Public Papers of Governor

rence and at Alfred the Trustees of the university have charge of the agricultural school. The reorganization plan provides for a Bureau of Agricultural and Vocational Education, with a local Board of Managers for each school, thus unifying the system.

OUR STATE NAUTICAL SCHOOL

And then there is the case of the New York State Nautical School, which further illustrates the haphazard system now prevailing. Appropriations are made to it by the State, but it is not responsible to any State department. The Secretary of the Navy was authorized by a Federal law of 1911 to provide a suitable training vessel at the Port of New York, and appropriated not more than $25,000 in case the city or the State would raise an equal amount for a nautical school. The Board of Education of New York City, which had accepted the Federal offer, decided in 1913 to abolish the Nautical School, but various persons interested in it had a State law enacted providing for its maintenance. The school gives instructions to boys between the ages of 16 and 20 in navigation, seamanship, steam and electrical engineering. A boy who has graduated from an elementary school with a little extra study may enter.

The school is administered by a Board of Governors. The members, exclusive of the Commissioner of Education, are appointed by the Governor for three years and serve without compensation.

There was no supervision of this school, either by the State Department or by the Federal Government, until the war broke out. Then the Nautical School was brought under the jurisdiction of the United States Naval Reserve Force.

The only other similar school in this country is in Massachuetts, and the per capita cost per pupil in the Massachusetts school has been very much less than in the New York school.

The reorganization plan is for the State Nautical School to be turned over to the Federal Government as a basis for a large school not restricted to New York residents. In case it is found impossible to do this it is recommended that it be placed under the State Department of Education, in the Bureau of Agriculture 'and Vocational Education.

The plan would also transfer to the Federal Government the Health Office at the Port of New York and the Port Wardens. It would abolish altogether the Fiscal Supervisor of State Charities, the Charities Building and Improvement Commission, the Fire Marshal, Harbor Masters and Commission on West Side Improvements, transferring to other agencies such of their activities as are regarded as of some public consequence. The Transit Construction Commission would be transferred to the City of New York. Neither embalming nor chiropody is accepted as a profession requiring higher education, but the Department of Education licenses both of them, and the plan is to let them stay there under professional examining boards.

NEGLECT OF THe Blind

A bureau of special education would be established to supervise the education of Indians, the blind, deaf mutes and State charges. It is estimated that there are about 8.400 blind persons in the State, but only 364 of them are officially known to the present commission, so loose is the system of registration. And so far as the State budget is concerned, only 298 blind children are known despite the much greater number in the State. The Commission for the Blind has in fact no real grasp on the situation.

To take the place of the several scattered and ineffective public agencies dealing with the situation it is proposed to create a division for the blind under the Bureau of Special Education, to care for the "normal" blind and to see that the so-called abnormal blind receive treatment at other agencies. The State School for the Blind at Batavia would be under its jurisdiction, and the Fiscal Supervisor and Board of Charities would be relieved of their present duties.

Similar conditions are to be met by similar remedies in other directions. The State's educational work has been selected for illustrative purposes, not because it reveals a greater commission than is apparent generally, but because there is greater familiarity on the part of the general public, presumably, with its methods. The solution proposed here is the same in its gen

eral scope as would be applied in other departments. The Reconstruction Commission in its report to Governor Smith thus defended the proposed reorganization.

"The only serious argument advanced against such a proposed reorganization and budget system is that it makes our Governor a czar. The President of the United States has administrative powers far greater than those here proposed to be given to the Governor. The Mayor of the City of New York appoints and removes all of the important department heads, and citizens know whom to hold responsible. The Governor does not hold office by hereditary right. He is elected for a fixed term by universal suffrage. He is controlled in all minor appointments by the civil service law. He cannot spend a dollar of the public money which is not authorized by the Legislature of the State. He is subject to removal by impeachment. If he were given the powers here proposed he would stand out in the limelight of public opinion and scrutiny. Economy in administration, if accomplished, would redound to his credit. Waste and extravagance could be laid at his door. Those who cannot endure the medicine because it seems too strong must be content with waste, inefficiency and bungling — and steadily rising cost of Government."

"The system here proposed is more democratic, not more royal' than that now in existence. Democracy does not merely mean periodical elections. It means a government held accountable to the people between elections. In order that the people may hold their Government to account they must have a government that they can understand. No citizen can hope to understand the present collections of departments, offices, boards and commissions, or the present methods of appropriating money. A Governor with a cabinet of reasonable size, responsible for proposing a program in the annual budget and for administering the program as modified by the Legislature may be brought daily under public scrutiny, held accountable to the Legislature and public opinion, and be turned out of office if he fails to measure up to public requirements.

"If this is not democracy then it is difficult to imagine what it is. The proposals here advanced are not partisan, Republican leaders and Democratic leaders of the highest standing and widest experience have indorsed the principles upon which they rest. They have appeared in the Progressive and Socialist platforms. Every Governor in recent years has made some recommendations along these lines, but the issue has never been placed squarely before the people."

There is nothing novel about the plan Governor Smith has championed. In regard to that his commission reported to him as follows:

The budget recommendations have passed beyond the theoretical stage, for thirty-eight States have enacted legislation providing for a consolidated budget system with varying provisions as to methods of preparation, legislative review and enactment into law. Half of these States have placed the responsibility for initiating the budget squarely upon the Governor.

"The recommendations with reference to the reorganization of boards, offices and commissions have not been accepted by the State Legislatures as readily as proposals for budget reform. The reasons are obvious. A consolidation of a hundred or more offices, boards and other agencies affects political patronage more vitally than does a budget system, and it requires considerable courage and intelligence on the part of the Legislature to reorganize an entire system of State Government. Nevertheless, recommendations of commissions are passing steadily into law. The State of Illinois, comparable to New York in wealth and population, in 1917, under the vigorous leadership of Governor Lowden made a complete and drastic reorganization, of the State administration, sweeping away 105 offices and agencies and consolidating the affairs of the State under nine great departments.

"The Commonwealth of Massachusetts by constitutional provision in 1918 prepared the way for consolidation of the numerous offices and agencies composing the State administration. Nebraska, by an act of 1909, reduced eighty-two departments and agencies to six administrative departments, six constitutional officers and four constitutional boards. Idaho, by an act approved Feb. 19, 1919, abolished a long list of offices, boards, and commissions and created instead nine departments of civil administration. Delaware has under consideration proposals for a reorganization of administration, consoli

dating 117 separate officers, departments, boards, commissions and other agencies into nine departments under the authority of the Governor. In Oregon a legislative commission proposes to consolidate all existing administrative agencies into ten departments. The Taxpayers' Association of California proposes to set up in that State twelve administrative departments in addiion to that of the Secretary of State. The messages of Governors in 1919 indicate that Indiana and other States are soon to follow in the footsteps of Illinois, Massachusetts, Nebraska and Idaho."

Appropriation Bills Signed by the Governor in 1920 Applying to General Fund