been disregarded and attention focused mainly on the provisions of the different States. Facts germane to this subject might be presented in a variety of arrangements. All data might be arranged geographically, showing first what are the regulations regarding school hygiene in Alabama, then in Arizona, then in Arkansas, etc. Such a procedure would be of some interest and merit from its possibility of holding up to scorn certain States and adding new laurels to the already widely heralded prestige of others. The data, on the other hand, might be arranged to show whether, in the establishment of standards, reliance is placed upon law or upon administrative agents. However, the fundamental interest of the educational public is in the standards of school hygiene, not where they obtain or by whom promulgated. For this reason the entire subject has been divided into a number of general topics, and under these the States are considered in alphabetical order. An arbitrary scheme of notation has been employed in the table covering these topics. While such a presentation involves some disadvantages, in no other way can so much of detail and yet so correct a general impression be caught at a single glance. 1. Regulating authority: Statutory (legislative enactments)=L. Judicial (decisions in common or statute law)= J. Administrative (rules of State departments of education, health, etc.)=X. 2. Enforcing authority: After each table appears a brief discussion of the facts of the table, including certain supplementary material that does not lend itself to the tabular form. Before reaching a conclusion as to any given regulation, the reader should consult the discussion as well as the table. II. GENERAL CONTROL EXERCISED BY THE STATE. By lodging with the several administrative officials powers of advice, approval of plans and equipment for school buildings, inspection and even condemnation of plants in operation, the State has made large extensions of its control over school environment. Advice is hardly a form of control; nevertheless, it constitutes the entering wedge of something more effective. Moreover, the function of advice is greatly strengthened when it is made legal, because the same act of the legislature that authorizes advice often sets aside a sum for the performance of the work. Table 1 summarizes the general situation regarding powers of advice, approval, inspection, and condemnation or correction. Forty of the States have taken some legal action to limit the local officials regarding hygienic precautions in erecting school buildings. The States that appear not to have taken legal steps in this direction are Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Illinois, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, and Tennessee. It does not follow that the State departments of education in these eight States are indifferent or even inactive with regard to the condition of schoolhouses. Through annual reports, circulars, and pamphlets, and the granting of certificates or commissions to "model schools," etc., all possible moral suasion is put into play. TABLE 1.-General control exercised by the State without definite standards. Alabama: School Laws, p. 114... Arkansas: Acts of 1911, No. 472... California: School Law, subdivision 11, sec. 1543; also sec. 1546. Connecticut: Rev. Stat. of 1888, sec. 2185. Laws Relating to Schools, sec. 249. Delaware: Laws of Delaware, ch. Iowa: School Laws, p. 65; Fif- 1 Where it has been necessary to give more than one reference under a State, the citations are arranged very nearly as they give the data of the columns following from left to right. Interpret according to the scheme laid out on pp. 5-6 preceding, by reading, for example: In Alabama, the State education department must approve plans for rural districts before State aid can be extended; or again, in Louisiana, plans for all new schoolhouses must, according to a rule of the State board of health, be approved by the State education authority and the parish (county) education and health officials. The law also gives power to the State health authorities of Louisiana to inspect all schoolhouses. TABLE 1.-General control exercised by the State without definite standards.—Continued. States and references. Advice. Approval. Inspection. Inspection combined with condemnation (or correction). Kansas: Laws Relating to Schools, Louisiana: Rule State Bd. of Health; School Laws, p. 124; Michigan: School Laws, p. 177; Reg., May 1, 1912; Bul. No. 40, Mississippi: Code of 1906, sec. 2513-2514; School Laws, 1914. 1907, sec. 1483; Rule State Bd. of Health. Montana: Laws of 1913; Rev. Code, LA'md...... LAA'ma. XC'ma; LBma. L (medical in- LA"pa. LA'pa. LA"pa; XA'ma (county truant officer) pa. LApa. LA'ma.. LXC'ma. LAma. 32, 237. Nevada: School Code, p. 26... New Hampshire: Pub. Stat. in force Jan. 1, 1901, p. 338. LAma. LC'pa. New Jersey: School Laws, pp. 72-73, 195. New York: Education Law, secs. 451-453, pp. 102-103. North Carolina: School Laws, pp. 56, 102. North Dakota: School Laws, pp. 30, 103, 104, 105; Laws of 1913, ch. 6 and 263, House Bill, No. 378. Ohio: State Bldg. Code of 1911; Code of 1910, sec. 4424; Laws of 1910, pp. 395-397. Oklahoma: Rev. Laws, sec. 6788... Oregon: General Laws, sec. 3999... Pennsylvania: School Code, pp. 42, 52-53; Act of Apr. 27, 1905. Rhode Island: Laws of 1911, ch. 725. South Carolina: School Law, pp. 26-27, 40-41, 63; Acts of 1912, No. 419. South Dakota: School Law, secs. LABB'ma.. LAeb; LAma.. Texas: Law effective July 1, 1913; LAma............... LA'B'C'A"C"ma LBmb. LAmb. LABB'ma. L (State inspectors of plumbing) C'pa. LA'ma. LA'pa; LAea. Rev. Civil Stat., arts. 2756, 4529. Utah: School Law, pp. 29-30; Compiled Laws, 1907, sec. 174, 1104x-1104x3, 1113x18-1113x20. Vermont: Pub. Stat., sec. 