LC 174 .E5 Copy 1 .JLIBHARr OF CONGRESS.! i -&Hf± ^ * f {UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.^ BOSTON DAILY ADVERTISER, SATURDAY MORNING, AUGUST 9, 1873. CONCLUSIVE ARGT7MEKTIN' OPPOSITION" TO TIM SUlESiE— AH ELAIiOBATE PRESENTATION OP THE WHOLE SUBJE T— TUB TKCTE FOLIC V OP THE GOVERNMENT CONCER4.IKG THE HIOHEB ELCCAHON. The follow n : la- the Ml report presented by President Eliot oi Harvard at the meeting; of tba National Educational Association at Elimva, New York, on luesday last, brief mentio i of wbick wasiradeiii our telegraphic despatches. Tb a report b s three parts,— first; an accoitot of what this association has done about a nacnual university since 1809; secondly, au examination of uio tills on the subject which were brought be- fore Congress in 1812, and lastly, a discussion of the uue i oliey of our government upon this urit- ui. At the conclusion oi an address on "The Pro- aiess of TJi.iversitv Education." delivered oy Dr„ Joljn V/. Hojt, of Wisconsin, before the uatiouil teacher's association at I'renton, New Jersey, aa tne Will of August, 1809, the folio wing resolution w as unai.ini(iUbly auoiiieu :— Jlexolvtd, That, ro the opinion of this association, a gieafc Ameiicjn university is a leadiug wj,nt of Ametkan education, and that, in order to con- tribute to the early establishment of such an insti- tution, the pre sidtnfc of this association, acuiiiv in ccncirt wi'h the piesnleut of the national euperin- ti'iiiiti'is' association, is hereby requested to a.i- poini a committee consisting; of one member from ia< h of the States, and ,if which Dr. J. W. Hjyt of Vt'ii-L.insin shail be chairman, to tatce the whole' matter into consideration, and to uiike such re- i port thereon, at the next annual eo.iveu- unii of said association, as sua'll seem to be demanded by the interests of the councry. ibis cimmiuee was duly appointed, but dni. BMhine whatever ruling the year 1869-70. Never- theless, ihe chairman, acting m the name of the i ci n nnitip, presented at the Cleveland meeting, in Ai^ini, 1870. v\hat was called "a preliminary re- tell," and asked that the committee inlg'bt Lave moictme. Ibis preliminary report describes ia eltv aud language the "leaning offices of a true university, - ' couipaies our existing institutions with Eihopear universities, paints a glowiug nte- luie lit the future oi the United states, sets forth v\ilb enihmiaim wbat a great, university would do lor ibe cuuntiy, avoids all embarrassing ostitis, loaves U.e precise character of the institution, its loiatun its ci institution and mode of government I fjUite ui denied, and assumes nolv this — that tiiore slumla be ore great central institutiou, and chat oiinding?andendc*Jtt**'*ttrereot the pri- vate ciiicen. the State asia the general govern- j >- : '.rune. It passed by all matrers liltejy iggest objections, ana caiieii for no specific actionuDaieier on the part of the association; the ebanman alone was responsible for ic, aud' it boie only bis signature. Ot course the report was accepted and' the request for more time wa,s i K rai ttd. At the St. Louis meeting of the Na- liei.al Educational Association, in August, 1671, Br. Hovt and a minoriiy of the com media aj.; .i intcd in 18C9 niesenrert a second report. This jtiorl aeain avoidsalldetailsof wbattlie proposed li.Liiiuiion shoum be and where it should be, but srys in jzei.tral terms that it should be enmpre*- Limive, high, free, »ujitr,immel:ed by oonsidera- ; lioisol Biction . iVai tv or creed, rico, and so co- oidmaied with the other institutions of the c iuii- tr.\ asiuii" wavocourlict with them. Further, tawr sreond rcpoii defines in some measure wiiic the i.iehroii arv repo-t vaeoely spoke of as tlic ueees- taiyo opei anon of the euizen, the State aud the- SCLeial government. H appears in the second re- ]crttnat "Ihe original endowment will uee.l tol e lurniEbedby the government, and Cangress nmsttbeiefore determine the general terms aui c millions upon which the institution shall be ad- ministeied"; that "proper authorities in the sev- eral Slates may have a voice in its minaarement," ai d "that, individual citizens aud associations of cnireu:- should be cordially 'nvited to emiow such. tie) ai iments as shall most eolist their symn-i- ihies." ihe icpoit then presents some ariu'mauts in iavcr el the right of Congress to endow a am— versiiy, anil says thai" the idea of a national uni- versin "is in perfect birmony with the policy aa.l practice of ihe government" and that "it remains but to determine the meau3 best calculated to se- cnie the adoption of the most judicious plan for ttoii.otitutiou, and ^o insure the congressional and other aid necessary to the full success of the enterprise. 1 ' Thereupon the committee reeomroeact tl at "there be ra.sedanew and permanent commit- tee ol Irss numbers than the present -sav fifteen— .... to be known as the national university com- u itiee," "chat a quite limited number of tnemDers thereof should be a quoium for the transaction of business at any regu:aiiy called meeting, and that a majority shall have power to supply . . .. vacan- cies... •.." 'Ihe concluding sentence of the report is as follows- "A committee of this character would le able, in the first place, to concentrate ti.e I est thought of the country upon the various impol fart questions involved lu the perfection of a plan for the institution ; and, secondly, to m ir- shal the stiength of the country iu systematic and. f. ftertive support. of the measure, wheu at last for- mally brought to the attention of Congress." Tills npoit was signed by a littie less than half of the meint ers of the original committee. The report was accepted, and the proposed permanent com- miltee of fiiieen was appointed. ■ 1 ao not find that the number of members of this committee which fhtulo constitute $ quorum was fixed by the asso- ciation. By taking this action at the St. Louis meeting, the association showed that it enter- tained the idea cf a single dominant university for the country, and contemplated, without disappro- bation, tne establishmei t theieof by the general government, ana through its committee the asso- ciation undertook— first, to prepare a plan for such an institution, and, secondly, to urge Vaa plan, when prepared, upon Congress. The 1 eimauer.t committee appointed in Au just, 1871, under these circumstances had serious wort to do and grave