Georgia's educational work : what it has been ; what it should be

GEORGIAS EDUffllQMI
WHAT IT HAS BEEN: WHAT IT SHOULD BE.
"HAMMONDS HISTORY" CORRECTED, ETC,
BY W. A. CANDLER, D. D.,
President of Emory College, Oxford Georgia.
ATLANTA, GA.: THE FOOTE A DAVIES CO.

/LA 31*1
A WORD PERSONAL AND PREFATORY.
In 1881 a policy of unfairness towards sister institutions of learning in the State was begun by the University at Athens. To carry it out for the first year, an appropriation of $2,000 was sought and obtained from the legislature, this being about the amount collected from tuition fees before the free tuition policy was inaugurated. For subsequent years a " companion piece " of legislation (so Col. Hammond of the University Board of Trustees calls it) was secured in the form of the funding bill of 1881, which operates to secure indirectly an annual appropriation of Above $8,000 for at least fifty years.
The Board of Visitors to the University for the year 1881 disclosed the purpose of the whole scheme in two paragraphs of their report to the Governor. They made in urging the adoption of the scheme two notable points.
1. They said: "The first result will be a large increase of students at Athens from the ranks of the freshman fl,nd sophomore classes in the branch colleges."
2. They said: " This step " [referring to the effort then being made by the Baptists and Methodists to thoroughly endow Mercer and Emory] " is rendered absolutely neces sary by the inroads which the branch colleges of the University under the free tuition system will certainly make upon the. patronage of both those excellent literary foundations" i. e., upon the patronage of Emory and Mercer.
Here then was the scheme: Let the University draw off the patronage of its own branches and they in turn draw off the patronage of the church colleges. To carry it out money was necessary and bills were pushed through the legislature in the following September to take from the State treasury $2,000 directly for the first year, and upwards of $8,000 indirectly every year for fifty years

thereafter. Thus the sinews of war were to be supplied tocarry on the fight upon the church schools.
The scheme did not succeed as well as was anticipated, and when the first lease of the Western and Atlantic Rail way was nearing its expiration a new plan was sprung. An effort was made to secure a. part of the rental under the second lease for the further increase of the annual in come of the University and for the establishment of branch colleges in the ten congressional districts of the State. In this way the University would have been able to accomplish a sort of educational monopoly at the ex pense of every other college in the State, male and female, for the branch colleges were to be opened to girls. It will be observed that the money was to come from the rental of the Western and Atlantic Railway and not out of taxes,, though of course it would have amounted to the same thing in its cost to the people. It is a notable fact that by the act of December 21,1821, by which what is called "the debt due the University" was created, and by thefunding act of September, 1881, and by the bill of 1389, the treasury of the State has been approached by the friends of the University through measures of such form as to arouse as little fear as possible concerning the cost to the people.
In this connection I may make a brief digression to say the Educational Bill of 1889 (which was defeated) did not propose any increased aid to the common schools. It proposed to give, them, as was already provided by law,, half the rental of the Western & Atlantic Railway. This also might be regarded as a prudential feature in the bill to conciliate popular favor. It was an unnecessary provision.
While the measure was pending in the House of Repre sentatives, the president of Mercer University and myself were invited to address the General Assembly upon the subject of Higher Education. The friends of the pending measure at least some of them were not pleased that we should be invited to speak. They could not well make

open opposition in the Legislature to the joint resolution of invitation, but privately and in the columns of the newspapers they expressed their disapproval, and when on the morning before we were to speak at 8 p.m., the Senate sent to the House, asking its concurrence a resolu tion convening the General Assembly for the .purpose of tearing our addresses, it was staved off with a parliamentary
technicality and was never acted upon, though if it had
been allowed to. reach a vote, it would have been adopted
in less than two minutes. But despite the unwillingness of these persons that we should have a full hearing, we were heard. Wedid not impertinently discuss the details
of any measure pending in the legislature, but confined our remarks to the general principles of the subject.
Our addresses were stenographically reported, and mine was printed in pamphlet form, as it appears in Chapter I of this volume. On August 8th, Hon. N. J. Hammond, Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the University, addressed the General Assembly, and in the course of his
remarks, was candid enough to admit that at least a part of his address was made because our addresses had been delivered. Though he freely discussed some of my ntter-
Jances, I was willing to rest the case without further de bate in newspapers or elsewhere.
On August 30th, I addressed by invitation an education. A! mass meeting, held in Putnam county, under the auspices of the County Alliance. At the conclusion of my ^address on that occasion, the following resolution was of fered and unanimously adopted:
"WHEREAS, the views of President Candler, of Emory College, on education by the State, as expressed in his recent address before the General Assembly, and in his remarks before this meeting to-day, eeem to bo in accord with the views of the Farmers Alliance upon this subject,
Resolved, That we request him to enlarge upon these views in a letter, or series of letters, addressed to the people of Georgia, in which he is requested to state what amounts .have first and last been expended by the State for common

6

schools, and what for higher education; what debt, if anyr the State owes the University at Athens, and what, in his judgment, should be the educational policy of the State.""

In response to this request, I prepared and published

through the Atlanta Constitution the letter which makes-

the second chapter of this volume. It is printed just as

it appeared in that paper. The essential facts and con

clusions of that letter have never been successfully con

troverted, and as Hon. N. J. Hammond truly says: " it

sided to defeat the bill," to which reference has been,

made.

The letter was widely read, and not a few writers and

speakers have since drawn data from it. Because of the-

influence of this letter, I have been much abused in some-

quarters, and early in the mouth of May, 1893, Hon. N. J.

Hammond stepped back the distance of a hundred years-

into the constitutional history of the United States and

Georgia to get a running start to overcome that letter and.

its influence, by a series of letters printed in the Atlanta

Constitution.



He raised much dust along the way about Dr. Franklin,,

prayers, oaths, liberty of conscience, etc.; but finally, when

he reached the matter he was driving for from the first^.

like the boy in the fable, he fell into the stream he sought

to leap across. "Circumstances compelled the closing of

his weekly articles" after only a few letters hal passed

between us in the columns of the Constitution. But, un

disturbed by his fall, he has gathered up his letters, re

vised and enlarged them by about fifty additional pages,,

tacked ,on to them two of his speeches and out of the-

whole has perpetrated a small book. As my utterances-

furnished the text for most of what his booklet contains, I

have thought that perhaps I owed him the service of put

ting some of my writings together, that the public might

be able to find out what he is after. Accordingly, I have-

arranged the following brief chapters for the accomoda-

tion of Col. Hammonds readers, aud to help, as far as I

may the people to understand properly the educational situation in Georgia. I have not felt it necessary to add anything beyond some foot notes in reply to what Col. Hammond has pat in his book, bat which did not appear in his letters to the Conttitution. His added matter is in this way easily disposed of.
For good reasons I have added an appendix which will be found to contain valuable information on the general subject of education.
The foregoing statement is made to explain the origin of this book and-the reason for its publication. If care fully read, this little volume will be found to contain a very full statement of " GEORGIAS EDUCATIONAL WORK."

CHAPTER I.
HIGHER EDUCATION.
AN ADDRESS DELIVERED IN THE HALL OF THE HOUSE OF REPKESENTATIVES, ATLANTA, JULY 23D.
Mr. President and Gentlemen of the General Assembly:
I am glad to have the opportunity of speaking to this body, at this time, upon this great subject. I can almost go the length of a hearty Georgian, who said to me to-day: "You speak to the cleanest legislature, in the cleanest capitol, of the cleanest commonwealth, of the cleanest union, on the cleanest continent of the cleanest planet in the uni verse." (Applause and laughter.)
I speak from a standpoint that may bring a phase of the subject before you, which, otherwise, might escape your at tention : from the standpoint of one who presides over a religious institution. Mr. President, the church in the United States (meaning by that, all the churches), has a right to be heard upon this subject, and her opinions are much to be valued, for she may be regarded as an expert in higher education, however unable she may be to take care of the primary schools.
There are 365 colleges and universities in the United States, according to the recent report of the National Com missioner of Education. We have one for every day in the year. Of these 365 institutions, 278 belong to the churches of America; of the 65,000 college students of the United States, more than 50,000 are in church schools.* Thege colleges, gentlemen, do not ask of the State, appro-
The cause of higher education would go forward In the United States if no State appropriations were ever again made to it.

9
priations or other help, bat they do ask of the State that she4 will give themthe protection of good government, and enact no legislation unfriendly to them." They think they have a right to ask this much. They know they serve the country well.
I cannot speak definitely -of all of them, but I am sure you will pardon me if I speak definitely of the institution over which I have the honor to preside, and from which I was graduated. She graduated her first class in 1841, and except during the four years of the war when her boys wereoff at the front, she has graduated a class every year since that time, until at length she has graduated 1,000 Georgians. I do not think they have been worse citizens, or worse statesmen, or worse soldiers, or worse anything that it is good for men and citizens to be, because they learned science at a religious school. I do not think that L. Q. C. Lamar, Associate Justice of the United States, is any the worse judge to-night because on another night un der the oak trees Of Emorys campus, he found God as a personal Savior, and" thereafter continued the study of science under the inspiration of Christianity. I do not think that the Hon. John T. Clark, whom all Georgians mourn to-day,* who preached righteousness as a preacher, who stood up against a military commander and refused to bend the civil law to usurping military authority I do not think he was any the worse judge because he learned science at Mercers altars. (Applause.)
The religious colleges have done well for the State. I observe that Emory college has graduated 5S college pres idents and pi ofessors. It may serve to give you some com prehension of how much she has done on this line, to com pare her work with other institutions. I wish I had the figures for all, but I have not. Up to 1875 I think it was that year Chancellor Tucker delivered an address in which he said the University of Georgia had graduated 30 presi-
*The news of the sudden death of Judge John T. Clark by a rail way accident had just reached Atlanta.

10
dents and professors of colleges. Emory has graduated 15 circuit judges, two judges of State Supreme courts, one judge of the Supreme Court of the United States, 15 con gressmen, 2 bishops, 5 generals of the confederate army and 10 foreign missionaries. She is doing this country good, and extending her influence beyond the seas. She is serving the State and it is costing the State nothing; she gives )ut.asks nothing in return, save that she shall be protected by the law, and not hindered by any unfriendly influence or legislation. Can the State, can anybody in the State who really loves the State, whatever may be his theory of education, refuse to foster these religious insti tutions that do the work of higher education as well as any and cost the State nothing for the doing of it?
I have had some opportunity to observe the educational interests of Georgia, and I love the cause. I have been observing the work of Emory College and of the other col leges in Georgia since I was a boy; for when a college boy I wrote articles in the newspapers, pressing this cause of education. To this cause I have given mind and money since I came to manhood. You will pardon me for saying that I have not been able to accomplish a gross income for all the years of my life, of as much as $15,000, but I have laid down $1,000 of it for the cause of higher educa tion in Georgia. It cannot be said, therefore, that I have been an indifferent observer of this great work and of the best method of accomplishing that which we all desire, the most and the best education for all the people, I beg you to believe me, as I address you to-night, to be the friend aud adyocate of higher education in the best sense of the word.
It was upon this question of higher education, I was invited to speak to you, and I suppose you mean that I shall speak upon that question as it presents itself to-day, with the conditions in Georgia such as they are. We are not here to discuss this question as we might have dis cussed it had we been with the fathers away back in the

11
latter part of the last century. The question is not what it was then. We are not here to discuss it as we may dis cuss it twenty years hence: the conditions will havechanged ; our financial condition, our educational status, all that goes to shape our educational policy all will have changed by then. But as we have it to-day, what isthe best way of fostering higher education in Georgia?1 My opinion is, the best way to do this, is to appropriateevery dollar that you have to appropriate to education, to the education of the common people to our common
schools. (Applause.) Two theories of education exist in the minds of men ; .
good men, honest men in Georgia to-day. One theory isr that we should begin at the top and reach downward; theother theory is that we should begin at the bottom and work upward. The first theory has had a long trial. Itwas begun before the close of the last century. In 1785r 40,000 acres of land were voted to establish a seminary of learning for higher education; 5,000 of these acres werelost by the treaty of Beaufort. The.35,000 remaining weresold mostly for notes of hand, secured by mortgage and personal security. They did not realize interest. The funds were incompetent for the work of the college which was in due time begun. The State came in and said to the trustees at their request, "If you want to subscribe for bank stocks,and you cannot realize on these.notes,bring them up, and I will furnish ready money to the amount of twothirds the value of them." Accordingly, the State advanced. 9100,000 to the college, which amount was invested in bank stock. Subsequently, (in 1821) the friends of the school secured the passage of a bill by which the State agreed to see that bank stock always yielded $8,000 by making up thedeficiency from the State treasury whenever the dividend fell short of this figure. So that has been continued through the years until upwards of $500,000 has been thuspaid to the University. When a difficulty has arisen, additional relief has been provided by the legislature in