1513, LA'm....... LA'ma...... LBpe; LA'pa. A. ADVICE. All of the States that have empowered officials outside of the district to give advice have backed up this advisory authority with stronger prerogatives. In one State the advisory work is shared by the county superintendent; in one by the local medical inspector; in one by the county superintendent of health; in two by the State board of health; in six by the State education department, i. e., by the State superintendent or commissioner of education or by the State board of education. In Montana advice is given to rural districts only. In Vermont the State board of health advises with municipal officers regarding the construction, heating, ventilation, and sanitary arrangements of public buildings, construed as including public school buildings. In certain other States advice is given to districts of all classes. The advice, except in Vermont, West Virginia, and possibly Texas, consists in the preparation of plans for buildings and the loan of the plans to districts desiring them. In Maine, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin specifications are prepared and lent. In three of the States that prepare plans the State superintendent may furnish the necessary details for large as well as small buildings, but in Maine and Wisconsin a four-room structure is the limit, while in North Dakota the superintendent has no authority to go beyond two rooms. The duty of giving advice is usually mandatory with the officials upon whom it is conferred, but in Maine the law is evidently permissive, since the State superintendent sets forth no standards and in a recent letter speaks only of approval. In West Virginia the local medical inspector, "when requested by the board of education," shall assist in formulating rules of procedure on matters pertaining to the lighting, heating, ventilating, and sanitation of the school buildings. It is evident that the purpose of advice is the protection of smaller and poorer districts against their own ignorance or the exploitation of persons from without. B. APPROVAL. Classes of officials utilized. The power of approval of plans is a species of control more generally exercised and more potent in effects than the power of advice. Table 1 shows that the power of approval has been practically taken from the lay authorities in at least 30 States. The function of advice is exercised in all cases directly under legal warrant, but in 3 out of 30 States the power of approval finds its authority specifically in the administrative ruling of the State board of health or of the State board of education. Approval, like advice, comes most frequently from the hands of education officials. In 21 out of 30 cases these officials are the sole authority in approval; in: 1 case the health authority acts alone; in 1 case the State archi tect; in still another a supervisor of plans in the building inspection department of the district police; in 5 cases health and education officials cooperate; and in 1 case, (Ohio), the health officials share their responsibility with several others. . Degree of centralization.-So far as the health authorities are concerned, it is nearly always the State boards of health that have jurisdiction, local boards working under their direction. With the education officers the tendency toward centralization is not so marked. Of the 21 States where the education officers act alone, in 9 the State department of education is in full charge; in 7 the county superintendent, county school commissioners, or county board of education approves. In the 5 others, State, county, town, and district officers are variously combined. In North Carolina the State superintendent has the power of initial approval, but before the building can be paid for it must be inspected and approved by the county superintendent. In South Carolina both the State and county boards of education must approve plans before aid can be received from the county schoolhouse fund. In Maine and Montana the State superintendent and the State board of health cooperate under certain conditions. In Maine both must approve plans if other than those prepared by the State department are used. In Montana there is cooperation except in districts of the first class, i. e., those containing the larger cities. In these districts the board of health may act alone. In Texas county superintendents approve plans in common school districts and in independent districts having fewer than 150 scholastics, while local superintendents approve in others. In Louisiana three officers-the State superintendent, the parish superintendent, and the parish health officer-must approve all plans as to hygienic requirements. In Minnesota all matters relating to schoolhouse sanitation were transferred in 1913 from the State board of health to the State department of education, and definite powers lodged in the State superintendent of education. West Virginia's new law (1915) creates a State department of health, with greatly enlarged powers including a public health council which will have direct oversight of State sanitation, etc. The Ohio State building code.-While Ohio's State building code of 1911 is a most exhaustive piece of legislation, it is not retroactive in any of its features. It does not mention condemnation of existing buildings, and in this respect is below the standard of many other States. Further; it does not provide for legal approval or advice, but it does charge specific officials, State and local, with the enforcement of specific requirements of the code, e. g., the State fire marshal or municipal fire chiefs enforce all provisions relative to fire prevention; building inspectors or officials, State or local, have similar responsibility touching heat and ventilation, while health officials, |