responsibilities to bear. Win* has it done? The members were ail very busy mtn, and thev were ecattered over the country fit m aiassaehusctts to Oregon aud from Minneso- ta 'o Louisiana. Several of them were appointed without their knowledge ana consent. The natu- ral cmsequences have followed. There has never been a meeting of the committee cimpetent ti transact business. .Nine of the gentlemen whose names were announced at St. Louis as members of this committee have informed me that they never attended a meeting of the committee; two more mtmLeis never attended any meeting excepts, biuttne m a hotel parlor at St. Louis shortlv after the C\mmittce wasuamed.a meeting which could, not possibly have been competent to transact busi- tess. Of the other four members, one is the chair- man, two have been long abBent lrom home and. " ,1-accessible to my inquiries, and one has net answered .my letters. It is obvious that as a boay authorized to speak and or.c in the name of the National E lucicional Ai- Eociation this committee has never h id atuooj mc's ixisteme. 1 congratulate the association that it is thus far free from all responsibility for what- ever may have been done since August, 1871, ab >ufc a rational university. The permanent commie which ihe association tliou constituted upon this suljett was never organized, aud no one lias lial [id any authority tr> speak in its uaine or in tlie nam9 of the association. Kolwitnstanrting this state of tbirgs, seine not unimportant action wis taken iu the spi ii.g of 1872, looking to the establishment of a national university by Congress. Two bills tu> establish a national university were broug.it into ihe S< nate, one oi which was drawn by Di. J. W. Hoyt of Wisconsin, the chairman of tlie coinnit- tee appointed at St. Louis, and was presented at his 11 quest by Senator Sawyer of South C U'olina. Oi this bill, so well informed a peisonasOener.il Eat* n, commissioner of education, himself a mem* ■ Ler of the St. Louis committee, savs in a letter to me, "It is the one, as I understand the facts, which uaslavored by the committee appoiute I oy the National Educational Association, of which Dr. -J. W. Hoyt ot Mauison, Wis., is cnairman." There is 10 doubt that this was the common impression: among persons who knew anything about the pres- entation of the bill brought m by Senator Sa.wrer on the 20ih of May, 1872. ft behooves tlie associa- tion to understand how this impression was pro- clued and what grounds there were for such an opinion. Dr. Hoyt has beeu for the pa8t four years chaiiman of a committee on a national uni- versity appointed by the National E lucattonal As- sociation, ano the action of the association in 1871 nade him chairman of a peimaneut committee, abhi ugh the committee has never met. In that capaci ty he vrote letters in the winter of 1871 72,, to a large number ot persons interested in ejuca- 1ion, asking their opinions and advice about a na- tional university, and enclosing a drait of a bill to establish isucb an institution. These letters undcub edly got more attentiou from tbe persons aodirssed because, in many cases at least, they were written on Ihe paper of the bureau of educa- tion at Washington, and were sent i ut from that t nice with tnvt lopes for the free transmission of the replies laek to tbe bureau. Dr. Hoyt has also talked in the course of the last four years wita a considerable number of persons professionally cmeerned with education upon the subject ot a rational university, and bas received from tuern a mass of suggestion-and opinions in great variety. Among the persons so Consulted by htm, either ! oialiy or m wilting, were most of the members of the committee named at St. Louis. Three or four of the committee felt a real interest in the sub- ject and devoted some attention to it, but they never had the advantage of common consultation and all then- suggestiong were fitered through the mind of the chaiiman. Ihe bill brought into the Senate by Senator Sawyer was theri|tore the work of a private citizen , having a certaiu* indorse- ment fi cm this association, who consulted such ■ peierns as be thought best to consult, and took as much of their advice as he liked. It was in no prooer sei se the work of this association or of any com- mittee thereof. The impression that it was favored by a committee of this association has ouly this warrant, that parts of it commended them -elves to certain gentlemen who were named in 1871 on a. committee which was never organized, aad wtt» therefore had only their individual opinions to ex- press. 1 have been thus particular in describing; what has taken place in regard to the project for a national university which was started in this asso- ciation in 1869, because, as I have examined the matter,! have thought that partly through easy goo* naiuie, and partly through that haste in the trans- action of business which is almost unavoidable in such a large assemblage as this, coming tigathef 1or two or three days once a year, the association Lad iun a serious risk of being placed in a false position before tbe public upon a subject of mu;h importance to American education. It has seemed to me that the association would do well to be cau- tious about constituting permanent committees, and abc lit passing general declaratory resolutions, particularly if the resolutions convey a lecoarmen- . nation to some superior power, as to Congress, a State legislature or the public at large. 1 now pass to the seco .d part of my subject, ait examination of tbe two bills to establish a national university, which were presented in the Senate in. the ~ spriii" of 1872. These two bills are tenta- tive plans for oreating a crowning univer- sity, richer, better and more comprehensive than any existing Institution, and under the patronage of the general government. They are tbe woik of private individuals only, and nothing has thus far come of them; but they are betore the c< untry as having been read twice and refer- red to the committee on education and labor ia ihe Senate of the United States. In the bill [.re- sented bv Senator Howe ot Wisconsin March 25. 