12
one way or another; now a loan, now a gift for repairs, now one thing and now another, until I find by a recent publication of the Educational Bureau at Washington, our University has come to a point where according to its centennial catalogue, it owns property estimated as worth $663,000.00 and has an annual income of over $30,000. Has all this produced common, schools? I think we are all familiar enough with the facts to know this method has not built up the common schools. Virginia tried the same policy with much the same result. The University of Virginia has had under its tuition 9,000 students, and it has made in the course of its history only about 500 teach ers, according to a recent publication. of the Bureau of Education at Washington, a publication entitled: "Thos. Jeffers.on and the University of Virginia." It .has pro duced in that time abqut 2,000 lawyers, but they wont teach school. (Laughter.) This process does not make teachers, but does create a ruling class. Mr. Jefferson saw the difficulty, and so he wrote to his friend, Joseph Cabell, Jan. 13th, 1823, "Were it necessary to give up either the primaries or the University, I would rather abandon the latter, because it is safer to have the whole people respect ably enlightened, than a few in a high state of science and the many in ignorance. This last is the most dangerous state in which a nation can be. The nations and the governments of Europe are so many proofs of it." Mr. Jefferson was right, and our experiment has confirmed the wisdom of his words.
We shall not be able to lift the common school from abov,e, but by getting down under the common school, we flhall be able to lift it up, and all that is above it. We may lift in the middle and prize the upper part of our population higher and press the lower part lower, until there shall be a yawning chasm between them that will not TDO good for any of us. (Applause.) But if we work upon the common school, we will lift all together, for getting an education is a good deal like getting rich. It is the .

13
first thousand dollars that costs the most labor and is the hardest to get; after that the next comes easier, and the next easier still and the next easier still. I am sure of this by experience, for I have not yet accumulated the first thousand. (Laughter.) If you will give a boy the keys that unlock the vestibule to education, depend upon it, if he is fit to approach tht inner shrine he will find the pass word, grips and signals and secure admission to the higher degrees. Here was that able Chancellor of the University, Patrick Mell, a poor boy in Warren county.
DR. NUNNALLY : Liberty county. DR. CANDLER : I thought it was Warren, so I saw it stated the other day. He got the beginning of an educa tion and then worked his way to Amherst college. Down at Emory this last year there were fifty young men work ing their way through college. While I speak to-night they are all about in Georgia working to make their expen ses for the next term; and I have thought if the angels who watched over the slumbering Jacob that first night from home, have not lost their sympathy for struggling boys, they are nearer to-night to those 50 boys and others like them in Georgia, than to any other people between Tybee and Rabun Gap. (Great applause.) The Indians have a legend that is not altogether a legend; it is also a parable. It is to the effect that a warrior slain by another imparts his strength in death to the hand that overcame him. It is so with a young man struggling for higher education. His difficulties help him; they give him education which books cannot give. They give him education of strength and courage and independence which can be acquired in no other way than by struggling and conquering. There are half a million children in Georgia between six and eighteen years old who need to have a chance to enter this struggle. If we we shall send down to them through the common schools all the money we can spare, we shall stimulate these young lives to thoughtfulness, to thirst and hunger after learn-

14
ing. They will begin to work, friends will begin to help them and our colleges will be filled with students. But if on the other hand, we give sparingly to them, and follow the old ante-bellum policy, that before the war was adopted all along the south Atlantic slope, we shall continue to have multitudes unlearned and a few taught at the expense of the many. If we ever have higher education in any .great degree, it must be by helping primary education. Who of us can be opposed to higher education? God bless every institution of learning in Georgia; the institution of the Baptists; the University of Georgia; Emory and that unborn University of the Presbyterians, but most of Jill may the kind Father in Heaven send the spirit to our people to give help to the 500,000 and more children in the country who most need it! (Applause.)
Mr. President, do we comprehend how many of. these children there are, and who they are? There are 560,281 in Georgia. Where do they live? In your cities? No, they are not there; 490,270 do not live in cities. It is worse than that, 475,738 of Georgia children live outside of all the incorporated cities, towns and villages in the State. They do not have the stimulation of the multitude going to and fro; they do not have the inspiration of com merce. Living in the country untaught, poor; how sadly they need helpl Among them are some of the brightest .and best minds, among them there are some like Patrick Mell, and Alexander H. Stephens, and this start which we ought to give them would bring them up to our colleges, to our universities, but they can never get that stdrt ot themselves. Why? For this reason: you cannot get teachers for them. Have we not graduated teachers? Yes. Why dont they teach? I answer, the rewards in other lines cf life are so much greater than the rewards of teaching, they cannot afford to teach. They prefer to fol low the more pi ofitable lines.* I wish they and all of us
* This does not apply to the common schoos for negroes as it does to the common schools f >v whites. Negro graduates cannot turn to law, medicine or merchandise with the hope of receiving- remunera tion equal to thai, they secure by teaching. Hence-negro schools will prosper with or without increased appropriations. But not so with the whites.

15
were more self-denying and more patriotic, but men are as we find them. They will not Leach without fair compensa tion, without that which gives them permanent support. I take it that graduates of our University, and our other colleges, are not worse than others, that they are good men, that they love Georgia, but not many turn to teach ing. We have graduated enough, yet do you know it is a fact that we have not graduated men willing to bear the burdens of even the colleges yet. I think I am correct when I say that our State University which has just cele brated its 100th anniversary, (a little prematurely, per haps, for I believe the first class graduated in 1804; but she has just celebrated some kind of centennial,) has never found a chancellor among its own alumni. Its graduates are men of ability, why have they forsaken the school room ? Why turn aside elsewhere ? Just because you do not make it profitable enough to teach, but other things are profitable; that is why. That is a hard saying maybe, but that is simple truth. If we put the-money down which the common people have not, and which they are not likely to have for awhile, we will find teachers. Georgia has educated men but the means to secure them as teachers has not been put down by the State.
There are 460,000 children who do not live in any town, much" less a county town. You can not reach them by putting money down in ten congressional districts. They could not get to those schools. Schools for them must be at their doors. One must be in each militia district, and on "this side of the creek" to all of them. If on the other side they will never get across. (Laughter.) And to do all this, means money, and a very great deal of money, money enough to make these schools run eight months in the year; for you must remember that a teacher does not eat, sleep and wear clothes three months only. The other nine months of the year he goes on sleeping and wearing clothes and eating, and you must make provision for his years support.

16
Building up the common schools is the shortest route to higher education in Georgia. If our colleges are waning it is largely for the lack of the material which the common schools should supply. The University and all the colleges, so far as I know, have had to do sub-freshman work. But now high schools are springing up. There is a school at Barnesville, Gordon Institute, an excellent training school. There is still another at Wrightsville, and one north of the Blue Ridge, Young Harris Institute; there is ah ex cellent school at Cave Spring, and another at Edgewood.. Some of the smaller towns, Newnan, Cartersville and West Point, and others, are establishing good training schools. When these schools have done all they can for their pupils we have the University already in possession of property estimated at over half a million of dollars, and Emoryand Mercer for their higher education. Below them, however, we must have the common schools, or these high schools can do nothing. The common schools will feed the high schools, and the high schools will feed the colleges. That will make the colleges at Athens and Oxford and Macon flourish, for they will be supplied with the prepared material that colleges must have before they can be of any service to the country.
Again, suppose you continue the old plan, and that, as has never been the case, you should be able to graduate by means of larger appropriations to higher education many teachers; you cannot get these "teachurs through college before this generation of country children will have gone beyond school age. The school age of a child lasts for a few years only. Georgias half million children cannot wait for teachers to be made; they are getting older every day, every night; while they wake and while they sleep they are getting older, and I tell you to-night there are 460,000 in the country, away from the towns, away from the cities, our " country children," as we say I tell you there are 460,000 of them who will very soon be past your teaching, or anybody elses teaching. If you are to do anything for them, you are to do it quickly. If we shall

17
rob them of their chance, we will hare done them an irre. parable injury, one such as the summer would suffer in the blight of the spring. It is a chance that comes but once; aud if the common schools shall continue inefficient for four or five years until we can, in the colleges, prepare teachers who will work for next to no pay if, indeed, we can ever prepare such this generation of children will be gone past teaching.
Other things, it seems to me, in Georgia can wait, but not this. I am not sure but that we can wait to have some more railroads built. I think we can wait to get rich; the good old Book has some wise suggestions about those who make haste to get rich. But our children can wait no longer for good common schools. They must have them now or nevef.
I think we are less alarmed in the United States when we ruin a crop of children than when we lose a crop of cotton or barley. What must become of a 460,000 crop of children down yonder in the country unless something is done? If it were 460,000 colts, I think our friends of the Farmers Alliance would have something to say about it, If it were 460,000 sheep that were being slain by the dogs, that dog-law which is before you would stand a better chance of passage. (Laughter.) But it is 460,000 chil dren, and we say " if they can get to school it is all right, and if not it is still all right." We must not waste chil dren that way. At last this world is made for people, and not people for this world. God did not put us down here to keen things from being lonesome, but he made things for us, aud the cattle on a thousaud hills, and our harvest fields and our railroads are absolutely nothing until we have turned them into blessings to our children. Remem ber this, and remember that down yonder among the poor are 460,000 of this young crop of children that need help ing and not wasting. There is where the money of the State should go to-day. Our University and colleges will in their present condition, without additional appropriations,

18
work up all the material the common schools and acade mies are likely to supply. And as for the special help which they must have, let our rich men supply them for awhile until the State has done for the common schools all that is needed.
Mr. President, have you thought about the duty of our rich men to our colleges? They do not give enough for higher education. The churches look too much to what they call " financiering." I shall be sorry when I see the trustees of Emory College go to " financiering." There is no way to financier a church college into plenty of money except a little process that hangs about six inches in length if your pocket dont hang too low. (Laughter.)
Our people dont give to the State college as they ought. Jefferson said, and he was not disappointed, that the benefactions to the University of Virginia would, by and by, overtop all the State could or would spare to it, and his words has come true. I look at this pamphlet [hold ing up a pamphlet on the University of Virginia,] recently prepared, and I find since 1865 private benefactions to the University of Virginia have run to $891,000. What have we done in Georgia ? Some have waited upon foreign ef forts ; some have financiered and have looked somewhere else than to going into their pockets, and doing by volun tary benevolence that which needs to be done for our col leges and University. We have been depending upon some thing else than giving. We need a revolution at this point; we need preaching upon it, and writing upon it, and talking upon it, and may be, a little wholesome, goodhumored quarreling upon it.
I was told to-day that, up to this time, no alumnus of the University of Georgia, many of whom have grown rich by means of the culture acquired there, have ever made a .gift to the University notable enough to get into history. It is time we had done better. We have begun to do some thing for Emory. Mr. Roberts, the Financial Secretary of the College, and myself have worried the Methodists

19
-until we have got them to give us about $25,000 during the past year, and they will have to give us $25,000 more be tween this and Christmas year, or be the worst bothered folks in this country. (Laughter.) I worry them, and tease them, and pray for them, and cry over them, and work with them, and will continue to do so until they do something for Emory worthy of themselves. And I hope my good friend, the Chancellor, will worry the graduates and the friends of the University until they divide their wealth with it. If he gets them aroused, their spirit may become contagious and the Methodists may catch it. And I trust that Dr. Nunnally will worry the Baptists in behalf -of Mercer. If he will get after the Baptists on this line we Methodists will have peace for awhile. Now we cant build .a church that the Baptists dont turn a creek down that way and come bothering us. (Great laughter.) If you will annoy and bother them they will do something for Mercer and forget to quarrel with the Methodists.
DR. NUNNALLY: They are not having any rest. DR. CANDLER : That is right. Shake them up. They cannot fall from grace; what is the use of their resting. (Tumultuous laughter and applause.) Our people yonder in the country are poor, but many of our people in the cities have grown wealthy. They some times cry "hard times," but these are not hard times. These are the best times I ever saw, and I have seen lots of times. (Laughter.) At any rate our rich people have means abundant to take care of the higher education, at least for awhile, until the State has given us common schools for eight months in the year, which is much more -urgent. This great work will tax every resource of the State, and these resources ought to be taxed until there is an eight months school within reach of every child that is born in Georgia. (Applause.) Suppose, Mr. President, you begin to make schools, not for all the people in every neighborhood, but in the county towns, or other favored localities. What will be the re-

