Ixsjfi^c^ Lo ^ 1st \^y(rn^<yuuUL , 19)0. 




aass_L:BMll 



Book. 



i9 10c 



Union Calendar No. 196. 



6l8T Congress, [ HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 

'2d Session. 



j R] 
I No 



Report 

1003. 



BENEFIT OF MORRILL FUND TO THE DISTRICT OF 

COLUMBIA. 



Apkil 13, 1910. — Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of 
the Union and ordered to be printed. 



"^ 



Mr, 



Scott, from the Committee on Agriculture, submitted the 
following 

REPORT. 

[To accompany H. E. 24316.] 



The Committee on Agriculture, to which was referred the bill 
(H. R. 24316) to amend an act entitled "An act donating public lands 
to the several States and Territories which may provide colleges for 
the benefit of agriculture and the mechanic arts," approved July 2, 
1862, and the acts supplementary thereto, so as to extend the benefits 
thereof to the District of Columbia, has had the same under considera- 
tion and begs leave to report the bill back with an amendment, with 
the recommendatioa that the amendment be agreed to and that the bill 
as amended be passed. 

The purpose of this act is to give to the District of Columbia the benefit 
of the Morrill Act of 1862 and of the subsequent acts supplemental 
to and amendatory thereof for the establishment and maintenance of 
colleges for the benefit of agriculture and the mechanic arts, and 
designating George Washington University as the instrumentality 
through which the fund provided in such acts shall be expended. 

Soon after the bill was introduced in the House, in December, 1909, 
a vigorous campaign was begun against it by representatives of the 
state universities, who protested against the legislation on the ground 
that George Washington University as a private institution with (as 
was alleged) strong denominational proclivities ought not to be made 
the beneficiary of a grant from the Public Treasury. At a later date 
the representatives of certain labor organizations and other citizens of 
the District of Columbia memorialized your committee in the interest 
of the McKinley Manual Training School, arguing that the fund should 
be granted to that institution on the ground that it is well equipped to 
do the work and that as a part of the public-school system of the 
district no fees are charged for tuition therein. 



2 BENEFIT OF MOKRILL FUND TO DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. 

In order that those objecting to the legislation from any standpoint 
might have an opportunity to present their views, exhaustive hearings 
were held and several days spent in taking testimony and listening to 
argument. After full and careful consideration of all the facts de- 
veloped by these hearings and after weighing carefully the arguments 
brought forward by those who opposed as well as by those who favored 
the bill your committee reached the following conclusions: 

The bill contains two entirely distinct propositions, which may be 
stated in the form of questions: 

First. Is the District of Columbia entitled to a share of the Morrill 
funds on the same basis as other States, Territories, and dependencies? 

Second. If the District of Columbia is entitled to share in these 
funds, then through what instrumentality ma}^ the best results be 
obtained ( 

The first question is to be answered by Congress in its capacity as 
the legislative body of the nation, and your committee recognizes the 
right of an}^ citizen of the United States to interest himself in the answer 
which Congress shall make to it. In the. opinion of your committee 
there can l)e but one answer to this question, and that in the affirma- 
tive. The intention of Congress in passing the Morrill acts wa^ no 
doubt to afl'ord to all the citizens of the United States, who desire to 
avail themselves of it, the opportunity for collegiate training in agri- 
culture and the mechanic arts through the establishment of colleges in 
each of the States and Territories. At the time the original act was 
passed, the District of Columbia, although not designated as a Terri- 
tory, did have a territorial form of government, and if that form of 
government had not been changed the District would probably have 
been recognized as a beneliciary of the law without any special act of 
Congress. 

However that may be the District of Columbia is a political entit}^, 
separate and distinct from any other political subdivision of our coun- 
try. Its citizens can not claim citizenship in any other State or Ter- 
ritory while residing here, and therefore must be denied the benefits 
of the Morrill acts unless the funds appropriated therein are expended 
here. The right of the District of Columbia, therefore, as a political 
unit to share in the funds provided b}^ the Morrill acts is so clear that 
it has not been seriously disputed. It was even conceded by the most 
earnest objectors to the present bill. 