1872. the "different faculties of the proposed uni- versity are all specified to the number of ten, and tbe professorships in each faculty are desiguatel in detail, except in the faculties of military sci- ence and naval science. Tbe same authority whtcn establishes a faculty or a professorship can of course abolish either at any moment, and so get rid of unpopular incumbents. The president of the university is to be appointed by the president of the TJnitea States, with the onsent of tha Senate. The heads of the teu faculties are to be annotated by the president of the university, with, the consent of the Senate of the United States. The president and the heads of faculties consti- tute an executive senate ot the university. Pro- fessors are to be appointed and may be removed bv this university senate, and private teachers are .to be licensed by the same body. The president s to have the same salary as the' Chief Justice of the United States, and the heads of fac- culties are to have the salary of a judge of the dts- uict court of the United States. The places are desuable.soi'ar as pay, patronage and oaspica- ne=s go ; they would be desired by a great number ot incompetent people; the more so because these; eleven efficers would never be brought, like a pro- fessor, to any public test of their capacity. Toere is no reason whatever to suppose that the appoint- ments would be made on any better method than, that which now prevails in United States custom- houses and post-offices. We are disgraae'.ully ha- bituated to custom-house "rings" and post-ofuoo "ill gs"; last wiuter the ne.vpapers talked much of an aaritulinral college "ring." Tbe spectacle of a national university "ring" would be even less edilymg. There is, indeed, in the bill a futile at- tempt to make the tenure of ofllce of the presi- dent of the university the same as that of tun judges of the Supreme Court of the United Si ices. . IhtSuprtme Court, however, was not established ly toigiess, but by the Constitution, and th» judges ol that court are consequently out of the reach of Congress; the president of a university established bv act of Congress would not oe. Toe bill gives no' security whatever that all tue ap- pointments m the university w.ubl not be of th? naiuit of political appointments. Ibis is a tatah deiect in aov cougresstouat bill to ^establish a uni- versity, so long as the principles of appointment to Uuiied Siates offices and the tenure of tttise cfLces tona.il what tbey now are. The only teaure ol cfti«e which is ht lor a teacher is tbe tenure during good behavi or ani competency; and thiB is the only teiure which will secure the services of com;rj;eat protestors in colleges and universities. ' J -' tl3 ' fc8 " tuency oi the elections of teachers is a ve;y baa leaiuiem our puulic school system. Pertciueuoe of tenure is necessary to make the position of a teacher one of dignity anil luelepen'Jeiioe. Youa * men oi vigor ano capacity will not enter a profes- sion which offers no money prize-, unless t.ney ace ii duced bv Us stability ami peace tulmjss, an J by ihe social consideration which attaches to It. Ihe tjsitm which prevails in most of our large oliie3 -id towns, of electing tbe teachers in the pajiie schools at least as often as once a yea 1 , isiioon- sistmt wi'h this digi.itv, penceiumess an I const 1- nation, unless a trmlv established custom of re- electing ii« uni bents converts the constantly recur- ring elections into mere formalities. We must all bitterly t)Pi lore the mortifying fact that for mire thou a i^ei.eiation neither dignify, peacefubiesa [COSIINTJED ON FOURTH PAGE,! (CONTINUED FEOM FIRST PAUE.l nor social cons {deration has attachei to any ap- BKrtntmei t in the civnservice of the United States. ihe man appointea has sometimes adorned his of- fice, but the cilice has Dever adorned the man. Until the service of the United States becomes, WKWgh a complete reform, at least as respectable S»d secure as the service of a bauk, an insurance company, a manufacturing cor- poration or a railroad company, not to speak of college and academy corporations, Con- gress cannot establish a university \vh;ch will comtnand the respect of educated Americans or win the confluence of the country, unless the ap- polutiDc power lor the university is made abso- lutely independent of all political influence. So I tar fr< m doing this, the bill before us provides no effectual burner whatever against political ap- pointments. In several sections of the bill there is a provision that for certain appointments cer- tain specified clnsses of persons shall "receive the ' preference"— a provision of no binding or eflective folce whatever. There is only one really erfreisnt § revision oi this character in the bill presented by cnator fiowe, and that one might reasonably give serious ccncern to persons who live iu the •|a„,., f , rit8j foits. arsenals, navy yards and light- houses of the United S'ates. It is provided m sec- tion 16 that after the year 1880 graduates of the national university m medicine and surge* y "shall ; alone be emitled to practice medicine and surgery in any Terntoiy ovei-wbtch the United States shall ! have exclusive jurisdiction." I shall lately mention some of the minor faults of Senator Howe's bill. To an ex- perienced college official, the following ue- ! scnption of tne qualifications for a Imission to the uuii ers ty 3eems absurdly vague, "a good i moral chat aoter and such intellectual attainments as aie indicated 1 y graduation at the colleges, u n- Teisities, at d best class of high schools, as estab- lished by law in the several Stales of the United States." With tne author of this bill the four years of study which generally come between graduation at a bigh school and graduation at a college count for nothing at all. Universities and high schools are spoken of as equivalent institu- tions, there may be States in tbts Union in which this classification is essentially correct; but there certainly are rot a lew States iu which it is cou- 3i icuously u-exact. The bill pruvi' es that professors snail receive salanes vaiyn gfrom $1000 to ¥2500 a year, and thateath ptolessor may also exact a fee of ten doilais a venr Horn each studeut attending his course. Under this system the professors of popu- lar subjects ujignt thrive; but 1 fear that the pro- fessors of Oiiental philosophy, scholasti- cism, Sclavonic languages, the Coptic lau- gua«e, ecclesiastical law, and similar , lather remote subjects, would starve. Neither students nor teachers in this country kite ihe fee system ; it has worked well in Germany, but has never been domesticated here except in | medical schools, where it has done a great deal of bairn. It creates a disagreeable money relation between teacher and student, and introduces into a facility illiberal contention. By section 18 of I this con'ptthenstve bill, the Military academy is removed irom West Point, and so changed as to oe inaction H J' ai o isned. This measure seems rather too wave to be biougbt in as an incidental part of a bill to establish a national university. The seventeenth rection. relating to the faculty of at'iicukuie, gives countenance to delusions which have already done much mischief in tne United States and still bid lair to cause further , wasted i.ublio au.i private resources. Trie first of these delusions n the model farm, ibe model faini li-e the m irre- sistible at the moment as the fatigue caused by too much hammering, hoeing or walking. Se :tion i\ of this bill niovidea "that tne seat of the university shall be at the cabital of the United States." 