20
suit ? You will make those towns richer and the country neighborhoods poorer; for by and by Squire Jones, who lives in the country, and who happens to be a little better off than the rest of the neighborhood, will say: "Look here, I am tired of working for you poor white trash. I am going off and leave 3Tou. You have no efficient school. I am going to town, where I can educate my children."" He and all his sort will go. You will then have congestion in the towns and atrophy in the country. The people who least need schools will flock to town, and they who need them most will he left behind. This will blight our agri culture as well aa damage our people. And remember that Georgia must always be an tgricultural state. But if the State puts a good school in every neighborhood, you will find that one of tine great temptations for moving to town, will have been removed, and you will hear the country people say, " We will stay here, educate our children in the schools that the State has provided, live at home and be happy." Such of their boys as have developed a zeal for learning will go to the high schools, and when a boy has gone through some one of our good training schools, if he has pluck, he can go to the college, and if he has no pluck, he would do no good if he went through a thousand col leges. (Applause.) You will then find young men at Athens, at Oxford, and at Mercer toiling and struggling, and they win succeed and be all the better for their strug gles, just like that noble old Roman, Junius Hillyer, suc ceeded, and Alexander H. Stephens succeeded, and Patrick Me11 succeeded. The colleges will flourish; then country schdols will flourish; and when we have flourishing country schools, a prosperous Univers.ty, and splendid colleges, what more in the line of education will we need ?
Mr. President, I am not so old, and you are not so far away from youth, that we are free from its enthusiasm. Every thought of the old State stirs us, and I tell you when this thought comes to me of what the State can do if she will build up her common schools my emotions are un

21
spaakable. I see a splendid prospect. before her, not a prospect like the history behind us, with a multitude of unlearned, and a few taught, with crippled common schools, with universities and colleges none too well filled; but a splendid State, rich in all that goes to make a state great and powerful, earnest in her commerce, and honest with all, independent in her manhood, and prosperous in every part; with a sky above her as fair as Italias; with an earth beneath her as beautiful as the valley of Sharon; above her and all about her every prospect pleasing and none of her people vile. I believe if this legislature will deliver all its strength and every dollar that the State can spare to help our 460,000 country children down yonder, there is before Georgia a future as fair as the Eden which lingers as a golden age in the memory of mankind, cloud less as the heaven which fills the hopes of the race. (Long end tumultuous applause.)

22
CHAPTER II.
GEORGIAS EDUCATIONAL WORK.
WHAT IT HAS BEEN WHAT IT SHOULD BE.
(From Atlanta Constitution, -Sept., 1889.)
On August 30th, the Farmers Alliance of Putnam coun ty held an educational mass meeting near Wesley Chapel, in that county. The meeting \*as attended by a great multitude, and President Candler, of Emory College,, delivered by invitation an address upon education. At the conclusion of the address, the following resolution wasoffered and unanimously adopted:
"WHEREAS, the views of President Candler, of Emory College, on education by the State, as expressed in hisrecent address before the General Assembly, and in hisremarks before this meeting to-day, seem to be in accord with the views of the Farmers Alliance upon this subject,
Resolved,, that we request him to enlarge upon theseviews in a letter, or series of letters, addressed to the people of Georgia, in which he is requested to state what amounts have, first and last, been expended by the State for common schools, and what for higher education; what debt, if any, the State owes the University at Athens, and what, in his judgment, should be the educational policy of the State."
To the request of the resolution, Dr. Candler makes the following reply:
It gives me great satisfaction to respond, to the extent of my ability, to the aboveTesolution.
There is a more prevalent and potent interest in educa tion now abroad in Georgia than at any other time in the history of the commonwealth. The State is, so to speak,, taking a new departure on the question, and it is import ant that the people have all the facts before them while this increased interest is taking form iu action, that the-

23
educational policy of the State may be intelligently di rected. Much of that which has been done iu the past, has b3&n done without mmh care or information upon the part of the great body of the people. It has been done mainly under the direction of a few persons, and now that the people are awaking to the importance of this great in terest, -they may find it necessary to recast former policies and work, even to the amendment of the State Constitu tion. If it shah be found that the Constitution, or laws in pursuance thereof, do not meet the wants of the people, they can be, and ought to be changed Georgia has had, first and last, a half dozen Constitutions, which she has abrogated or amended at pleasure, and that of 1877 is no more sacred than the rest.
I deeply regret that I have been unable to secure exact figures as to amounts appropriated to common schools prior to the late war. The appropriations were so mixed up with appropriations to county academies, and as a c >mmittee of the legislature in 1828 said, in many cases the funds were " so wasted and misapplied," it is impossi ble to say just how much was really bestowed on the com mon schools, or as they were then called, the "poor schools."
The " county academies " were for a long time the only enterprises of the State for the education of the masses. They were much more nearly institutions for higher edu cation than common schools. In them Latin, Greek, En glish literature ard the higher mathematics were taught.*
They surpassed the New England schools, of which Col. Hammond speaks on page 130 of his bonk. Below Massachusetts 230 high schools, which he mentions, there are 10,000 schools of lower grade, like our common schools, and they are long term schools. When Georgia has mure and. better common schools, our towns will provide the high schools. But let us do as Massachusetts does, de liver the strength of the State on the common schools. Upon her common schools Massachusetts spends in three years more than Geor gia has ever spent on common schools in all her history. Since 1638 (250 years), Massachusetts has only spent $I,7t>4,368 on her colleges, viz: Harvard, Amherst, Wi Hams, the Agricultural College and the Institute of Technology. Georgia has spent about $1,200.000 on the University and its branches in less than half that time

24
When the system was at its best, and the greatest number of academies existed, they were inaccessible to the -over whelming majority of the people of the State.
This academy system was inaugurated by an Act ap proved July 31, 1783, and the institutions created by it were each endowed with 1,000 acres of land, worth about three and a half dollars an acre, and subsequently by Act of December 20, 1792, with one thousand pounds value of confiscated property. Pupils in these academies were re quired to pay tuition, amounting in the case of at least one of them the Richmond Academy, in Augusta to $10 per quarter. It will be seen, therefore, that they were more nearly colleges than free schools; indeed, it may well be doubted that some scnools in Georgia now called colleges are the equals of the Richmond Academy, under W. H. Crawford in 1799, or to old Sunbury, under William McWhir from 1792 to 1820.
But quasi-colleges as they were, these academies absorbed the educational expenditures of the State to the exclusion of the common schools, until 1817, and thenceforward, until 1836, divided equally with the " poor schools " the educational fund of the State. How far they fell short of reaching all the people may be inferred from the fact that in 1840, when they reached the number of 176, they had an aggregate attendance of only 8,000 pupils, though the children of school age then in the State numbered not less than 85,000. During the entire period of their history, the county academies must have cost the State something like $200,000, and in this estimate I do not include $250,000 voted to them by the Act of December 21, 1821. That amount was invested in bank stock of the State Bank for their permanent endowment, and I only estimate the in terest which must have been paid them, as they never re ceived the principal.
Anything like free schools was not begun in Georgia until Dec. 18, 1817, when the legislature, being convinced that the "academy system" was "not.well calculated for

25
the general diffusion and equal distribution of useful learn ing," appropriated $250,000 for the establishment of "poor schools" throughout the State. This amount was invested in bank stock, and the interest only was available. To this was added, in 1818, moneys arising from the sale of certain lands, described in an act known as the "Land Lot tery Act of 1818." Again, in Tecembef 21, 1821, $250,000 bank stock of the Bank of Darien, the State Bank of Sa vannah and the Bank of Augusta, were added to the "poor school fund" by the same Act which gave $250,000 to the county academies.
It must not be forgotten that the interest on these amounts was not devoted to common schools as we now have them, but only to pay the tuition of indigent chil dren. To secure its benefits, parent or child was forced to confess pauperism, and then the child could be sent to school at public expense only three years. The school age was from eight to eighteen years until 1843, when it was changed to eight and sixteen years. In 1836, in 1845 and in 1856, strenuous efforts were made to establish com mon schools; but all failed In 1836, the effort was nearly successful. One-third the surplus revenue, amounting to $350,000, was set apart " as a permanent free school and educational fund," and a joint committee of five from the two branches of the legislature was appointed " to digest a plan of common school education." The legislature re ceived and amended the report of this committee, and in 1837, passed an Act establishing a general system of com mon schools, to take effect in 1839. By that Act the aca demic and poor school funds were consolidated, and a dis tinction which Governor Schley justly characterized as "invidious and insulting," was obliterated. In 1840, the Act establishing common schools was repealed, and the amounts which had been set aside for their maintenance were constituted a " poor school fund." So that the old " poor school fund " and the " academic fund," which fo*
years had flowed together to make common schools,

26
henceforth flowed out as a " poor school fund," and the badge of pauperism attached to anyone who availed them selves of the educational funds of the State, except the students of Franklin College, now called the University.
But one result could follow the fund did next to no good. The people refused such aid. "In 1849 thirty-two counties made no returns of their poor children. In 1850 fifteen counties failed to make returns, notwithstanding the law provided that counties makirg no returns should participate in the educational fund agreeably to the last return on record ; in the same year eight counties received nothing because they had never made a return."* In 1845 only fifty-three of the ninety-three counties in the State applied for their apportionment of the poor school fund, though the penalty for such default was forfeiture of claim. Such a S3stem was much as if Georgia had made no appropriation for elementary education at all. Un der this sjTstem the counties which were poorest, and there fore had the most poor children, by reason of the small amount f their taxable property had the smallest claim on the school fund. For example, Jasper and Newton, with some 120 poor children, paid into the treasury, as State . tax, $8,910, while Union and Gilmer werf able to pay a State tax of only $1,594, and returned 2,884 poor children. By this system help was bestowed where it could well have been spared, and denied where it was most needed.
In addition to the appropriations we have been consid ering, on December 11,1858, an Act was approved appro priating $100,000 of the net earnings of the Western and Atlantic Railroad to the educational fund, which fund was subject to appropriation by the State to any educational purpose. But as the proceeds of the road, which had been built by an issue of scrip, or certificates of State debt, were first to be "applied to the payment of the principal and interest of the bonds of the State issued on -account of the road," and as the road did not always make "net
Jemes "History of Education In Georgia."

27
earnings," the educational fund was little the better off on account of this appropriation. Moreover, the "poor school fund" had no exclusive claim to this appropriation if it had amounted to anything.
Not until after the adoption of the Constitution of 186& did Georgia have any proper system of common schoolsr and this system was not organized until after the passage of the Act of October 13, 1870. The schools were run af ter a fashion in 1871; but as the legislature diverted the school fund to other purposes, at the end of the year there was a debt of about $300,000 due the officers and teachersDuring 1872, by reason of this debt, the schools were sus pended, and the common school system of Georgia did not really begin to live until the year 1873. In January, 1872, " the father of the common schools of Georgia," that great and good man, the late Dr. G. J. Orr, was appointed State School Commissioner, and the common schools of Georgia began in truth to live, move and have their being the year, following. Since then they have gone forward with in creasing efficiency until the present time.
What, I am asked, has Georgia expended upon all this work of elementary education first and last?
It is comparatively easy to answer for the years since 1870. It appears from the reports of the State. School Commissioner that for this period the State has expended $6,070,615.38. To this amount we should perhaps add $1,686,007.76 by cities and counties operating schools un der local laws. There are thirteen cities and four countieswho have operated such systems,* and while, of course, these local enterprises are not fairly to be credited to theState, and do little for the enlightenment of the great masses of Georgias population, we will take thoir expend itures into this account. The grand total of expendi tures for common schools in Georgia since the war, we will therefore put down at $8,756,623.14.
The number has increased since this letter was published.

