

p-r.i; -4c w

^S.^S^ OOrH C

§- g & °^ §

10 C ° -t-1 W T5

^ o » "S-| S| ,

O> M c ^_ T3 ^ C
O -»J JU '2 W O 0)

c S *g S o o

SC T}* rH ^O

°? \ ^ ^ TH

, g 8 ^ « oo g \ w

'•-^(M TH H^CO^^W^^

E>3

>» « c -2

g | | ^

j£ c 5 o *

§ 3 -1 -^ « J

On] (H C

.pi c

< < 6 S

1 S 11 1 1

* M HJ S S S

TH CO CO ^t

to co t> 06 os o

Q r§

O t- rH
(M rH rH
O5 O5 O5
rH rH rH

1-^
05
r-l

0
rH

05
00
rH

•^ «H
.2 ° -t->
+i M <0 O

|J 0) +i ft

o O2 3

o> 2 CQ
PHCL

LO CD

o
cc

0
O
rH

Tf CO

L.t

05
t-

£ O O5

10 O5 rH

O5 rH

30 University

rH
CO "^

1 -c

P ^

<M lO

T^ C-

'rH

« b£

•^ -<^

— <
CO

03 o

CO
1O

^5 CO ""^

rS °

2 °

«O CO

2 °°~

2 ^

00 O O
•<3< iO "^

O 00

O CO

^ t-

rH 00

I> (M

o o

oo 53.

«»-

CO rH

S-

•d

,__,

S «2

'TJ ^

S g

r-4 CS

S £
g S

pj ^^ cS

o o

r. -o *

'C -" £H
^ 'g 5

^ a,

H §

a'S '£

rD W<

fcp

1 s

1 1
<M ^0

T— I

bfi

O 0 "^

'"I rH

•H

' ° s

• "S -u

__j_j

O ^J

S § C

rH C

o> u

° a

^ m rH

a>
M

o
o

« &S,

ae-

'S 0)

$-1 -t-J

X >>

§ a

>> rf CO

,-, rH <M ft
§ <N <M oj

0 O5 O5 ;-,
-W rH rH fcO

_!_> OO

Isa

| Jg «" rS

S * "S "S 5

r-* 0} D Q

S xt o o ^

,-j g

«»<

>,» rH O3 CO <U
rH^ **-' rH rH W

rf?

CO ^

'•

•4-j

• 02

02 *

g "S 5
•S g S

r? Z Z

.2
O

Oregon . . .

Tennessee-
Utah

Washingto

Wisconsin

Wyoming.

rH OJ CO

rH rH rH

SO l>

rH rH

CJ
CN

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 153

of the operation of the general property tax. All mill tax
states have state boards of equalization. Texas has no
such board.

9. If adequate and not specifically appropriated by the
Legislature, the institutions may be less responsive to state
needs and sentiment.

10. If inadequate by itself and subject to supplementary
and specific appropriations, no advantage over the wholly-
appropriation method.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ADDITIONAL DATA

Arizona. Session Laws, 1921, p. 159. Proceeds are available with-
out further appropriation. Proceeds may be used for mainte-
nance and construction. Normals were offered the mill tax
method of support but refused it.

Arkansas. Acts of 1917, Vol. 1, p. 631. Acts of 1919, p. 32. The
total of one and one-ninth mills is deducted from the general
revenue rate. Proceeds are subject to appropriation by the Leg-
islature.

Colorado. Constitutional amendment adopted November 2, 1920.
Session Laws, 1921, pp. 179, 591, 647, 649, 694, 794, and 16.
Its levy is within the discretion of the General Assembly. The
General Assembly specifies the rate for each institution.

Illinois. Rev. Stats. 1917, Ch. 120, Arts. 400 and 401. Laws of
Illinois, 1921, p. 149. In 1911 the rate was fixed at one mill.
It was reduced to two-thirds mill in 1919. Large additional ap-
propriations.

Indiana. Burns' Annotated Indiana Statutes. Revision of 1914, Vol.
3, p. 459. Acts, 1913, Ch. 182. In 1883 a rate of one-half of one
cent was levied for thirteen years. In 1895 changed to one-sixth
of one mill. In 1903 changed to two and three-fourths cents.
A total of seven cents is levied for the state educational institu-
tions. A law of 1919 provides that if there is an increase in
the valuation of property, the tax levy shall be proportionately
reduced. This automatically lowered the educational levy from
seven cents to two and eight-tenths cents. Emergency condi-
tions in 1920 led to an addition of one/ cent to the levy. In 1921
the tax was changed to five cents, Indiana University to receive
two-fifths of the proceeds, Purdue, two-fifths, and Indiana State
Normal, one-fifth. The Legislature apportions the levy. Pur-
pose or use not restricted.

Kentucky. Special tax for A. and M. goes back to 1880. Later the
University and the A. and M. consolidated. Acts, 1918, p. 12.

154 University of Texas Bulletin

Available without further appropriation. Use not restricted.
It is a segregated part of the general state rate.

Louisiana. Constitution, 1921, p. 96.

Michigan. Compiled Laws of Michigan, 1915, Vol. 1, p. 642. Prac-
tice goes back to 1867. Tax was made one mill in 1893. Was
changed to three-eights mill in 1907. Available without further
appropriation. No restriction as to use. Large additional ap-
propriations.

Minnesota. General Statutes, 1913, Arts. 2915 and 3024, Sec. 2.
Laws, 1919, Ch. 289, and Laws, 1921, p. 608, levy' a tax sufficient
to provide $560,000 a year for the year 1921 and each succeeding
seven years for a "University Building Fund." This is additional
to the other mill tax. Available without further appropriation.