1 reserve this point lor discussion in conoectun with the other bitlto which 1 now invite your at- tention. ^ The important feature in the bill presented in the Sei.ate by Senator Sawver on the aoth of May, 1812, is the mode in which its author euueavore I to pioviue a government for the university which would have some chance of being free from polit- ical influences; or in other words to deprive the government oi the United States of all power over the unit eisiiv tr. nj the moment of its establish- ment, except 'of course the power to abolisti it. By this bill the gn\ eminent of the university is vested in a board of regents, numbering nfty-hve persons, a council of eoucation numbering seven- teen peiBOLS, a council of faculties which iuclu le3 all the executive officers of the university and all professors, and a general council of the univer- sity, "composed of all members of the board of jegents, council of education, council of faculties and all graduates of the university of five years' siftuumg." ihe last named body, which lu tbe etui se of years wi uld become very numerous, has only power to make recommendations to the otner fccaias. Ihe ciuiie- of the council of faculties are not prescribed with distinctness. The real governing bodies are the board of regents and the co.meit o£ education. It is provided "that the board of re- gents shall consist of one member from each State of the United States to be appointed by the gover- nor thereof with the advice and coussut of the chiel justice and the superintendent of public in- struction, or other like officer, of his State; five intmlieis from the country at large to be appoint- ed by the Presiuent of the United States, with the advice and consent of the Chief Justice, commis- sioner of education and chief officer of the univer- sity and the lolloiving members ex-officio, to wit, the Chief Jui- tice of the United States, commis- sioner of education, commissioner of agriculture, commissioner of pateuts, superintendent of the loast suivey.supeiintendent of the naval obser- vatory, secretary oi the Smithsonian Institution, president of tne National Academy of Sciences, nretaideut of the N alio . al educational Association, Dissident of the American Association for the Ad- vancement of Science, president of the American Philological Association, president of the Aneticati Social Science Association and the chief officer of the university, fifteen to be a quorum." The members representing States ai e to serve six years, and the members at I large ten years. 'Ihe specified duties of the re- gents Pie "to enact laws for the government of the university) to elect the officers thereof, to dster- I mine the general conditions of altnission to the university', and to confer appropriate degrees." It is expiessly declared that "no faculty snail be or- ganized, no chair created, -~ salary determine I, and no professor appointed or removed without I the approval of the board of regents." With so i large an organization to direct, and such lmport- ' ant powers to exeicise, the hoard of regents would meed to have several meetings a year. Two meet- ings a year would obviously be the least possible stliness of __mbers 'scattered all over the count! y! need not be enlarged upon. It is number. The cumbrousness and the so large a boaiu, with its ?*r£? i ac thK autno1 ' of the bill did not expect the members oi the board of regents to attend its lmceu.es with much constancy, lor lie S4 Quorum which is only one more than a quarter of tfce Lumber of members. To name a smill quorum lor a larse bo&y of Trustees re- getts or direct, ra, is to countenance that ne-leet I ZLntuuwF n„ '. he part ot - ,ue supposed ma'alg- ere of public and private inatituiions of crusl | charity or education ivlucb has been so freiueot v | 8Ld so grievou-sly illustrated during the past few years. "The i nnciple upon which the board" ' chiefly made up is a veiy questionable one. Wuv eboui.i there He one rneinber iroin each State iu the governing board , f a university, about which there is to le nothing sectional, sectarian or parti- san? Such a priuciple of local representation im- plies that Ma„,e and Oregon, Minnesota and Fiori- na inav have d.flerenc interests in the institution. •The diflerent Slates of the U. ion may easily have different int. rests ab ut customs, interna taxes SKto"ft„ , ^ ,1 ? ia *! eanalB ' c « m ">erce and mail rentes; so tbatour legislative bodies are naturally h»t7h.'re n i^^ P .' i '- C,p l e of !" eal ^presentation* but the le is no r asou for a similar const rution of the government of tbe university. Pnilolo^v his- tory, philosophy, science and mathematics are the same in Massachusetts and California. The pro- lesson hips might as well be divided among the uibereii .States, as the places iu the board of re gents luaee.., it this vicious principle were ad- ' mmed.ro the constitution of the chtef gov! Z mi A ,^ arJ . . we should fully expect to see the university offices parfelled out among the different States just as P rfoiitical ap- pointments now are. There are twelve et-officL imjmteisofthe board of regente,noneof whom iu all prooabimv, could give the smaller attention fto this function iof governing a university. Tike. ' ■for instance, the chief Justice of the United States, tbe commissioner of education, ihe super- I Ji!i C J™-?k 0r the coast survey and the secretary of i the Smithsonian Institution; each of these officials I is lully occupied with the regular work of his own proper office. It 