28
It is not so easy to answer for the years before the war, but we can make a fair estimate however.
By a report of the committee of the legislature, we know that from Dec. 18, 1817, when the "poor school" sys tem began, until June 5, 1820, Georgias investments for the poor schools paid $18,566, and we know by an act of the legislature still of record, $12,000 were distributed in 1822, and that in 1836, the best year, perhaps, the poor school system ever had, $40,000 were distributed. From these figures it will be seen that to estimate an average expenditure of $30,000 a year from 1817 to 1860, will be an over-estimate rather than an under-estimate of Geor gias expenditures for common schools during those years. For the forty-three years intervening between the dates mentioned, at the rate of $30,000 a year, we should have $1,290,000, which added to the $8,756,623 expended since the war, will give us $10,046,623 as Georgias total expend iture for common schools, "first and last," from 1817 to 1889, seventy-two years. Massachusetts spends nearly or quite that much in two years, and has 90,000 less children of school age than Georgia.
Among how many children has Georgia distributed this amount?
Let us see. The school age lasts but ten years; under the
poor school system it lasted but three years. We may, therefore, reckon a new school population- for Bvery ten years. The school population for Georgia is now 560,281; for the present decade, therefore, if we reckon 400,000 as our average school population, we will not overstate the case. From 1870 to 1880, we may put it down as 250,000; from 1860 to 1870, 200,000; from 1850 to i860, 150,000; in 1836 a legislative committee reported it as 83,000, it will be therefore safe to put it at 85,000 from 1840 to 1850; from 1830 to 1840, reckon it 50,000; from 1820 to 1830, 30,000, and from 1817 to 1820, 20,000. From these figures we will derive the aggregate of children having a claim on Oeorgia for elementary education during these seventy-two

29
years as numbering 1,185,000. Fair-minded men will call this a low estimate. Comparing this number of children with the amount expended for common schools, it appears that Georgia has expended for the elementary education of her children in seventy-two years about eight and a half dollars apiece.
If some one objects to including in this estimate the amount expended for the common school education of th~ negroes, let us subtract the amount paid on their account and see how the case stands. The most reliable estimates I can find give the amount expended by Georgia for the com mon schools for the negroes since the war as about $2,300,000, and the number of negro children taught at about 250,000. If these figures are subtracted from the forego ing estimates, it appears that Georgia has given to her white children, for their elementary education during the last seventy-two years, about eight dollars apiece.
In the meantime, what has been done by the State for higher education?
We will not, in this estimate, count the amounts given to the academies though, as we have seen, these amounts might much more properly be charged to the account of higher education than to that of common schools.
In 1785 (January 27) the legislature voted 40,000 acres of land for a college or university, land worth, when it was sold, about $150,000. In 1801 the college was put in oper ation. In 1787, by the treaty of Beaufort, between Geor gia and South Carolina, a tract of university land, con sisting of 5,000 acres, situated between the Tugalo and Seneca rivers, was lost by falling into the State of South Carolina. The remaining lands, not being available for the purposes of the college, the State loaned the University, by Act of Nov. 27, 1802, $5,000.
In 1806 a lottery was authorized by the State to provide a library for the University. I have not been able to ascer tain how much was realized in this way.
By Act of Dec. 15, 1815, the trustees were authorized to

30
ell the University lands, in lots of one hundred acres, at public outcry. But the lands were sold in lots less and more than 100 acres, and Dec. 18, 1816, these sales were validated by special act. The trustees then had on hand many notes secured by mortgage on the lands, but they could not realize on them. If they sued and recovered the land, they would simply recover what could do them no immediate good, and what they did not want. Against some of their sales adverse claims were set up. Providing against this emergency, they secured in the Act approved Dec. 15, 1815, which authorized the sale, a provision that "if any subscription should be opened by any banks in the State at a time when the bonds and mortgages should be uncollected or not due, and a failure to obtain stock on that account would ensue, the trustees of the University, by depositing the whole amou.it of said bonds and mortgages in the treasury of the State, and producing to his Excel lency, the Governor, the treasurers certificate of the same, shall obtain from the Governor a warrant on the treasury for whatever sum, not exceeding two-thirds of the amount of said bonds and mortgages, that may be necessary for subscribing for such number of shares as the proceeds of .said lands, if collected, would authorize them to subscribe for." For #150,000 worth of such land mortgages, Georgia, accordingly, gave the University *100,000, which was invested in stock of the Bank of the State of Georgia, in which it was still invested as late as 1845 (See Whites Statistics, page 76). The University got the money, and the State got as collateral for this advance and ior the previous loan of $5,000, land notes that might or might not be valuable. Some we know were not good; as late as 1823, the State was certainly still worrying with her notes .and making credits upon them as the validity of adverse claims were established. (See act for relief of Lovick Pierce and other purchasers of University lands approved Dec. 20, 1824.) By an Act approved Dec. 21, 1821, Geor gia provided that the permanent endowment of the Uni-

31
versity "shall consist of a sum not less than $8,000 per annum; and that when it so happens that the dividends furnished by the bank stock granted to the University shall not be equal to the sum aforesaid, the Treasurer of this State is required to make up the deficiency semi-annually out of any moneys in the treasury not otherwise appropriated."* This is the origin of the so-called debt due the University of the State. It will be observed the $100,000 was paid and invested in bank stock, and so con tinued at least until 1845, and was perhaps lost when the Bank of the State of Georgia failed. Georgia now has among her nominal assets 1,833 shares of that corporation. But while the principal was thus paid, the State guaran teed 8 per cent, interest on it, although she could then borrow money at 6 per cent. The State has continued until this day to pay (or see that it was paid) the $8,000 per annum." The State now borrows money at 4 per cent., and $8,000 is, therefore, equivalent to interest on $200,000.
In 1816 the State granted to the University another loan of $10,000 against the land notes previously described. If this loan and the loan of 1802 were ever paid, they were paid out of the collections made on these land notes, and since the State gave the land at first, they ought to be reckoned as donations to the University.
By Act of December 18, 1819, a donation of $2,000 was given to the University to build a house for a grammar school.
By Act of December 21, 1821, the State secured to the University a further grant of $25,000, by land sales.
In 1830 the State again loaned the University $10,000, and as late as 1833, the records of the legislature show it
Some say this quasi-endorsement ol the University's bank stock created a debt upon the State; that it has "ripened" into a debt. If this be so, what was the consideration lor which this debt waa given? Suppose some legislature should repeal the Act of Dec. 21, 1821, what would be the effect? Col. Hammond, on page 134 of his book, calls it "systematizing by funding, in 1821, of the University notes " There was no funding of notes in it. It was simply an endorsement of bank stock, already purchased by the University trustees.

32
had not-been repaid; if it has ever been repaid, the record of the payment I cannot find.
In the same year (by Act of December 21, 1830) $6,000 were appropriated annually to the University, " for the purpose of enabling the board of trustees to rebuild the college edifice, and replace the library and instruments destroyed by fire, and for the purpose of defraying the annual expenses of the college," and not " to help poor students," as was recently stated in an address delivered before the General Assembly, by a distinguished trustee of the University. This appropriation was continued until 1841, eleven years.
On March 30, 1872, Governor Smith transferred to the trustees of the University the fund arising from the land scrip, $242,202.f
In February, 1875, the State appropriated $5,000 a year for three years to the branch of the University known as the " Georgia State College of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts," located at Athens.
On September 29, 1881, the legislature appropriated $2,000 a year to the University for four years, to make tuition free
On September 27, 1884, an appropriation of $2,500 was made to repair certain buildings on the University cam pus.
In October, 1887, another repair fund of $5,000 was voted to the University, and $5,000 to the branch college at Dahlonega, and $3,500 each to the branch colleges at Thomasville and Milledgeville.
,In 1888, the legislature appropriated $18,000 to the School of Technology in Atlanta, calling it a branch of the
tThe contract made by GOT. Smith was unauthorized by any law, Federal or State, and I doubt not, is invalid. The majority of the ' committee of the legislature, appointed to investigate the land . scrip in 1891, said in their report: " We doubt if the legislature of the State, by legislative enactment, has eyer located under the terms of the Act of general government, the State College of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts, and thi question should be settled once foral'.."
ITThis appropriation was for only one year. This error is explain ed and corrected in my second letter to Col. Hammond. See Chap. iv.

33

University, that the constitutional difficulty in the way

of such an appropriation might be evaded.

At the same time and in the same manner, $3,000 were

appropriated to the college at Dahlonega; $2,000 to the

college at Milledgeville; $2,OD9 to the college at Thomas-

ville, and $2,000 to the college at Cuthbert.

It will be observed that while from 1841 to 1875 the

University received no special appropriation, since the lat

ter year appropriations have fallen upon it and its

branches thick and fast.

Since 1873, $8,000 a year have been appropriated to the

collegiate education of negroes an amount doubtless sug

gested by the amount appropriated annually to the Uni

versity at Athens.

In 1881, the legislature passed an Act which operates

indirectly as an annual appropriation to the University at

Athens. It provides that whenever the trustees present

any due bond of the State it shall be funded at 7 per cent,

in a non-negotiable bond of the State payable only to the

trustees for the benefit of the University. Thereby

$255,000, as shown by the last report of the State Treas

urer, are now held by the University, and the amount

draws 7 per cent, interest from the State Treasury. In

asmuch as the State borrows money readily at 4 per cent.,*

this additional 3 per cent, is in the nature of an annual

appropriation. Since the Treasurers report was made,

$15,000 more of such bonds have been thus funded, making

in all $270,000, which at 3 per cent, per annum yields

$8,100 as an indirect appropriation to the University

annually.

Adding all these amounts together, we have expended

"for higher education in Georgia, first and last;"

Interest on Bank Stock since 1816 to 1889, - $584,000

Donation for Grammar School at Univer

sity in 1819, ------

2,000

Loans of 1802, 1816 and 1830, - - , - - 25,000

At 31 per cent. now.

34

Amount carried forward, ...

611,000

Additional grants by land sales in 1821, -

25,000

^6,000 a year from 1830 to 1841, ... 66,000

$5,000 a year from 1875 to 1878, - - - 15,000

$2,000 a year from 1881 to 1885, ... 8,000

Gift for repairs September, 1884, -

-

2,500

Gift for repairs October, 1887. ... 5,000

Land Scrip,

....

242,202

School of Technology,

.... 18,000

Gifts to branch college at Dahlonega, - - 8,000

" " " " " Milledgeville, - - 5,500

" " " " " Thorn* sville, - - 5,500

" " " " " Cuthbert, - - - 2,000

Annual appropriation to higher education of ne-

groea since 1873,

...

128,000f

Total for higher education, "firstand last," $1,141,702[ In this estimate I have not given value of the old capitol at Milledgeville, used for college purposes; nor the ap propriation made in 1881 or 1882, (I forget the year,) to rebuild the college at Dahlonega;* nor the indirect appro priation annually made to the University through the funding Act of 1881. If these items were added, the amount would run smartly beyond the figures given for "higher education."
tThis amount for the negro co'lege is properly chargeable to the University. For it is paid in lieu of any claim of the colored popu lation upon the proceeds of the land scrip. 1 hat the University may get all the land scrip the State pays the negroes $8.000 a year and yet we are often told the State gives nothing to the University.
ISince this was written, I find from the Acts of 1892, $22.500 appro priated, to the School of Technology; $22,900 to the Konnal and Indus trial College at Milledgeville, besides the original appropriation for its establishment; $3,000 for the Dahlonega College. These are in addition to the usual $8,000 a year each for the University and its branch college for the negroes at Savannah.
The appropriation act of 1892 directs that the chairmen of boards of trustees of all educational institutions supported by the State shall report to the Governor the number of teachers and employees with their salaries, etc. And that their reports shall be printed and bound "tor public information and the use of the General Assembly." This -will greatly facilitate a proper understanding of these educational zpenditures.
There were two of these appropriatiosn, aggregating $20,000 and not given in the estimate above.

35

How many pupils have had the benefit of this higher

education? It is impossible for me to say how many have

attended the branch colleges, the School of Technology,

and the Atlanta University for colored pupils; but we may

arrive at an approximate conclusion in answer to our

question, if we will take the figures for the University at

Athens. The whole number of students who have, "first

and last," attended this institutiou, the.students who were

graduated and the students who were dropped by the way,

is put down by Mr. Charles Edgeworth Jones, in hisjrecent

pamphlet entitled "Education in Georgia," issued by the

Bureau of Education, at Washington, at 6,000. The in

stitution has received, "first and last," $941,202 at least.