The right of the District of Columbia to a share of the funds pro- 
vided by the Morrill acts being conceded, the only question I'emain- 
ing is, through what institution can they be most judiciously expended? 
And that question, in the judgment of your committee, is one which 
concerns only the people of the District and the Congress in its capac- 
ity of legislature for the District. Your committee recognizes the 
force of the argument that public funds should be expended through 
a public institution, and it regrets very much that there is no public 
school of college grade in the District of Columbia which might be 
designated for this purpose. But all of the Morrill acts so plainly 
contemplate the establishment and maintenance of colleges that your 
committee does not feel as if the spirit of the law would be met by 
placing the funds within the control of the McKinley Manual-Training 
School or of any other school of secondary grade. 

Unfortunately there is no public school of college grade in the Dis- 
trict of Columbia, and the only institution prepared to give the instruc- 

Apr 



BENEFIT OF MOERILL FUND TO DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. S 

tion called for under the Morrill acts and asking to be designated for the 
purpose is George Washington University . The question narrows itself, 
therefore, to the single proposition, shall the citizens of the District 
of Columbia, although plainly entitled to the benefits of the Morrill 
acts, be denied these benefits until a public institution shall be created 
through which they might be conferred, or shall they receive such 
benefits at once through the instrumentality of the George Washington 
Universit}^ ? 

If George Washington University were a denominational or sectarian 
institution, as a great many of those protesting against this bill have 
evidently been misled into believing, your committee would not for a 
moment consider a favorable report upon this measure. But such is 
not the case, as the charter of the university, under a recent act of 
Congress, expressly declares it to be nonsectarian, and in point of fact 
several denominations are represented upon its board of trustees and 
upon its faculty. . 

And if George Washington University were a purely private insti- 
tution, conducted at a profit for the benefit of some individual or com- 
pan}^ or corporation, your committee would hesitate long before recom- 
mending that this bill pass. But that also is not the case. The most 
that can be said is that George Washington University is a privately 
controlled and privately supported institution. It renders a distinctly 
public service and it has never paid a dividend to an}^ person or cor- 
poration. And by the terms of this bill it is given at least a quasi 
public character by the provision that during the life of this act three 
ofiicials of the Government shall be ex-officio members of its board of 
trustees, and by the further provision covering the limitation upon 
tuition fees that may be charged. 

Kecurring, then, to the question, Shall the citizens of the District of 
Columbia be denied the benefit of funds to which it is conceded they 
are entitled because there does not exist any fully public institution 
through which such funds may be expended, or shall they receive such 
benefits at once through the instrumentality that is now available, it 
has seemed to your committee there can be but one answer. If there 
existed here an institution of college grade, maintained as a part of 
the public school system of the District, this fund would of course go 
to such institution without question. It is a singular fact, and in the 
mind of your committee a deplorable fact, that there does not exist 
to-day at the national capital any publicly endowed or supported 
school wherein the white youth of the city may receive a college train- 
ing at the public expense. Such provision has long existed in relation 
to the colored youth through the establishment of Howard University 
and it is to be hoped that in the near future the children of white 
parents may receive equal consideration. But for the present the 
funds carried in the Morrill acts must be expended through George 
Washington University or their benefits entirely withheld from the 
citizens of the District. 

As originallj^ introduced, this bill made an indefinite grant of the 
funds to George Washington University, without any limitations upon 
the time during which the grant should continue or upon the tuition 
fees that might be charged. It has seemed to your committee, in view 
of the considerations which appear in the hearings, but which need not 
be embodied in this report, that there should be a time limit put upon 
the grant, and the present bill accordingly restricts the designation to 



nm 



BENEFIT OF MORRILL FUND TO DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. 



the three succeeding- liscal ^^ears. It seemed to your committee also 
that there should be some limitation placed upon the fees to be charged 
for the instruction which will be paid for through the funds carried in 
the bill, and the sum of $20 per annum is accordingly fixed as the 
maximum that may be charged for tuition in the suVjjects covered by 
the Morrill acts. The result of this limitation, as shown by a letter 
from President Needham, of George Washington University, will be 
to reduce the fees charged for courses leading to the bachelor's degree 
in civil engineering, electrical engineering, and mechanical engineering 
from $600 for the four years, the present charge, to $155 for the four 
years, a reduction for each student of |155 for the four years' course. 

Your committee feels that with these limitations — the time restric- 
tion, which will compel the Congress to take the matter up for con- 
sideration again at the end of three years, and the requirement that 
fees charged shall be merely nominal — every reasonable objection to 
the legislation has been met. 

On page 3, line 21, of the bill, the word " current" was inserted by 
clerical error, and the committee recommends that it be stricken out. 
With this amendment agreed to, the committee is of the opinion that 
the bill should pass. 

o