13 an impofition npou these ee™° tlemen to make them devote time and thou -hi to £w^f V U « 6 ' ly u,stinct from their official em- ployment as tie management of a university; and it they are not to give time and tbouaht to the uni- versity, tbe public are imposed upoii by toe list of ex-qffioio nif mbers of the board of regents. I know no surer « ay to procure an inefficient b>dvof trustees lhan to constitute it in good part of offi- cials who will pi ebably have but a slender interest in the matter of tbe trust, and whose reonlar duties leave them little time and strength for extianems functions involving labor i and responsibility. The author "of the bill doubtless perceived that the board of regents would be an unwieldy and incompetent body ; he therefore contrived a sort of executive I committee called the council of education. This council cousi- ts of six regents, six members of the council of faculties and hve ex-ojflcio members to i wit., the cbier officer of the university, commis- sioner oi education, superintendent of the I coast survey, superintendent of the naval I obeervato.y, and secretary of the Smithsonian in- stitution. Of this body of seventeen mem uers ten I is a quorum, 'this is the working bodv. It is i charged, in the language of the bill, "with the or- ! Ranizatiou of faculties, the appointment and re- I moval of professors and teachers, and, in eeueral, with the educational managem<>nt of the univer- ' sity" ; but it subsequently appears that in all these I things the approval of the board of regents is es RPntlUl. lhf> rnlll1tf.il flf Orfnn.ttnn ia ,1..-. t....... — r.— -— - n — • — - — -m— ~-. ...v. «. .njj^uuB 10 es- sential. Ihe council of education is the boaid which would attend to details and prepare the business ot the board of regents. It would nave to meet very frequently, and as the presence of its ac-ojficio members would ordinarily be out of the I question, three out of the six regents from as many different States would have to be called iu to make a quorum. The I resident • fficers and professors of the university would supuly the other seven members. A board thus constituted is an untried experiment; its I working wouio be a curious problem. The maj or- 1 ity of its active members would be professors, who would be called upon to advise the rodents alout ay auestious of appointment, pay, rank and &*™ on y? c ™ ,, ! M ' n » n e t^r colleagues and them- selves. Ihe object which the author of this bill had in view in devising this elaborate arrange- ment of uove. ning boards for his university was a laudable one, Lamely, to detach the national '-ni- versiiy lr. m tbe national government, but his scheme is too novel, complicated an.l unproniisin- te commanu the confidence of persons experienced in connuctiLg educational institutions. ♦wKa? s « lal '«?° utras,:w,th the general tenor of thiB bill, the fifteenth section gives Senators and Kepiesentatives a light to nominate candidates ftom then respect ve States or districts for schol- arships which secure free tuition for five years then by copying the worst feature in the organiza- tion ot the military academy at West Point and the navai academy at Annapolis, and giving mem- bers of Congress another excuse for ne 'lectin*- their pr. per legislative functions to busy them- selves win patronage. This very objectionable section of the bill was orobably intended as a bid jor the v. tes of the members of Congress, but it is a very small bin, for section 13 pro- vides "that instruction shall at all times be as nearly free for stuaents as is consistent w.tn Ihe income of the university and the best interests ot learning. This is a sounding phrase capable, like not a lew other phrases in this bill, of widely differing const ructions, but it strongly su -rests free tuition. F, ee tuitiorin a place oi professional . or other high education is always objectionable. because it u a perfectly indiscriminate charity • when this indiscriminate charity is to be supported by national taxation it is doubly objectionable Section 14th oi the bill contains the sin'tilar pro- visions that "no person shall be admitted tor pur- poses of 11 gnlar siuby and graduation who his not previously recenco ihe degree of bachelor of arts or a deg ee ot" . qual value, from so ne in-icirutnn reccgn.zed by th uni ersuy authorities." Toun- Atntrt ais do 1 ot get tne degree of bachelor of arts.cn the iveia.e, before their twenty-second I year. Ou these tcinisthe regular students of the new university woul 1 in my judgment be few. ex- cept in the professional departments. This pro- vision cannot be a serious one; it wa-° probiblyin- j tended to quiet the appieheusious of tbe 300nsti- 1 tutu rs which now give the degree of bach dor of ■ aria, and of course it can be repealed ac any time. Both the bids u-der discussion rely noon Con- gressional grants or appropriations for the maiu- 1 tenance of the uoiversiy. Senator Howe's bill does net unceitake ti ueflue the amount of the appropriations required. Senator Sawyer's bi.l 'grants twenty millions of dollars in the singular form of an unncKOtiable certificate of indebted- ness of the United Siates, bearing interest at five percent, a year. Oue million of dollars a year is #iot a large estimate of the annual cost of the pro- posed univeisitv, considering the extreme waste- fulness which characterizes most government ex- penditures. The private incorporated colleges and UBiveisities use their scanty resources with the greatest poesii le thrift, fueir example is a wnole- some 1 lie. I fear that the example of a university which tad ■ ne bai.d iu the nation'al treasury would not be as salutary. Bi tb tbe bills plant the proposed university at Washintton, a citv which is the capital ot tu* Dnited Stales only 111 the governmental or p .liti- cal sei ee. Ihis country has no L mdm, no Paris, no Berlin, no Vienna, no Home. We are fortunate that there is no single city in which all the activi- ties of the nation, commercial, industrial, intel- lectual anci governmental, centre. On the Atlantic coast are four large cities, each with a character aid ltfiuerceof its own; in the northwest ii Chi- 'cago; on the Ohio is Cincinnati; oi the Mississippi is St. Louis; on the Pacifle, San Fiancifco. Every one of tne3e looil ; centies is vastly more important to the country thnn Washington, for Wei-hiuirton 13 a focus of reitber foreign commerce nor domestic trade, neither manufactures, agriculture nor min- ing, neither litei ature nor art. Tue climate of the city is not veiy healthy, and the presence oi Cou- gress and of the hangei»-on of Congress does not make tbe city a better place of residence for young uu.ii at the forming period of life. There is no precedent in Europe tor a single, dominant, na- tional university endowed by government, and the only one so endowed, and situated at a national capital. London is in everv possible sense the capital of Great Britain; but the chief universi- ties of Great Britain are not in London. Berllu is the seat of a Prussian university subsidized by the State; but Prussia subsidizes several other univer- sities as well. The university of Paris is only the largest branch of that single organization of pub- lic instruction which spreads all over France, is maintained by the government, and preside 1 over like the aimy and the navy by a minister. In con* tment a) Europe all universities are subsidized by government. Such is the custom of those coun- tries,— a custom which is certainly not tne out- gronthosfree institutions. The leading univer- sity is now at Leyden.uow at Paris, now at B>- logna, now at Vienna, now at Heidelberg, now at Berlin, and now at Leipzig, the stream of students fiowiLg fitfully from one place to another. The proposed university at Washington wouli bear no resemblance whatever to any of these famius seals of learning, either in its constitution or its surroundings. And now let me recall to your minds for amoment the second outv which was assigned to the com- mittee appointed in St. Louis m 1871. They were in thefiist place to prepare a plan for a national university, and in tbe second place they were "to marshal the strength of the country in systematic and eflective support of the measure." What has really taken place? In introducing the first bill u e have discussed Sei ator H we said, apologeti- cally, "1 ought to say by way of explanation tnat this bill was not sent to me. It was drawn oy seme one, I do not know who, and sent to my col- league, and it is at his request that I preseut it." In presenting the bill which was supposed to bare .the sanction of this a-sociaiiun, Senator Savvy _-r said, "I. wish to say in reference to this bill th.it I mtioouced it by request. . . .1 do not wish co be un- deistood as recommending it." Neither bill was supported by anybody in any wav, and neither bill has been beard of since it was brought into Con- gress until this day. The Senators woo introduced them did not imagine lor a moment that auv legis- lation would crow out of them. As to cue strength of the country being marshalled ineffective sup- port of either of these measures, the idea is com- ical. Tbe whole proceeding is loose, crude, hasty, undignified and unworthy oi the t-ubject. I turn next to my third topic, tbe true policy of our goveri.ment as regards university instruction. In almost all the writings about a uatiou's ujiver- sity, and of course in the cvvo Senate bills now unoer discussion, there will be toundthe implica- tion, if not tbe express assertion, that it is some- how the duly ot our government to maintain a magnificent university. This assumutiou is the foundation upon which rest/ the ambitious pro- jects before us, and many similar schemes. Let, me try to demonstrate that the foundation is itself ui.sonnd. The general notion that a beneficent govern- ment should provide and control an elaborate or- ganization for teaching, .just as it maintains an aimy, a navy or a post-cilice, is of European ori- gin, being a legitimate corollary to the theory of tovernment by Divine right. It is said that the State is a person having a conscience and a in >ral responsibility; thai the government is the visible representative of a people's civilization, and the guardian of its honor and its morals, and should ) e the embodiment of all that is high ano good in the people's character and aspirations. This moral peison. this corporate repiesentative of a Chris- tian ration, has high dnt'es and functions com- mensurate with its great powers, and none more imi ei ative tbun that of diflusmg knowledge and advancing science. ' 1 desire to state this argument for the conduct of high educational institutions by government, as a maiter of abstract duty, with all tbe force which belongs 10 it; lor under aii endless variety of tbm dn-nurses, and with all sorts of amplifications and dilutions, it is a staple commodity with writers upon the relation of government to education. Ine conception ot government upon wl amumentis nased is obsolescent everywhere, lu a tree community the government dies not hold this parental, or patriarchal— I should better say Godlike— position. Our government is a group of servants appointed to do certain uifflcult aud im- poitant work. It is not the guardian of the na- tion's moials; it does not necessarily represent ibe best virtue of the republic, aud is not responsi- ble for the national character, oeing itself one of the products of that character. The doctrine of Siate personality and couscience, and the whole argument to the dignity and moral elevation of a Christian nation's government as the basis of government duties, are natural enough under Grace of God governments, but they find no ar> undof practical application to modern republi- can confederations; they have no bear- ing on governments considered as purely human agencies with defined powers and limited responsibilities. Moreover, tor most Americans these arguments prove a greats. deaJ,wB*mucb; for if they have the least tendency to persuade us that government should direct any part of secular education, with how xuuch greater force do tbey apply to the conduct by government of the religious education of the people. These propositions are indeed the main arguments for an e?tablisbed church. Keligion is the supreme hu- man interest, government is the m;>reuje human organization; therefore government ought to take care for religion, and a Christian noverument stould maintain distinctively Christian religious institulioiis. This is not theory aloue; it is the pravlice of all Christendom, except in America and Switzerland. Mow we do not admit it to be our duty to establish a national church. We believe not only that our people are more religious than many nations which have established churches, but als i that they are far