If we do not place the land scrip to their account, nor the

indiiect appropriation of the funding Act of 1881, these

6,000 students have each received from the State about

$125. If these amounts are counted, they have received

$185 apiece while we saw the children in the common

schools have received eight and a half dollars per capita!

Is it strange that in 1880 Georgia returned a greater num

ber of persons ten years old and upward as unable to write

than any other State in the Union?

What debt, if any, does the State owe the University at

Athens? Let the foregoing estimates answer? But if this

be not sufficient, let us remember the University owns

property valued at $663,000, and has an annual income of

nearly $35,000 and that it has nothing which it did not

acquire through the State except Gov. Milledges land gift,

the Terrell bequest of $20,000, the Gilmer fund of $15,000,

the Moore Building worth $25,000, and the Charles McDon

ald Brown Scholarship Fund of $50,000.

I am asked what in my judgment should be the educa

tional policy of the State? I answer, for the present, at

least, all its appropriations should be made to the common

schools.



This policy starred out the common schools until within recent years and they are but poorly sustained now. The teachers are al"ways a year behind on the "poor salaries they receive. (See CoL Hammond's book, page 129).

36
New England has followed in the main this policy from the first, and to-day there are not only more and better common schools in New England than in any other section of the Union, but more and better equipped collegesBeginning at the bottom, her educational work is firmly founded on a base broad enough to sustain it whatever height it may attain to. Connecticut has never given Yale College as much as Georgia gave the University from 1830 to 1841. Massachusetts kept Harvard in the leading strings of the State until 1865, when its alumni demanded its disestablishment, and since that time it has been enabled to increase its board of instructors from 45 to 110r and it has received more gifts and bequests than in the two hundred years of its previous history. The writer of the article on Harvard University in the American C3rclopedia says: "The University has no funded property from the public treasury, but has always depended upon the revenues from students and the gifts of individuals, which have far surpassed in number and magnitude those made to any other American institution of learning."
Brown University, in Rhode Island ; Bowdoin, in Maine, and Dartmouth, in New Hampshire, have answered the uses of their respective States and have in the main lived upon similar financial bases.*
Since 1036 Massachusetts has appropriated to colleges of every sort $1,704,368,73. Since 1700 Connecticut has appropriated $288,676. Of Rhode Island, Prof. Blackmar says in liis book entitled, "The History of Federal and State Aid to Higher Education in the United States"(from which the foregoing figures are taken:) "The State Legislature has never aided Brown University by grants or appropriations.'' It put the land scrip given by the U. S. Govern ment there to be held in trust. There was nothing else to do. Since 1773 the entire money grants by New Hampshire to colleges have aggregated only $106, 933.66. The total grants by the legislature to all the colleges in Maine since 1794 have been but $313,718. Vermont's grants since 1798 have amounted to $90, 500. The entire legislative grants to colleges in all New England in two hundred and nfty yearshave amounted to about $3,500,000 in round numbers. But in the one year 1889-90--the year when certain friends of the common schools in Georgia moved for their improvement against the slogan of the University and its friends that " education must begin at thetop"--New England expended $14,200,000 on her common schools. These figures show, that when Col. Hammond says on page 129 "it seems that Dr Candler was mistaken" about New England'8policy, it is he and not I -who is mistaken.

37
A similar policy should prevail with reference to our State University. With the start which the State has .given it; with property valued at 1663,000, and with an annual income of not leas than 135,000 (equivalent to an endowment of $700,000 at 5 per cent.) ;with living alumni numbering over 1,000 and with many supporters besides its alumni, let it now depend upon tuition fees and the .gifts of its friends.
It is a shame that the alumni of the University have .given it next to nothing, and that in their clubs they have been clamorous for the State to give money to their alma mater, while beyond the expenses of a few banquets given to further the movement to put their old mother more completely on the charity of the commonwealth, they have done almost nothing for her themselves. They seem to forget that the State Constitution, which they delight to tell us says, "In addition to the payment of the annual interest on the debt due by the State to the University, ~the General Assembly may from time to time make such donations thereto as the condition of the treasury will Authorize," says also, "The trustees of the University may accept bequests, donations and grants of land and other property for the use of said University." I would stir up their "pure minds by way of remembrance."
Let the University charge tuition fees. A student who can pay board and other expenses at Athens can pay tui tion. Free tuition there gives no more graduates to Georgia than the Stat would otherwise secure if tuition were charged. It is simply a present of $60 a year to them who do not need it.*
Moreover, as long as the State makes tuition free at Athens it creates an unfair competition with private and
Some years ago Trot H. H. Boyesen of Columbia College, New York, wrote these wise words: " In my opinion it is not the busi ness of the State to supply higher education. A democracy depends for its very existence upon the enlightenment of the voters. But it stands to reason that to tax the commumty at large for the benem of the .comparatively few who are able to avail themselves of a university education, would be unjust and contrary to the spirit of democracy."

38

church schools, which tends to discourage the cause of
higher education in Georgia and provoke opposition to the University which hinders it. As the case now stands,, it looks like the State were seeking to use her superior re sources to break down the church colleges. This is surely not good policy. In the medical and law departments of the University tuition is charged; in these departments the church schools make no appreciable competition, fIn the departments with which the church schools com pete, tuition is free. The design of the thing is manifest. But is it wise in the State to discourage the churches from entering or continuing in the [field of higher education T
Is it right ? Most of the people in Georgia who patronize colleges at:
all prefer the church schools. They do not say. to theminority who prefer to patronize the University at Athens,. "You shall patronize our schools;" but they do say to the minority, "If you prefer not to patronize religious schools,, do as we do, and pay for what you prefer." They do not say, as they have been unfairly represented as saying, "Only denominational colleges succeed, and only denomi national colleges should succeed;" but they do say the State should not toll taxes from the denominations, and then devote a part of its funds to a policy design d to hinder the denominational colleges from succeeding.
But some may say, " We now propose to elevate theUniversity to be a university indeed as well as in name, and thus lift it above competition with the church col leges. " This is a delusion and a snare. Does any sane

t It avails nothing to reply to this that the medical and law de

partments are peculiarly related to the University. They could be

related otherwise if the University Trustees chose to have it so, and

free tuition prevail in them. And it is just as much the duty of the

State to give free chemical, agricultural and legal tuition as it is to

give free classical education. If it is her duty to set one of her sons-

up as an analytical chemist,any of her sons have the rieht to demand

free education for the professions they chose. And if any not desir

ing professions, but merchandise, demand to be set up in the grocery-

business they have an equally j ust claim upon her bounty. The whole

thing runs, at last to communism when followed to its logical conse

quences.

.

39
man believe the University is going to abandon its A. M course, its A. B. course, its B. Ph. course, or its B. S. course, and confine itself to the work of such courses as the Ph. D. course ? But if it proposes to continue these collegiate courses it proposes to put itself in competition with the church colleges, as it has always done.
If the University wishes to deal fairly with the church schools, let it do what it ought to do anyhow, because it is right: charge tuition. If it needs more or better professors, the sum thus provided will secure them. As that wise and scholarly man, the Hon. Samuel Barnett, said some months ago in a letter to the Evening Journal, of Atlanta, if the University will do this it will not need " to clamor " for State funds. If the 147 students at the University during the past year had each paid $60, the usual tuition for a year in Southern colleges, the institution would have received from this source $8,820, a sum sufficient to pay three new professors $2,000 a year, besides yielding annu ally $2,820 for repairs and other current expenses.
The University of Virginia charges tuition fees.* So does the University of North Carolina. So also does almost every respectable college in the United States. The Uni versity of South Carolina tried the free tuition plan
On page 132 of his book, Col. Hammond says the University of Virginia does not charge for tuition. The catalogue for the session 1890-91 (the year after I wrote the above words) of the University of Virginia on page 47 shows tuition fees ranging from $75 a year in the academic department to $120 in the pharmaceutical. Law is $80; Medical, $110; Engineering, $100, and Agricultural tuition, $100. If there has been any change since then I am not aware of it. These rates are charged students taking degrees, and all others pay $25, but they can take no degrees. The catalogue for the University of North Carolina for the year this letter was written puts tuition and fees at $75. The tuition at Washington and Lee University is $80. At Hampden and Sydney it is $63. The University of Michigan, while claiming to give free tuition, charges fees under other names nearly or quite equal to tuition fees and discriminates in favbr of Michigan students. The University of Pennsylvania charges $150 a year. Harvard, Yale, Bowdoin, Brown, Columbia and Amherst all charge tuition fees. The facts do not justify the statement that when the University adopted the system of free tuition, it did but conform "to the general policy of American public institutions of learning to open their doors freely to the youth of the State without charge for tuition."

40
awhile, but the people of that old commonwealth became convinced that the policy was unwise for the University . and unfair to private and denominational colleges and they abandoned it.
If it be said this cannot be done in the case of our Uni versity, on account of the Act of September 29, 1881, the answer is easy: Repeal the Act in whole or in part; it is not a law of the Medes and Persians.
But as against all this, some may say, " It is neces sary for a States glory and power, that she have learned men as well as men educated in an elementary degree."f . This is admitted; but does it follow that Georgia can only get them by appropriations to the University ? Most of the men living in the State, who have received a colle giate education, did not get it at Athens. The church col leges havt! turned out more graduates than the University. Among their alumni are not a few learned men. Shall the State, while affirming its need of learned men, seek to cripple colleges from which she may get them at no cost to herself in order to get a chance to pay for them at a State school ? Is religion so unfriendly to learning that the kind of men who come from religious schools are not
tCol. Eammond makes much of this idea on page 128 of his book, playing a beautiful but valueless variation on the names of I'ierce, Curry and Palmer, that lie may please Methodists, Baptists and Presbyterians. He seeks to import into my words a meaiing quite foreign to them. I insert, therefore, a paragraph from, an article of mine printed some years ago, to make more plain my meaning: "It may well be doubted if the State has a right to make any appropriations to an interest, the benefits of which are HO exclu sively confined by the very nature of the case to a privileged class, as are the benefits of a college education. Such appropriations must always and inevitably be at the expense of the many who are poor for the benefit of the few who are rich, or comparatively well-to-do. Nor is it sufficient to reply to this that the State gets a return for its appropriations in the benefits arising from the services of a few dis tinguished men and from the beneficent influence of its educated classes. The State would doubtless be benefited if it were to build railroads and factories and present them to chosen citizens who could run them well. Out of such enterprises would come employ ment for many hands, food for many mouths and a general stimula tion to business; but. the State cannot make presents of such proper ties to a few of its favored citizens without gross injustice to all the 'rest. Kor can it make a present of a college course to a few of its more favored children without doing injustice."

41
desirable to the State. Was Dr. G. J. Orr, a graduate of Emory College, and the father of out-free school system, unlearned or hostile to learning? With much more justice might it be charged that some who dery denominational colleges are hostile or indifferent to religion; for while, by the Act of January 27, 1785, establishing the University, it was required that " all officers appointed to the instruction and government of the University shall be of the Christian religion," by an Act of 1887* this requirement was repealed and now a Mussulman or an agnostic may be a professor there so far as the law is concerned.
At last, what is it now costing to turn out graduates from the University? Last year there were 147 students, not counting 31 law students, who paid their tuition. The University had an income of $32,164.14 from in terest paid through the State treasury, not counting income from other sources. If this were all the income of the University (and it is not), these 147 students were educated at a trifle more than $218 apiece. This was tuition alone, for they paid their own board, clothes and book bills. Since $60 is the "regulation tuition fee" in Southern colleges, with $218 three students could have received free tuition if the money had been spent directly on the students instead of the institution. And be it said the the institution exists for the students, and not the students for the institution.
It is now proposed to add $35,000 annually to this out of the State treasury. Let us suppose that this will double the patronage of the University, though it is hard to see how it will do it. Tuition is already free, and the fact does not draw students to Athens. The additional $35,000 can only result, therefore, in paying more or better salaries to professors. But let us suppose the number of students is
This is a typographical error. The date should be 1877, just as on page 10 of Col. Hammond's book his printer puts 1887 for 1877. This error has been followed by other writers, and in alluding to it, Col. Hammond applies to it the epithet "false." He knows I am incapable of falsehood and introduces the harsh epithet for stage effect I suppose.

42
by this appropriation increased to 800. If we combine the 132,164.14 of present income with the $35,000 proposed, we have #67,164.14. If to this we add $15 by every student as matriculation fee at the beginning of every session, we will have a sum above $70,000; or the 300 students will cost $325 apiece. Applied directly to paying tuition fees this amount would nearly provide for four students. But this approp riation will not run the patronage to 300, and if it should stand at the figure for last year, viz: 147, or say 150, the tuition of the students at Athens would cost, under this appropriation, $470 apiece. The children of Georgia out side of the cities and towns the children who need most the common schools now barely receive II apiece for their common school education! And this amazing inequality accounts for the small number of students at Athens: there is not enough preparatory education in Georgia below the University to provide students. Free tuition at the University can never remedy this evil. The only remedy is more and better common schools.
To this view objection will still be urged, that appro priations to the common schools must be divided with the negroes, while appropriations to the University are devoted entirely to the white boys of Georgia. Waiving the ques tion whether, since the negro is a citizen, it is not wise for the State to give him an elementary education to fit him for citizenship, it is enough to say Georgia will have to do for the higher education of the negroes a proportionate amount of what she does for the whites. All her appro priations to higher education hitherto have been thus divi ded. As we have seen, $3,000 are annually appropriated for the collegiate education of negroes an amount cor responding to the amount voted to the University at Athens. Departments for colored pupils have been es tablished at the Academy for the Bliud at Macon, and at the Deaf and Dumb Asylum at Cave Spring. Demand is already made for agricultural colleges and a school of technology for the negroes, and the demand, it must be

43
admitted, may be plausibly pressed when it is said by some advocate of negro education, " The white people say the negro should do the manual labor of the country, and should not intrude into the professions. Will they deny .him schools in which to learn to do this manual labor well?"
Moreover, we are in danger of perpetrating the folly of the man who, in order to freeze his dog to death, went out in the cold and held the dog until he was himself frozen,, while the dog survived; the only difference between usand him being that we will freeze our white children and not ourselves. In truth, we have followed a policy for nearly a century which has all but frozen out the common schools.
Meanwhile be it remembered the common school educa tion of the negro will go oh whether the State increases the appropriation to common schools or not. The negrocolleges are turning out many graduates. Coming out of these colleges they cannot enter the law, medicine and other such professions, by reason of the prejudices of their own race, as well as by the attitude of the white people. They are excluded from merchandise by lack of capital. They must enter upon manual labor or teach school. An ill paid school will bring them greater remuneration than manual labor. Most of them therefore now teach and will do so with or without increased appropriations to common schools. But with white graduates, to whom all the pro fessions are open, it is not so. M >st of them, and the best of them, will not teach in the common schools with out living salaries, which provide a years support. Re curring to the figure, it is manifest if we withhold appro priations from the common schools to avoid helping the negro, we will freeze our children before we freeze the dog,, even if it were proved the dog ought to die.
We should have eight months schools in Georgia. They will cost not far from two millions of dollars annually. Massachusetts, with a population exceeding that of Geor-

44
gia by about 250,000 souls, and with a school population less than that of Georgia by about 90,000 children, gives upwards of $4,000,000 annually to her common schools.*
Georgia must soon begin building school houses. The country schools are miserably housed in many cases. Ex cept for college buildings, and for school houses erected in certain cities, towns and counties by local taxation, I do not believe Georgia has spent a dollar for school buildings in fifty years'. If the State has done so, it has entirely escaped my notice.
Our common school system must be put on its feet. The University is old enough to stand alone. With pro perty valued at $663,000 and with an annual income of nearly or quite $35,000, f and with a roll of alumni con taining nearly 2,000 names, "of whom the greater part re main unto this present but some are fallen asleep," the University ought voluntarily to relieve the State of further charges on its account, and lead the agitation in behalf of better common schools.
I am, with good wishes for the University and all insti tutions for higher education in the State, and with beat wishes for common.schools, Very respectfully,
W. A. CANDLER. Emory College, Oxford, Ga., Sept. 6, 1889.
She now gives her common schools about $8,000,000 annually. t The report of the Board of Visitors published June 18, 1893, showed its annual receipts amounted during the last col egiate year to $50,910 68. It has been increased by the Morrill Fund l2,000, the negro college receiving the remaining $6,000, I sup pose. All this $50.910,68 seems to have been used at Athens, ex cept $2,000 allowed to the school at Dahlonega.

45
CHAPTER III.
"HAMMOND'S HISTORY" CORRECTED.
From Atlanta Constitution, of July 2, 1893.
Editor Constitution: The reading of his church paper, The Wesleyan Christian Advocate, together with other in fluences, brought upon Hon. N. J. Hammond early in the month of May, a disposition to write history, and after the manner of good historians, he throws in many reflec tions by the way. From his first paper, which appeared in your columns May 7th, to his last, which appeared June 25th, I have read his pieces (nearly all of them I think) with such care as my leisure permitted, and always with interest. Along the way Col. Hammond has fallen into a few minor errors of historic incident, such as, for exam ple, the mixing of the continental congress and the con stitutional convention in the matter of Rev. Mr. Duches prayer, but these errors have not materially impaired the value of his papers.*
However in this last piece, which might be entitled "The History of Free Tuition at the University of Georgia,* Colonel Hammond falls into several mistakes which, if un challenged, might be accepted in future as history and mislead many. I am sure he would not willingly set er rors a going and have them remain uncorrected. His pur-
*Col. Hammond who takes to a small compliment like little Jackey Horner did to a plum, makes much of this pleasant allusion to him. He says:
"That one whose position at the head of Emory College keeps him constantly on guard, that a critic so well posted, so lynx-eyed and ready to find fault, should write that he has read all my articles with both care and interest, and yet found only that I had "fallen into a few minor errors of historical incident," and they in no way "mate rially impaired the value of his (my) papers," seems a high compli ment."
I did not say that "minor errors1' only were all I found. The next paragraph shows a very material error in important history.

46
pose is to write history and I know he wishes it to go down correctly.
I venture, therefore, to call attention to some of his er rors, and he will permit me to follow his example of set ting down a few reflections while giving the facts.
In the beginning of his piece in the Constitution of June 25th, Colonel Hammond says:
"The history of free tuition in the University of Geor gia is not long. Originally the States plan was to help the indigent only. For instance, in 1830 the legislature allowed the poor school commissioners of each county to select their brightest boy, who might go to the University without charge for four years. The Act appropriated .$6,000 per annum to pay their tuition. That legislation was repealed in 1831."
The purpose of the appropriation is misstated by Colo nel Hammond and the date of its repeal is incorrectly set down. It waw only the fourth section of the Act which was repealed in 1831. The appropriation section was not repealed until 1841 and its purpose is thus stated in the Act: "The sum of $6,000 be and the same is hereby an nually appropriated to the University of Georgia as a fund for the use of said institution for the purpose of enabling the board of trustees to rebuild the college edifice and re place the library which was destroyed by the late fire at Athens and for the purpose of defraying the annual ex penses of said college."
.Section 4, which was repealed in 1831, was as fol lows : "That it shall be the duty of the justices of the inferior court of each county in this state immediately After the passage of this Act to select from among the poor of their county one young man who shall be between the age of fifteen and eighteen years, whose duty it shall be to notify the board of trustees of said selection, and it shall be the duty of said board to cause each applicant so reported to be boarded and educated at Franklin College out of the funds hereinafter mentioned, free of any charge. This proposal was for free board as well as free tuition,

47
the only method by which free tuition can be made avail able for those who really need it; but it amounted to nothing because no funds were "thereinafter mentioned" in the Act except a loan of $10,000 specifically granted to replace the burned building, library and apparatus. An effort was made to get a $20,000 appropriation for the poor boys, but it failed. So also did a proposal of $10,000 fail. But the $6,000 annually for the University did not fail. It was not repealed until 1841.
In 1831 the Hon. Thomas F. Andersou, a member of the senate from the county of Franklin, sought, while the measure to repeal section 4 of the Act was pending, to engraft the following amendment upon it: "That the annual appropriation of the $6,000 in favor of the Univer sity of Georgia as mentioned in the second section of the above recited Act be, and the same shall no longer be con sidered for the benefit of the University, but added to and distributed with the poor school fund for the purpose of educating the poor children of the state." But his motion failed by a vote of 30 yeas and 36 nays. (See page 289 Journal of the Senate of 1831.)
There was nothing in the Act of 1830, or indeed in any ante-bellum acts concerning the University, looking to the free tuition system which has prevailed at Athens since 1881. That is post-bellum blundering which has injured the University without accomplishing its object of overcoming the competition of the church colleges. Colo nel Hammond mast excuse me for believing, in spite of his denial, that it was aimed at the denominational col leges. The evidence forces me to this conclusion. That evidence may be briefly stated in part thus:
1. Free tuition was adopted when the universitys pat ronage had dropped as low as 134, counting all the stu dents in both Franklin College and the State College of Agriculture, while the patronage of the church colleges was rising steadily. This fact was a moving cause for action as will appear from the testimony of the board of visitors for the year 1881, which I quote further along.

48
2. The act making free tuitiqn at the University only extended the privilege to the departments with which the church schools competed.
3. The report of the board of visitors for the year 1881 discloses the animus of the act. They said in urging the scheme of free tuition: "To show also that now is the time for action in the premises, it is confidently stated* [By whom it was stated the report does not say; the state ment was, perhaps, a bugaboo to enforce the appeal of the visitors for free tuition ] "that both Emory and Mercer col leges, with far-seeing sagacity, are seeking, by speedy endow ment of these institutions to open the way for free tuition. Already Emory College, through the liberality of Mr. Seney, has made a good start, and the earnest efforts of the re cently appointed agent of Mercer, Dr. Landrum, cannot fail to make large additions to the endowment fund of that institution. This step is rendered necessary by the inroads which the branch colleges of the University under the free tuition system will certainly make upon the pat ronage of both these excellent literary foundations. But shall it be said that the mother institution, after sending forth avauut couriers in the cause of free education, halted midway in the work and allowed these institutions to out strip her in reaching this very desirable result?"
Colonel Hammond cannot offset this plain testimony of the board of visitors by an appeal to the general character of the members of the board of trustees of the University at the time. The character of these men is not in question but the merits of this case. Some whom he names may not have been present; others may have been misled as to the proposal. A commencement session, with its hurry and confusion, is a time when men are readily confused. Others may have opposed it. For example, I have reason to believe Bishop George P, Pierce never approved it Will Colonel Hammond give us the proof of the Bishops approval? It is noticeable that most of the men men tioned by Colonel Hammond are now dead and cannot

49
define their position about the matter as it now stands.* Cemetery silence is not good testimony.
This I know: The friends of the denominational col leges understood the action at the time as war upon their schools, and protested against it. In July, 1881, when the subsequent Act of September was manifestly determined nponr the official organ of the Methodist church in Geor gia protested against the unfairness of the Act in words that are good reading to-day. The editorf said: "Let us see: 1. The Baptists and Methodists make the majority of the tax-payers of Georgia. *2 Most of them believe most conscientiously that the sort of college work they consider to be absolutely necessary, cauuot be done by the State. 3. They believe that it is the duty of the church to establish and conduct colleges and universities. 4. Thev have to provide for them out of their own pockets. 5. They naturally object to being compelled to endow stite colleges that cannot do what thay want dane, when they find themselves unable to endow the colleges that are doing just what they want done."
From both the friends of the University and the friends of the church colleges we have, it will be seen, therefore, proof that the movemsnt was understood at the tims to have been originated to give the University the advantage of the denominational colleges.
The following bit of argument by Colonel Hammond one might take as a joke if it wars not wall karivn that the colonel cant tell one. He says:
"So far from working to injure the dsnaminational colleges, the board of trustess of the University has increased to sixteen the ago at which students miyeuter,^ and raised the scholastic requirements for matriculation bsyond that required by any institution in the state. That
*Ubr can their silence when in life b3 used as evidence. Man will often allow a matter to go without opposition not basausa they approve it but because they are averse to controversy.
tBishop Hiygood WAS its Editor ani wrote tb.3 word* quoted. HThis raising of the age of entrance WAS nit dona until njirly tan years later.

50
calculus is in the sophomore year shows how advanced is that curriculum. In that regard it is so advanced that the late board of visitors in their report complain thereat. This is not the place to explain why it is so. We mention it only to enforce the proposition stated. The effect of this requirement caused the rejection of forty applicants during this scholastic year, many of whom, we suppose, went elsewwere."
Raising the age of entrance one year and putting cal culus in the sophomore class are the evidences of amity towards the church schools!
Let the public understand that a student at Athens pur suing the A. B. course ends pure mathematics on the cal culus, but does it sophomore year and takes no pure math ematics afterwards. A student at Emory or Mercer ends also on the calculus, but does it senior year. It is no higher standard at one or the other schools, but only a difference of place in the course for the calculus.
Let Colonel Hammond make the comparison and he will find a student at Emory seeking the degree of A. B. must study the same subjects required at Athens and some not required there. I submit to any competent educator ifalgelira, trigonometry, analytical geometry and calcu lus should all be thrust into aue year, and that year the sophomore year, as is the case at Athens. This might be justly called the practice of taxidermy on sophmores.
The effort of the chairman of the board of trustees of the University to make Emory and Mercer appear to be schools of a lower grade than Franklin College is in line with the effort to defeat them with an unfair competition.
Ma}r I make a digression here? The Colonel is fond of digressions. May I inquire if Colonel Hammond designed to cast odium upon the cause of Emory college and the good name of her benefactor l/y suggesting interogatively a charge he was unwilling to make affirmatively when he penned the following?
"Suppose one should fix the date of Mr. Seneys gifts to

51
Emory and Wesleyan Female College, and then show that soon afterwards he obtained from Georgia the charter of the East Tennessee, Virginia and Georgia Railroad Com pany, so damaging to the Western and Atlantic Railroad, which it paralleled, and which the State owned, and then charge that th* Methodists in the General Assembly who voted for that charter were by Seneys gifts to their col leges, bribed to do a wrong to the State. Would there not be just indignation?"
I understand that some years ago certain lewd fellows of the baser sort tried to give currency to this unworthy charge against the man who gave more to higher education in Georgia than any man ever gave; but I had not ex pected to see the vile slander introduced to public notice by a worthy gentleman and he a Methodist, even though he should do so hy suggestion or illustration. It is a charge opprobrious to the Methodists of the State, as well as libelous upon Mr. Seney. It can have no standing among the respectable people of Georgia until they have become so degraded that ingratitude cannot disgrace them and the requital of generous help with scandalous abuse will bring no blush to their cheeks. Such a man as Colo nel Hainmoud ought to abhor such a charge.
But to return from the digression: I thank Colonel Hammond for explaining to the public how the following words were in, 1877, stricken from the time-honored charter of the University of 1785: "All officers appointed to the in struction and government of the University shall be of the Christian religion." These words appear to have been of fensive to Major R. J. Moses, a Jewish member of the legislature, though Colonel Hammond tells us the provi sion had been annulled by our constitution long before Major Moses moved its repeal. But even the deference to Christianity of this legal nullity was not to be endured. I am thankful that the following words are still left in the common school law: " The Bible shall not be excluded from the common or public schools of this State."

52
Truly we need denominational colleges. The State can not know religion in its institutions. That would inter fere with freedom of conscience. * And yet somehow the States agents sometimes take a religious, even a sectarian turn. For example I read this in the Atlanta Constitution of June 18th, with reference to a recent election at Athens:
" It is said that the fact that he is a Baptist had much to do with his selection, as the trustees concluded that there were too many Presbyterians and Episcopalians in the faculty, and they thought it best to diversify the re ligious competition of the college. It is also stated that if Mr. Sylvanus Morris had been a Baptist he would have been given the place."
In this connection, it is but the statement of a fact to say that in the ninety-three years of the Universitys his tory it has had eight Calvinistic ckaucellors and one Arminian. The eight Calvinists have held the place for seventy-nine years, and the one Arminian fourteen years, during three of which the college was suspended. Be it also remembered that it appertains to the office of chan cellor to teach mental philosophy, and that when the question of the freedom of the will and divine sovereignty is under discussion in that science, aCalvinistgives quite a different answer from that of an Arminian. f
An Episcopal Methodist was never chancellor of the University, though that denomination is one of the largest in the State. If I am correctly informed there is now but
* Col. Hammond delights to quote Bishop Haygood's strong words: " The State has nothing to do with religion except as it protects the citizen in his rights." But in the departments of both physics and metaphysics religious questions are inevitably raised, and a State col lege can say nothing to settle them. As the phrase goes in Arkansas. " It digs up more snakes than it can kill "
t Col. Hammond professes not to be able to understand the differ ence between Calvinism and Arminianism This will be surprising to both Calvinists and Armlnians, if indeed it is not offensive to them. It seems to charge both parties with contending about a nothing. But I think Col. Hammond does not mean this. It is simply his infirmity that he cannot distinguish between a part and a whole.

53
one Methodist in the faculty of Franklin College. Profes sor Jere M. Pound, a Methodist, was not of the right de nominational complexion, even as was the case with Mr. Sylvanus Morris, in the recent election, though both were Georgians and gifted alumni of the University.
I have no criticism of the honored gentleman who was elected. Ho is, I am glad to be informed, very competent. But when denominational colleges are criticised for their alleged sectarianism and the old requirement that profes sors in the University shall be of the Christian religion can no longer be endured in^the charter, even as a nullity, it seems to me denominationaliem should not enter int-?elections. Maybe a covetous eye was cast at Mercers growing patronage and it was "thought best to diversify, the ritMgious competition of the college."
At last, is not this higher education, raising as it inevit ably raises sundry religious questions, rather too delicate work for the State to undertake under our form of govern ment? Had not the State best stop at educating for citi zenship? Has she a duty or right beyond that? To these questions my friend, Col. Hammond, will vehemently re ply in the language of his last letter:
" Some contend that the State is in duty bound to edu cate its citizens but a little, so that they may be able to read their ballots, without understanding their force, but that to teach enough t<> make thm wise members of so ciety is wrong. That seems to IHJ fallacious b^th in prin ciple and logic."
A common school fellow can read a ballot, but it takes a college man to understand the force of "it. Is that your doctrine, Colonel ? It seems so. What a pitiable fix is Georgia then in! It may well be doubted if even the University can relieve the situation unless the few whom it educates to know the force of a ballot can somehow get control of the benighted multitudes who only know how to read a ballot. And as our population is rapidly in creasing, we should hasten with all speed the increase of

54
the ballot directors lest the mere ballot readers, like Sir Isaac Newtons little dog, Diamond, should do a world of mischief without knowing it. Let us force the boys to the University, giving them not only free tuition, but free board and clothes also, items which stand in their way very much more than tuition fees. Free tuition is a need less present to those who can provide the rest. The aver age attendance per year at Athens since 1881 with free tu ition and high board has been one hundred and seventythree, counting both Franklin College and the State College of Agriculture; while the average attendance at Emory,, where tuition is charged and board is cheaper, in the colle giate department alone f;r the same period has been on& hundred and eighty-five.
The Colonel offers a novel reason why Georgia should retain the funding Act of 1881, by which the State issuesfifty-year 7 per cent, bonds to the University when she can float at par a 3 per cent, bond in open market. He inti mates that this indirect appropriation is a good induce ment to the alumni to give to its endowment. I am op posed to any appropriation by indirection ; but this plea of my distinguished friend almost reconciles me to it. Hesays :
"Some are urging the alumni to endow the University, What greater inducement can they have than the assur ance that if they comply with the Act of 1881 the State will see that nothing shall keep their bounty from certain income for the purpose of the donors."
In my judgment, if the legislative committee of th& University trustees (by the way, a singular sort of commit tee, not needed to inform the legislature of the condition of the University, since the Chancellor does that, but of whose functions I will venture no surmise) wants an an nual appropriation of $7,000 or $8,000 from the State treasury to make tuition free, they should ask for it in a straightforward way and riot seek to get it by such an in direction as the funding Act of 1881. But while this is my

55
honest opinion, none of us perhaps should seriously com plain if the Act brings a gift from an alumnus to the en dowment. It must be confessed, however, that it affecta the alumni slowly. In twelve years it has brought noth ing. It is a most remarkable history that a college should be over ninety years old and none of its alumni ever have given it anything. I forgot one thing, however. Some of them did propose to insure their lives for it, so that the institution might live if enough of the alumni should die.
I will not weary your readers with a repetition of the land scrip history. The fourth section of the congres sional Act creating that fund says: "Said sum of money shall be a perpetual fund, and shall never be used except as in this Act provided in section 5, and the interest of which shall be inviolably appropriated by each State which may take and claim the benefit of this Act to the endowment, support and maintenance of at least one col lege, where the leading object shall be, without excluding scientific and classical studies, and including military tac tics, to teach such branches of learning as are related to ag riculture and the mechanic arts in such manner as the legislatures of the States may respectively prescribe, in order to promote the liberal education of the industrial classes in the several pursuits and professions in life." Without quoting further from the Act I submit to any fair mind that the governor of Georgia had no authority to dispose of that fund by contract or otherwise for free scholarships or for any other consideration.* The date of the contract was March 3D, 1872. By Colonel Hammonds own statement it appears that the legislature was in session as late as January 15th before the contract was made, and again on July 25th afterwards The executive should have left this matter where congress put it, calling the legislature
It has been said that the legislature can not now remove the land scrip from Athens, because such an act would impair the validity of a contract and would therefore be unconstitutional. But an unlaw ful contract has no validity to impair.

56
several weeks in advance of its summer meeting if necessary that the matter might have been regularly disposed of. Moreover, neither the governor, legislature nor board of trustees of the University could divert properly one dollar of that fund from agricultural college purposes to Uni versity purposes, "directly or indirectly." But the facts show that the purposes of the Act are not being accom plished at Athens. By Colonel Hammond's figures it ap pears that there have been registered (mark the word) in what is called the "agricultural college" at Athens an averaee of only forty-five students a year for twelve years past. A report to the legislature some year or two agu signed by Hon. I. H. Hand and Hon. A. C. Hill said: "Let us examine the annual announcement and catalogue of the University at Athens for 1891. Turn to the register of students, page 56, senior class. Not one in this class stands registered as.an aspirant for the degree of bachelor of agriculture. We next look through the junior class and we rejoice at finding four aspirants for the degree of bachelor of agriculture. We look through the sophomore and freshman classes and fail to find one who registered in the State College of Agriculture."
In 1881 when the free tuition plan was being brought on, the Board of Visitors accounted for the small num ber of students in the College of Agriculture thus: "How ever wrong and unfounded, the fact cannot be disguised that scores of sensitive farmers and men in moderate cir cumstances refuse to accept of the free scholarships ten dered by the trustees from the belief that their sons and wards will occupy inferior positions in the University and be looked down upon as charity students." Abolish all tuition fees they argued, "the first result will be a large in crease of students at Athens from the ranks of the fresh man and sophomore classes in the branch colleges." Well, it was done, and the number of students in the College of Agriculture at Athens dropped from fifty-six to thirty-nine> and has averaged by Colonel Hammoud's figures, forty-five

57
a year since, but by the report of Messrs. Hand and Hill it has been very much lower. There must have been a fault in the diagnosis or the prescription of the Board of Visitors. It did not cure.
Last winter another remedy was applied (perhaps "to quiet agitation"); a brief course of agriculture was estab lished. But the remedy did not work. Until Christmas the maximum number of students on the course at any one time was three or four. At no time did the number exceed fifteen, among them being a venerable pupil of some sixty summers of age. A few cows were dehorned I learn. Farmers institutes have also been employed.
But none of these things meet the purposes of the landscrip act.
Messrs. Hand and Hill offered this suggestion as a rem edy : "For a number of years the University of Missis sippi tried to run the agricultural and mechanical college in immediate connection with the University, but the plan was unsuccessful and abortive, as it has proven to be in Georgia. The suggestion was made of removing the agri cultural and mechanical college from the University and locating it elsewhere, and was acted upon, and the college removed some ten or twelve years since. The result has abundantly established the justice and wisdom of the ex periment. Before the separation of the college from the University there were only about eighty registered in the department of agriculture and mechanic arts. Eight years after its removal it exhibited an average of 315 students." Messrs, Hand and Hill are, perhaps, right. It is hard for the land scrip to serve two masters. At any rate the re port of Messrs. Hand and Hill makes interesting reading and it is somewhat historical. It should be widely read while we-are studying an historic series.
W. A. CANDLE R.

