development of the educational program, unless the separate appropriations are requested by the institution itself.

In the accompanying table the receipts of the colleges from institutional sources in 1928 have been segregated into five items-interest on college endowment, tuition and student fees, extension-service student. fees, receipts from athletics, and other institutional funds. With the exception of extension service, student fees and athletic receipts, revenues from all of these items are available in most cases for general purposes. There is no restriction on their expenditure. Obviously the temptation to secure larger funds from these sources exists. As will be shown later, the principle increases are made in tuition and student fees. According to the compilation, the receipts of the 52 land-grant colleges from institutional sources totaled $26,067,624. Of this amount, $4,254,590, or 16.4 per cent, was derived from interest on college endowment; $14,401,383, or 55.3 per cent, from tuition and student fees; $987,096, or 3.6 per cent, from extension service student fees; $2,240,179, or 8.6 per cent, from athletic receipts; and $4,184,376, or 16.1 per cent, from other institutional funds. A more detailed analysis of receipts from the different sources is made in Table 10.

TABLE 10.-Receipts of land-grant institutions from various institutional sources,

TABLE 10.-Receipts of land-grant institutions from various institutional sources, 1928-Continued

With a few exceptions, revenues from interest on college endowments constitute minor sources of income for land-grant institutions. Twenty-nine of the colleges have no endowments. Of the 23 possessing endowments, the bulk of the income for 1928 was centered in 4 institutions-the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cornell University, University of Minnesota, and University of California. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Cornell University are semiprivate schools, which accounts for their large endowments. That two State universities, such as the University of Minnesota and the University of California, should possess college endowments of considerable size is a tribute to the health of their educational standing in their States. While Rutgers University had an income of $181,925 from this source, receipts from interest on college endowment of the other colleges were generally small, ranging from $32,834 for the University of New Hampshire down to $151 for the University of Wyoming.

As already intimated, tuition and student fees represent a vital resource for expansion of the income of the land-grant colleges. In another part of the report both the gain in receipts and increase in rate of fees will be presented in full.

That revenues from this source are relied upon to a marked extent to provide support is indicated by the table showing that in 1928 there were no institutions which did not enjoy an income from tuition and student fees. In a number of cases the figures were large and in the majority of colleges they consisted of substantial sums.

Three of the land-grant colleges realized between $1,000,000 and $1,500,000 from tuition and student fees, three between $800,000 and $900,000, one between $700,000 and $800,000, two between $500,000 and $600,000, and one between $400,000 and $500,000.

The large volume of receipts from student fees is partly due to the size of the student enrollment. It is evident, however, that States and institutions alike are depending for support to a substantial amount upon charges made against students, although the schools were originally established as free public institutions of higher education. The burden is thus being considerably shifted to the students.

An analysis of the receipts of the remaining colleges from this source discloses that 3 had revenues from $400,000 to $300,000, 1 from $350,000 to $300,000, 4 from $300,000 to $250,000, 1 from $250,000 to $200,000, 2 from $200,000 to $150,000, 4 from $150,000 to $100,000, 12 from $100,000 to $50,000, 10 from $50,000 to $25,000, and 3 less than $10,000.

Twenty-one land-grant colleges secured further revenues from student fees through charges for extension courses of instruction in addition to the income from tuition and student fees for regular academic work. While the total for this item was not large in the aggregate, the receipts of a number of individual institutions attained sizable sums. The University of California had receipts of $311,109 from this source in 1928. Revenues of the University of Wisconsin amounted to $198,251 and of the Pennsylvania State College $168,641, while in the other institutions the income varied from $84,315 to $540. Receipts for fees of this type usually revert to the extension service to be used in meeting its cost of operation.

The remaining items of income from institutional sources include athletic receipts, when these are handled through the institution treasurer, and other institutional funds. The entire question of income from athletics as well as capital investments in athletic plants is appraised in another section of the report. Receipts in 1928 from other institutional funds, as already shown, totaled $4,184,376 for all the institutions. In a number of cases the income from such funds constituted sums of considerable proportions.

Receipts of the Ohio State University amounted to $728,846, University of California $654,220, Cornell University $423,670, University of Maryland $465,903, University of Minnesota $423,670, Agricultural and Mechanical College of Texas, $267,411, Oklahoma Agricultural and Mechanical College $137,986, and

Alabama Polytechnic Institute $112,642. The other institutions received less than $100,000.

Items from other institutional funds are made up principally of interest on bank deposits and trust funds, real-estate rentals, student activity funds, memorial funds, licenses, city or township appropriations, and receipts of hospitals and infirmaries.

The amount of support received by the land-grant colleges from private gifts varies from year to year. It is therefore an unstable source of income. Where gifts or donations are made, they are ordinarily for specific activities or purposes and consequently are not available to defray general operating costs. An examination into this phase of the question shows that in 1928 the use of the private gifts received by the institutions was limited to nine different specific purposes.

The increasing number of private gifts to the colleges is an undoubted recognition of the growing public confidence in the landgrant type of education.

For the year 1928 the total receipts of 36 institutions from this source amounted to $7,392,862, of which $3,090,822 comprised gifts for endowments, $3,030,367 for permanent improvements and capital outlays, $679,100 for operation and maintenance of instruction and administration, $60,665 for operation and maintenance of agricultural experiment stations, $3,484 for permanent improvements of agricultural experiment stations, $7,993 for operation and maintenance of engineering experiment stations, $30,962 for agricultural and home economics extension, $12,421 for other extension, and $477,048 for research.

Table 11 shows the amounts and distribution of private gifts by institutions and by specific purposes for that year.