lums of New York and California would be against any measure that would deprive them of these receipts and hence the great difficulty that arises when improvement is sought. The state that is dominated by a combination of political and sectarian interests may have to struggle long before relief, if ever, is found. Any state pursuing the same course will in time find itself in the same condition, the institutions resting with heavy weight on the public as the mountain on Enceladus:
The crags are piled on his breast,
The earth is heaped on his head.
Ohio has a district system under which counties may unite and establish a children's home. There are forty-five such homes, and in August last there were about 3600 children in them. The expense in 1894 for their support was $242,554.09. These homes are often pleasant and attractive. A large number are placed in families each year, and the people seem pleased with the system. There must be a great diversity of management, and whether so expensive a system will prove the better time must develop.
The Pennsylvania system is somewhat like that in New York. The Children's Aid Society does excellent work in placing children, and its methods, if extended, would no doubt be of great benefit. Massachusetts after trying various methods has placed all dependent children under the control of the State Board of Lunacy and Charity, which boards out the children, places them in families and supervises them by paid visitors. There is a radical difference of opinion in Massachusetts as to its system. The present condition there is somewhat formative and experimental. These states are cited because so much is done in them by public officials and private citizens to improve the condition of dependent and delinquent children, while in most of the states there is great indifference and neglect with county poor-house support and associations. The following table is referred to as showing the results of different systems:
