VOL. I.

No. 7.

N pursuance of a purpose expressed in the editorial columns of the January number of this magazine to examine fully into the merits and demerits of the new Union High School Law, the editors, on February 10th, addressed to each of the School Superintendents of the State, a circular letter, wherein were embodied the following questions:

I. NUMBER OF HIGH SCHOOLS ESTABLISHED IN YOUR COUNTY.

2. NUMBER OF TEACHERS EMPLOYED. NUMBER PUPILS ENROLLED.

3. AMOUNT APPORTIONED TO UNION HIGH SCHOOLS.

4. ON WHAT POINTS, IF ANY, HAS LITIGATION ENSUED?

5. WHEREIN, ASIDE FROM THE PURPOSE, DO YOU CONSIDER THE LAW DEFICIENT?

6. IS IT POSSIBLE FOR UNION HIGH SCHOOLS TO DO THE WORK GENERALLY EXPECTED OF THEM?

As the following symposium shows, our educators have responded fully and cordially to the questions. What is here contributed certainly cannot fail of good in bringing about thought and improve ment in educational legislation.

For the benefit of those who might wish to refer to the test of the law in

question we publish the same on another page.

Letters Received:

DEPARTMEMT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION.

SACRAMENTO, Jan 19th, 1882. Editors "The Pacific Coast Teacher," DEAR SIRS:

Replying to your favor of 12th inst. allow me to say that, so far as I have been able to inspect the workings of the Union High School Law, I am satisfied that it is a step in the right direction. The law is rather crude, and in consequence the working thereunder has not been as smooth as is desirable; yet, I am satisfied that with such amendations as practical application has suggested, it can be made a means of great benefit to the cause of higher education throughout the State. In all departures from previous customs, it requires time to adopt; all new machinery requires use to remove the roughnesses. Just so in the working of the High School Laws. The people are becoming familiar with the features of the law, and I have no doubt that the next Legislature will make such amendments as will cause the law to be more readily put in opera

SANTA BARBARA COUNTY. CARPINTERIA, Cal., Feb. 15, 1890. Editors Teacher:

Yours in regard to High School Law received. (1) Three High Schools have been established in Santa Barbara -Incorporated City;-Lompoc Union, embracing 12 Districts; Santa Maria embracing 18 Districts. (2) Have not exact number of pupils; about 125. teacher in each Lompoc and Santa Maria schools; Santa Barbara, 4 teachers. (3) Santa Barbara, $7,000; Santa Maria, $1,000; Lompoc, $2,700; (4) No litigation as yet.

One

(5) I think the law should read two or more districts may unite, also should define more clearly who, in cities without Board of Education, should raise necessary funds, also who in Union Districts should sign orders on High School fund. There is hardly room on blanks for a majority of (19) trustees to affix their signatures. I require Pres. and Sec. (6) In Union Districts, I think the work of these schools will be imperfectly done. Santa Barbara will do hers well. Have an excellent corps of teachers. It is a good law taken as a whole and I do all I can to encourage it. Yours truly,

G. E. THURMOND, Co. Supt.

SAN DIEGO COUNTY.

SAN DIEGO, Cal., Feb. 16, 1892. Gentlemen:-Your circular letter in regard to Union High Schools received.

3. $7600-Amount apportioned to High Schools.

4. In the matter of location and change of location of schools, litigation has arisen. 4. Deficiencies and faults in the law: No provision after formation of Union District for including or excluding other territory. Deficient in that it does not specify whether districts voting against shall be excluded or not: Leaving the Course of Study to each High School Board is a very grave defect, also the provision in regard to manner of creating the Board of High School Directors. 6. Yes-possible but not probable.

On the whole, the law faulty as it is vastly excels no law. I hope to see the law amended, but not in such a way as to invalidate what has already been done in this County.

Much pioneer work has been done, and the districts which have worked for Union High Schools should be helped out of the errors of the present law, not discouraged by a new law, which would necessitate their beginning again. Respectfully,

Why not? Let the University hold all examinations and promote only on merit.

Truly yours,

GEO. F. MACK, Supt. of Schools.

VENTURA COUNTY. VENTURA, Cal., Feb. 15, 1892. To Pacific Coast Teacher;

Yours of the 10th inst. reached me to-day. I am glad you have taken hold of this High School question, and shall cheerfully give you any aid in my power to bring about a better law. I herewith submit my answers to your questions:

1. Two-Ventura Union High, and Santa Paula High School.

2. Teachers: Ventura-Three regular and one special (Drawing). Santa Paula -Two regular.

3. Ventura-$2100-It receives other aid. Santa Paula-$11,000.-$8000 for building.

4. No litigation.

5. The law is lacking in clearness as to its real meaning. It is weak in giving control of the school to the chairman of the local boards of trustees. The educational department, at least, of the High School ought to be under the control of the County Boards of Education. The reason for this is obvious.

6. Most emphatically-Yes.
Respectfully,

SAMUEL T. BLACK,
Supt. of Schools.

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY.

MARTINEZ, Cal., Feb. 16, 1892.

To Editors P. C. T.:

One Union High School has been established at Antioch, Cal., and embraces sixteen contiguous school districts. One teacher is employed. The number of

pupils enrolled is twenty. A tax of ten cents on the hundred dollars was levied for the support of the Union High School. Twenty-seven hundred dollars was raised this year. Litigation has arisen or will arise in regard to the collection of this tax. The tax-payers of two school districts have refused to pay the High School tax, and have subscribed a fund and employed an attorney to defeat the tax levy. These two districts voted against the Union High School but were included by a majority vote of all the districts. The Union High School law is deficient in regard to details. Also in regard to course of study and selection of teachers. In another respect in regard to expense. The expense of maintaining these schools is much greater than is warranted by the benefits to be derived from them and at the same time is unlimited.