Montana. Revised Code, 1921, Art. 2148.

Nebraska. Revised Stats., 1913, Art. 7102. Subject to appropriation.

Nevada. Statutes, 1920-21, p. 226. Beginning in 1921-22 the Uni-
versity is to be wholly supported from the mill tax. Law specifies
that not less than two cents shall be set aside for buildings.
Constitution Art. 11, Sec. 6, provides for a tax not in excess of
two mills for support and maintenance of university and com-
mon schools.

North Dakota. Compiled Laws, 1913, Vol. 2, p. 340. There is a tax
of one mill levied for the university, school of mines, the agricul-
tural college, the normal schools, the school for the deaf and
dumb, and two other institutions.

Ohio. Laws of Ohio, 1921. For the years 1921-1922 and 1922-1923
there shall be levied a tax of 125/1000 of one mill for the purpose
of providing a building fund for Ohio State University, Ohio
University, and Miami University. Of the fund, 14 per cent
goes to Ohio University, 14 per cent to Miami University and
the remainder (72 per cent) to Ohio State University.

Oregon. Laws, 1920, Arts. 5427, 5428, 5443, 5466. Available with-
out further appropriation. Until 1920 University had three-
tenths mill, the Agricultural College, four-tenths mill and the
Normal, one-twenty-fifth mill. In an election in May, 1920, the
people voted a 6 per cent increase in the amount of taxes levied
each year over the preceding year.

Tennessee. Public Acts, 1921, p. 48. Proceeds go first to meeting
interest on the $1,000,000 bond issue for buildings. Any surplus
beyond specifications in the act may be used for maintenance.

Utah. Compiled Laws, 1917, Art. 5214.

Washington. Laws, 1920-1921, p. 528. Changes in the rates to be
reported on by the joint board of higher curricula in the report
next preceding the convening of the Legislature in 1925. Wash-
ington is the only state which makes orderly provision for possible
periodical change.

A Mill Tax for Higher Educational Institutions 155

•

Wisconsin. Statutes, 1913, Sees. 390, 406a. Subject to specific ap-
propriation by the Legislature.

Wyoming. Compiled Statutes, 1920, Arts. 482, 2939. Available with-
out further appropriation. The four-eighths mill is divided into
one-eight for buildings and permanent improvements and three-
eighths for maintenance.

The rates given in the second and third columns of the tables are
presumably the current rates. In column four certain rates are given
in parenthesis, and these are the old rates and the ones in effect for
the proceeds given in column four.

The data in column four were obtained from Statistics of State
Universities and State Colleges, for the year ending June 30, 1920,
Bulletin, 1920, No. 48, Bureau of Education, Department of Interior.

J.56

University of Texas Bulletin

13 bJO

C G

OS '£

8 I

2 .2

0> *-

> ^

G 03

3 £
-2 "3

03 cj

I s

•*3 ±J
$3

M oj
0> 5

3 Z
c

o g

g I
Is

8*1

g-8|

^ S -M

W g '"
Q 2 s
Q ^ ^ •

«< M g c
— **• g

5
g

3 'S.

£ 2
ft

I B.

BJ nj

-M CO

rf) O5

^ c

*"O

^ll

fi * >»

O . . ja

s I

^£3 Q)

§.53

q> 0) ^

e^'s

e
« o

•Jl
ffl

ft CO
X CO

W °l

05"

o o
o o

• O O •
. o O •

• 05 10
C- O5

" O5

! «o

• • ' O. O O O

. . .0000

* O5 rf ^J* GO
* C- Tt« C- U3

rH CO CO O

IO LO
O (M

• O5 CO
• rH O5 •

• CO

• • • -* 00 t- O

• • • e- co co 10

o o o
o o o

030

10 rH O
rH~ rf CT

rH rH 00

oooooooooo
oooooooooo

; O5 O5 O5 O5

COOO
OOrH

•P X

D c3

v\ C"^

ooo-ooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooo

§t-
o

CO CO CO t- O O Tt t-.OO COOlOOOCOO5rHO5
_ CO ^* O5 00 LO ^^ CO O5 rH 00 '^ ^5 GO IO "^ t^ rH CO

IO IO IO t- »O CO

CO rH IO CO CO rH

o o o o

O O ~ O O

H^SorH^rH

«''"•'»

2§

t> CO

CO ^ o — 00 CO

; 2

• 03

02 ! ! ! '

. O) 5/0 •
• be o> •

: :3

be ! I S

! !

• 'o to • • • • u

: : ° c : : ^ c \ 3 1

«o_-S. ^5r=o^

; i'g '

> «i 5

S : •&§

6 Si .£ ti

ss ^ c

I »

-s

3 jj

II1§I :1I'S

2 ^ 3 HH § >> -M x
•S ,2 ie o a £ § -S

Mi - ?8Ii?lfl

y
y

W||«f«o

^ M >»s >> >»

•"£ o o -"S ."S

'S ^ ^ '« Ctf '«

^ojoj^C^^.^o;
.> S g > | > > -g .>
c 'O c c -S c

Un
Un

Co
Co

c .a
8 S
•s R

2 S

G) O

> >

'2 '2

D D

3 g

a g g

° o

S ^^^

5». -S ^ ^

- 1 S j

2 x 2

YC 0422P

5221)30

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "A mill tax for the support of higher educational institutions in Texas."

See other formats