more religious under tueir own voluntary system than they would be under any government establishment of religion. Wedo not acmit for amoment thai establishment or no establishment is synonymous with national piety or impiety. Now, if a beneficent Chris- tian government may lightly leave the people to provide themselves with religious institutions, surely it mav leave them to provide suitable uni- versities for the education of their youth. And here again the question of national university or no national university is by no means synonymous with the question— Shall the country have good university education or not'/ The only question is, shall we nave a university supported and con- trolled ty government, or shall we continue to rely upon universities supported and controlled by other agencies? There is then no foundation whatever for the as- sumption that it is the duty of our government to establish a national university. I venture to state one broad reason why our government should not establish and maintain a university. If the peo- ple of the United States have any special destiny, any pecu'iar function in the world, it is to try to work out under extraordinarily favorable circum stances the problem of free institutions for a heterogeneous, rich, multitudinous population spread over a vast territory. We indeed want to breed scholars, artists, poets, historians, novel- ists, ergmeers, physicians, jurists, theologians and orators; but, first of all, we want to breed a race of independent, self-reliant freemen, capable of helping, guiding and governing themselves. Now the habit of being helped by tbe government, even if it be to things good in themselves -to churches, universities and railroads— is a most insidious aud irresistible ene- rnv of republicanism; for the very essence of re- publicanism is self-reliance. With the continen- tal nations of Europe it is an axiom that the gov- ernment is to do everything, and is responsible for everything. The French have no word for "public spirit," for the reason that the sentiment is un- known to them. This abject dependence ou the government is an accursed inheritance from the dajs of the divine right of kings. Americans, on i tlie contrary, maintain precisely the opposite ! theory, namely, that government is to do nothing not expressly assigned it to do, that it is to per- foim no function which any private agency cau peiloimaswell, and that it is not to do a public good even, unless that good be otherwise unat- tainable. It is- hardly coo much to say that this doctrine is tbe foundation of ourpublic liberty. So long as tbe people are really free tbey will main- tain it m tbeorv and in praciiee. During the war oi tbe rebellion we got accustomed to seeing tbe government spend vast sums of raoueyandput > forth vast efforts, aud we asked ourselves 1 why should not somej of those great, i resources aud powers be applied to works of peace, to creation as well as to destruction? so we sub- 6idizeo raihoads aud steamship companies, an I agricultural colleges, and now it is proposed to subsidize a university, ibe fatal objection to this subsidizing process is that it saps the foundations of public liberty. The only adequate securities ot public liberty are the national uabits, traditions at.d character acquired and accumulated in the practice of liberty aud self-control. Interrupt • these traditions, bieik up these habits or cultivate | the opposite ones, or poison that national ehar.ic- ! ter, and public liberty will suddenly be found de- fenceless. Yfe deceive ourselves dangerously when we think or speak as If education, whether primary or university, could guaiantee republicau institutions. Educatiou can oo no such thing. A republican people should indeed be educated aud intelligent fbut it by no means follows that an ed- ucated and intelligent people will be republican. Do 1 seem to conjure up iwaginarj evils to follow from this beneficent establishment of a superb national university? We teachers should be the last people to forget the sound advice— obsta pnn- cipiis. A drop of water will put out a spark which otherwise would have kindled a conflagration tint rivers could not quench. Let us cling fast to the genuine American meth- od,— the old Massachusetts method— in the mat- ter of public instruction. Tbe essential features of that system are local taxes for universal ele- mentary education voted by the citizens them- selves, local elective boards to spend the money raised by taxation and control the schools, and for the hiuher grades of instruction permanent endow- ments administered by incorporated bodies of trustees. This is the American voluntary syste 11, in sharp contrast with the military, despotic or- ganization of public instruction wnich prevails tn Prussia and most other states of continental Eu- rope. Both systems have peculiar advantages, the crowning advantage of the American metJod being that it breeos freemen. Our ancestors well undei stood the principle that to make a people free and self-reliant, it is necessary to let them takecaieof themselves, even if they do not take quite as good care of themselves as some superior power might. And now, finally, let us ask what should make a university at the capital of the United States, es- tablisheoandsuppcrted by the general government, more national than any other American univer- sity. It might be larger and richer than any other, and it might not be : but certainly it could not have a monopoly of patriotism or of catholicity, or of literary or scientific enthusiasm, .there is an attractive comprehensiveness and a suggestion of public spirit and love of country in the term "national"; but after all the adjective only nar- rows and belittles the noble conception contained in tbe word "university." Letters, science, art, philosophy, medicine, law and theology are larger and more enduring than nations, these is some- thing childish in this uneasy hankering for a big university in America, as there is also in that im- patient longing for a distinctive American litera- ture which we so olteu bear expressed. As American life grows more various and richer in sentiment, passion, thought and accumulate 1 ex- perience, American liteiature will become richer aud more abounding, and in that better day let us hope that there will be found several universities in America, though by no means one in each State, as free, liberal, rich, national