It is possible for them to do the work required of them by law: that is fit students for the university. But for them to do what is expected of them by their patrons and keep up their standard of university work is not possible. The patrons of the Union High Schools expect the schools to fit the pupils in one year's time to pass a teacher's examination and thereby save them the expense of going to a Normal school. And as the course of study is left entirely in the hands of the Boards of District Trustees there is no remedy for this perversion of the law. Respectfully,

W. A. KIRKWOOD,
Supt. of Schools.

SAN BENITO COUNTY. HOLLISTER, Cal., Feb. 18, 1892.

Pacific Coast Teacher:

In answer to yours of 10th inst. I have to say that no High School has yet. been established under the new law in

San Benito County. The people petitioned the Board of Supervisors to call a special election to vote upon the establishment of a County High School, but the Board refused on account of the expense that would attend such election. The question will be submitted at the general election this fall. This will answer the first four of your questions.

Question 5. Have found no deficiencies except those that have already been brought up in Alameda and other counties.

6. I think the work can be done.

Yours truly,

J. N. THOMPSON, Co. Supt. of Schools.

MONTEREY COUNTY.

SALINAS CITY, Cal., Feb. 15, 1892. To Publishers P. C. T.:

Replying to yours of the 10th inst., permit me to say that we have but one High School (Salinas City), that being a City High School supported by city funds. The city works under a charter as do San Jose and San Francisco. So far, we have made no attempt to establish a High School under the Union High School Bill. There has been some talk of a County High School but it has not caused any action. As you can see I am not in a position to give an opinion on the merits of the bill from a working standpoint. Respectfully,

JOB WOOD, JR. Co. Superintendent.

SACRAMENTO COUNTY. SACRAMENTO, Cal., Feb. 19, 1892. Gentlemen:-Your circular of February Toth, in reference to High Schools, at hand and noted. In reply will state that we have not organized any school of that grade in this county, though

probably will do so during the present year. I can therefore furnish no data at present.

Very truly,

B. F. HOWARD,

Co. Supt. Schools.

NEVADA COUNTY.

NEVADA CITY, Cal., Feb. 15, 1892. Pacific Coast Teacher:

Yours of the roth inst is at hand. In answer I can say that we have not formed a High School yet and I can not say when one will be formed.

Not having had occasion to use the law I am not prepared to say anything for or against it.

Yours truly,

W. J. Rogers, Supt. of Schools.

SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY. To the Pacific Coast Teacher:

Our experience with High Schools has thus far been confined to the organization of three, under what is known as the Union District High School bill, these at Cambria, San Luis Obispo, and Paso Robles. These will not go into practical operation until after the 1st of July, 1892, and of course we are not as yet able to say any thing of the working of the law or its adaptation to the purpose. We do not apprehend any litigation, for the vote in favor of the High Schools has been in every case practically unanimous: moreover, the cost of maintaining the schools under the system proposed will be so slight as to prevent opposition from any source. As yet no course of instruction has been formally proposed but it is thought that in addition to State University requirements the law should be liberally construed in the direction of providing for such special instruction as our

local circumstances may require. And herein it seems to me lies one of the needs for amendment to the law. Many of our young people have taken an irregular course, and have neither the time, the means, nor the disposition to take the University course. I fully agree with ex-President Holden that for a full course of instruction for our public school, that one is best which leads up to the University, but as the law is intended to provide for a system of higher education which should be independent of State and County funds, and supported wholly by local taxation, it should be so amended as to permit of a wider latitude in the direction of local needs. San Luis Obispo, for example, should establish a commercial branch, wherein should be taught book-keeping, commercial law and arithmetic; such a course, in fact, as would fit young people for ordinary business pursuits.

Another much needed amendment is to Sections 5 and 6 of the existing law, which should provide more definitely for the Board of Control. First, as to who shall compose the board; second, the Board of Control should be so provided for, that representation therein should be based upon the number of census children, the number attending, or the taxable property available for the support of the school in the respective districts uniting. It is manifestly unjust that one district, with a census of twenty, and a property valuation of $50,000 should have as large a share in the control of the school as another with a census roll of 1000 and an assessed valuation of two millions. In counties like ours, the County High School law has no place. The Union District law has not yet been tested, but as it has succeeded elsewhere it will here, and I think the time is not far distant when every little town in our

county will be the center of a district whose high school facilities will be such as will fully meet the demands of the times. Respectfully,

W. W. ARMSTRONG,

Co. Supt. Schools.

CALAVERAS COUNTY.

SAN ANDREAS, Feb. 19, 1892. Pacific Coast Teacher:

We have had no experience, as yet, with High Schools in this County, therefore, any suggestions from me would not be drawn from observation. Yours most respectfully,

WM. M. NUNER, Jr.

MENDOCINO COUNTY.

UKIAH, Cal., Feb. 20, 1892. Gentlemen:-We have not at the present time a high school in the County. On next Saturday there will be an election in five adjoining districts in Potter Valley, to determine whether a high school shall be established or not.

I think Union High Schools are just what we want. I have no doubt but there will be several of them in this County within the next two years.

The principal defect in the law as it now stands, aside from those pointed out by the Atty. General in his opinion on the law, is in leaving the Course of Study to be prepared by the High School Board, remembering the composition of that Board.

Yours very truly,

W. K. Dillingham,
Supt. Schools.

ALPINE COUNTY. MARKLEEVILLE, Feb. 19, 1892.

Pacific Coast Teacher:

In answer to first four questions in your circular letter of Feb. 10, I will