and glorious as tie warmest advocate of a single, crowning university at tie national capital could Imagine his desired institution to become. <&, ** CL (^ cvtCZZ-t^'iJll • A NATIONAL UNiVEllSITT. Tbe address of President Eliot of Harvard College befoie tbe American Educational Asso- ciation on tbe scbeuie of a national university will attract tbe attention of all educators. It is a tboiougb exposure of the weakness of tbe movement so far as it bas been devel- oped, and ot tbe weakness of tbe theory upon which it is based. So sharp aud fatal a puncturing of a plausible sophistry is seldom made, and we do cot think tbe body before which it was delivered will care to be louger identified with a movement in favor of wbich little that partakes of reason or sound views, touching either government or educatiou, can be said. It is a matter of public con- gratulation that President Eliot was able to show that the Educational Association is hardly responsible, except in the way of easy, good-natured -tol- eration, for the scheme which certain members have endeavored to launch with its approval. It is not mucb to the credit of this association that it bas lent its ceuntenance, even to the extent it has done, to the foolish pioposiiion ; and if it knows what is becom- ing and what makes for its own reputation among intelligent Americans, it will retreat as gracefully as possible. Theie is not a worse fallacy than this which assumes that tbe gov- ernment is in any respect bouud to provide the means of university education, that the government of a republic is a kind of profes- sional school-master, standing in loco parentis to all the youth of tbe nation. The govern- ment has one" duty to see that means are pro- vided for imparting such a degree of educa- tion to every child as shall qualify him for an intellisent performance of. the simple duties of a fiee citizen. It has no concern to edu- cate them for lawyers, or clergymen, or phy- sicians, or farmers, or chemists, or statesmen, or journalists, or merchants, or for any other of the thousand aud one spscialties by which. men make their living or their fame. The wonder is that, in these days of appli- cation for government aid, the Crispius have not besought Congress for an appropriation of public land or bonds for the establisbment of a Great National Brogau Manufactory at the seat of government, to illustrate the ad- vantages of short hours and higb wages. Should the professors of agricultural colleges ever get what they want, we may confidently look for the establishment of a model plauta- tion in the vicinity of Washington, to be run by a veteran reserve corps of ambitious theorists, for whom there is not occupation in the class-rooms of State agricultural colleges. Or it might be used as an asylum for students who have learned how to cultivate potatoes at a loss in some of the tributary eleemosynary colleges. Whoever has much acquaintance with the condition of the country knows that we aie about as much in want of a national college of tailor- ing, an* hsuse-building, and pork-slaughter- ing, and bookkeeping, and railway manage- ment, as of agriculture and the mechanic arts. Nor is thtre any doubt whatever that each of these interests has quite as guod a claim on the fostering liberality of the government as any other department of business. In pres- ence of the Miller's Kiver nuisance who will presume to affirm that the business ot slaugh- tering animals has reached- the degree of aesthetic and utilitarian innocuousness that might be attained if governuent schools were established, where the aspiring butcher and Tenderer might be taught by professors nom- inated by the member of Congress for the district, and practised in model slaughter- houses ? It is safe to say that the proportion of citizens to whom it is a matter of happi- ness to be well dressed is larger than of those who desire to enter the learned professions or even to become scientific agriculturists. Why should there not be a national college of tailoring, aud nest to it a national college of dressmaking and millinery? The possi- bilities of human culture are yet but narrowly apprehended by our zealous subsidy pleaders. We counsel the industrial classes to watch this matter, and not suffer a bill for a naiioual university to pass with provision for only ten faculties. Ten faculties for the great American Natioual University ! The inade- quacy of the scheme is one of its most aston- ishing features. If government is going into this business it should do the thing hand- somely. No discriminations in favor of head- work must be tolerated. Where is the grand army of working-men ? Let them look to it that the public lands are not exclusively ap- propriated by the non-producing classes. A demand for national working-men's colleges wouldn't be out of place in the labor party's platform. It was a grievous blunder on the part of the national government that this business of subsidizing professional schools was ever be- gun. We do not begrudge any reasonable appropriation, whether of money or land, for fostering public schools, but this also ought to be of the Dature of aid and encouragement rather than of endowment. Everything we see leads us to suspect that there will be in Washington this winter another aud more numerous lobby of scientific and agricultural college presidents and professors. It would be a good thing for the people to give them and the members of Congress now at home some positive knowledge that any measure i like that concocted and nearly successful last ' winter is not approved. We have no enmity to agricultural schools, or scientific schools, or technical schools, or schools of any of the practical arts, but we do say that they are not the affair of the national government. And we object with all strenuousness to the dangerous notion that the national govern- ment is under any obligation to foster them by subsidies, however useful they might prove. The paper by President Eliot is explicit and forcible on this point. It deserves attention as the mature thought of one of the foremost educators of the country, and we hope its cogent reasoning may have wide publicity, particularly at this time when legislators are so weakly wiUing to give heed to every sounding profession of zeal for the public welfare that looks to the public treasury for its resources. LIBRARY OF C0 NGR E SS 029 479 522 4