58
CHAPTER IV.
To the foregoing letter, Hon. N. J. Hammond printed a reply in the Atlanta Constitution of July 9,1893. Under the above caption the following answer to his piece appeared in the same paper July 15:
Editor Constitution. It appears from Colonel Hammonds last piece that while he was sitting in court at Savannah defending the interests of the Central Railroad he fell into a meditation upon a subject in no wise con nected with that litigation, viz: the safety of the Univer sitys endowment. My honored friend had much time for such meditations there, for, with his usual ability, he had so carefully prepared his case that the court sus tained his contention without so much as hearing from him, 1 believe. Tf he had been as careful about his history I should not have found it necessary to correct his errors.
While he sat there witnessing the wrecked condition of ihe Centrals securities he thought of them like the school boy thought of pins who wrote in his composition: "Pins are good things. Many children have saved their lives by not swallowing them." He tells ua he "thought what might have been the situation of our University had its board of trustees in 1881 gone into the market and invested its funds in the securities of those railroads instead of being-allowed by the State to fund them permanently under the act of that year." For the sake of the symmetry of his meditation, it seems to mo the Colonel should have gone on meditating, and somewhat on this wise: "And the Act of 1881 i>ot only gives a safe security to the Uni versity; it gives also a security with a very high rate of interest and a very long time to run a fifty-year bond at 7 per cent. And we get it at par without a chance of com-

59
peting bids, not even from the denominational colleges. If such a bond were put on the market even- in these hard times it would bring as much as 130 perhaps, and maybemore. But we get it at par. It is true this saddles upon the State for fifty years a 7 per cent, bonded debt when she can borrow money for 3 1-2 per cent, (and perhaps for less before the fifty years expire) and it is true the people whose own investments are obliged to be uncertain, like llentral railroad securities, will have to pay this increased debt, but the funding Act of 1881, with its companion piece, was necessary to make tuition free at Athena, and tuition there must be free whatever burdens it may bringto the people. Rich students must have free tuition tokeep poor students from feeling badly in receiving it, and poor students must have it because it is not right that agraduate of the University should, at his graduation, give to his alma mater his notes for his tuition. He may insure his life for her, but he must not promise to pay her for his tuition. It is better to put a large debt on all the people for fifty years than that a few graduates should each have u small debt of $240 for a brief period.* It would require nearly half a years labor for these young men topay their tuition after graduation, but that is not to be thought of. It is better for the present generation to pay high interest on their .bonded debt and hand over to pos terity the principal for payment than that graduate* should begin life by paying their own tuition bills."
If Colonel Hammonds meditation had run on that fashion he might finally have fallen to musing on this wise :
"In 1896 more than *500,000 of Georgias bonds will mature. As they near maturity they will fall to about par. That will be a harvest time for the University. We must, as they near maturity, get all we can of them, so aa to get them changed to fifty-year bonds at 7 per cent. Such as we then get will run to 1946, a long time to be
This amount is the cost of tuition for four years, Students en tering above Freshman would not owe even this mucli at graduation.

60
sure, but we have a good precedent to justify the proceed ing. Everybody knows that in 1821 the friends of the University secured the passage of an Act which provided 'that the permanent endowment of the University shall consist of a sum not less than $8,000 per annum, and that when it so happens that the dividends furnished by the bank stock granted to the University shall not be equal to the sum aforesaid, the treasurer of this State is required to make up the deficiency semi-annually out of any moneys in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.' That Act looked as innocent and harmless to the Georgians of 1821 as this funding Act of 1881 seems to the people of to-day. Some years away back between 1821 and 1840, as much as $500 a year was appropriated under it, and flome years the appropriation was less, but now the bank stock has. gone to wreck and the $8,000 annuity is 'ripened into a debt.' By 1946 there is no telling what benefits will accrue to the University through the 'ripening' process, and the funding Act of 1881. When we coma to the year 1896, when the 8500,000 falls due, it is to be hoped no constitutional difficulty will arise in the minds of the governor and treasurer of the State on account of section 12, paragraph 1, of the Constitution which says: 'The bonded debt of the State shall never be increased except to repel invasion, suppress insurrection or defend the State in time of war,' though it must be con fessed a nice question may arise thereabouts. Let me see: anticipating the maturity of over $500,000 of her-bonds in 1896, the State will probably raise the money to meet them by Issuing 3 1-2 per cent, redemption bonds in the year 1895. The money from the sale of these redemption bonds will have to be in the treasury to redeem the maturing bonds beforehand, but the University, having secured as many of them as possible, late in the year 1895, so as to get them cheap, will present such as it may be able to get and demand for them under the funding Act of 1881 a new 7 per cent, bond running for fifty years. But if the demand is acceded to, the bonded debt of the State will

61
not only be increased by the higher rate of interest secured but it will also be increased by having two bonds out for the same purpose, viz: the redemption bond bearing 3 1-2 per cent, and the refunded University bond, bearing 7 per cent.* That looks like a violation of the Constitution, but then the Constitution must not be construed too strictly when applied to the University. If a bill were passed extending the privileges of the funding Act of 1881 to Emory and Mercer it would be unconstitutional, for I had it put into the Constitution that no money shall ever be taken from the public treasury, directly or indirectly in aid of any sectarian institution, and such an Act would be an indirect appropriation to them. But wheu we come to the case of the State University our practice must be more elastic. For example, the Constitution says: In addi tion to the payment of the annual interest on the debt due by the State to the University, the General Assembly may, from time to time, make such donations thereto as the condition of the treasury will authorize. And the General Assembly may also, from time to time, make such appropriations of money as the condition of the treasury will authorize to any college or uni/ersity, not exceeding one in number, now established or hereafter to be estab lished in this State for the education of persons of color. Now, under a liberal construction of this section we can establish any number of schools by simply calling them branches of the University there is something in a name after all and moreover, for a number of years we gave $8,000 a year to a sectarian negro college in lieu of the negros claim to a part of the land scrip which we put entirely in the possession of the University."
But the Colonels meditations never reached these sub jects. Maybe they might have done so if he had not been disturbed by my calling attention to some of his errors of
Col. Hammond in his book characterizes this view as "empty." That assertion is his ipae dixit--nothing more. Able constitutional awyers tell me the point is well taken.

62
history: for, after briefly recalling his Savannah medita tion he proceeds to say:
" Dr. Candler then said the i6,000 which I had said was appropriated by the Act of 1830 and repealed by the Act of 1831, to educate the poor hoys at the University, was in point of fact never appropriated. He quotes from the Acts of 1830 and 1831, and the journals of the house and senate of those dates to sustain his view of it, and he seema to be right. I had my information from Cobbs New Digest, page 1094, where the Act to provide for the educa tion of certain poor children therein mentioned, is pub lished, leaving out the fourth section, and stating that it was repealed in 18313 and I had read elsewhere that the appropriation was actually made. Perhaps it wascarelens in me not to have hunted up the old Acts and journals, though I do not know that they could have been found here. But it was not so careless as Dr. Candler when, in in his speech to the Farmers Alliance of Putnam county he stated, and afterwards in Sepember, 1889, published, that $2,000 for the purpose of free tuition in the University was annually appropriated by the Act of 1881 for four years, when that Act was accessible to all, and on its face was for one year instead of four."
But what of my mistake ? That Act of 1830 was cited as the only ante-bellum legislation concerning tree tuition in the University, and to that Dr. Caudler agrees. What amount was thereby appropriated for that purpose, or whether any amount was, was wholly immaterial to the argument."
The Colonel could doubtless have found the Act of 1830 by walking from his office to the State capitol, a few blocks away. Accuracy is well worth so short a walk by one volunteering to give the people history upon so material a matter as the policy of the State University concerning free tuition during the first eighty years of its history the period, by the way, of its best success.
The error which Colonel Hammond attributes tome has this history: I have no law books in my library, and for such I depend upon the college library. Of recent years the State has sent to the library of Emory college none of *.he Acts of the legislature nor journals of either house.

63
Before the war there was a law requiring that these books should be sent to Emory College. Perhaps it was annulled by the Colonels constitutional provision against appropri ations "directly or indirectly " to sectarian institutions. At any rate these publications are no longer sent to us at Emory. In the preparation of the speech to which Colonel Hammond alludes I depended upon Mr. Charles Edgeworth Jones monograph entitled: "Education in Georgia," and published under endorsement of the United States Bureau of Education in 1889 (the national government still sends its publications to church schools). 1 supposed Mr. Joness pomphlet was accurate about legislation as late as 1881 at least. (1). Because it was written by a gifted young man who had not only taken a course at Athens, but a post graduate course at the Johns Hopkins University also. I knew he was a son of Georgias well-known historian, Colonel 0. C. Jones, and supposed he wrote perhaps in his fathers peerless library. (2). Because his pamphlet was endorsed by the United States Bureau of Education. (3). Because it was much praised at the time of its publication and nobody pointed out this error. (Colonel Hammond, who seems overfond of the doctrine that " silence gives consent," will appreciate fully this point).
Accordingly in the absence of the Acts of 1881, and re lying upon the best authority within my reach, I followed the error of Mr. Jones in saying; On the 29th of Septem ber, 1881, the legislature appropriated $2.000 per year, for four years to make tuition free." (See Jones "Education in Georgia," page 48).
I fell not only into this error from not having the Acts of the legislature at hand, but into another which the Col onel has not discovered, or does not care to bring out. I was answering, at the request of the Putman County Alli ance, the question: "What amounts have been expended by the State for common schools and what for higher education." Not having access to the Acts of 1881 and 1883. I said on page ten of my pamphlet: "In this esti

64
mate, I have not given the appropriation made in 1881 or in 1882 I forget the year to rebuild the college at Dahlonega," * etc. If those Acts had been before me I should have said: "By Act of September 15, 1881, $10,000 was appropriated to the University of Georgia for rebuilding the branch college at Dahlonegh. and again by Act of December 12, 1883, another $10,000 was appropriated for the same purpose." Instead of charging up, therefore, to the University $8,000 (i.e. $2,000 a year for four years), I would have entered three items aggregating$22,000. My estimate was too low by $14,000, but of this Colonel Hammoud will not complain.f
But when, by chance, I discovered my error, I did not repeat it, as Colonel Hammond has done with his error. In his speech delivered before the General Assembly in 1889, he fell into the same error about the Act of 1830 which he has written in his recent history, and I corrected him then and said in my pamphlet published shortly thereafter:
"In the same year (by Act of December 21,1830), $6,000 was appropriated annually to the University, 'for the pur pose of enabling the board of trustees to rebuild the col lege edifice, and replace the library and instruments destroyed by fire, and for the purpose of defraying the annual expenses of the college,' and not 'to help poor stu dents,' as was recently stated in an address before the General Assembly, by a distinguished trustee of the Uni versity."
This occurs in my pamphlet just ten lines above my error which Colonel Hammond points out. Only three sentences intervene between them. It is amazing how he missed his own error; but found mine. It reminds me of a remark which I have heard attributed to Mr. Blaine It is said that the senator from Maine told Judge Ed munds on one occasion: "You can see a gnat on a barn door a mile without seeing the barn door."
* See Chapter III. tCoL Hammond'g error was 166,000; mine was $14,000.

65
Colonel Hammoud meets the curriculum question thus: "Now for the remainder of Dr. Candlers article. H& says my effort to make Emory and Mercer appear to be schools of lower grade than Franklin College is in linewith the effort to defeat them by an unfair competition. I wrote not of Franklin College only, but of the University which embraces much more than Franklin College proper. I made no effort, nor said anything of the kind. Combat ing the charge that the trustees of the University were try ing to injure the denominational colleges by unfair com petition, I stated that both the age and scholarship necessary to enter 1 he University had been raised. Had we been trying only to get students, it would have been better to have lowered both instead of losing applicants for their want of age or preparation. Some of our pro* fessors claim superiority over those colleges as to the course of study, and I may at some time have echoed their claim. But in these papers I made no such claim, <ind do not know whether it is true. I have never made a com parison. Surely I may think that had we a sub-freshman class, as they have at Oxford, we might this year have added to our numbers as they added to theirs, their subfreshman class this year containing sixty-seven students. I am not complaining that they have such a class. It would be proper, perhaps, for us to have one.^f Sines writing mv first papar, a catalo?u3 of the Univer sity for the year 1888 has fallen into my hands. It gives, the age of admission to the University at that time as fourteen years. The schema of free tuition began in 1881, seven years bafore. How then cam the recent raising of the age indicate anything as to the purpose of an Act taken nearly a decade before? As to the curriculum, Colonel Hammond now admits he does not know, but may have echoed the claims of certain University professors. He can make a comparison of the courses of study when-
TSub-freshman work at the University was provided for last summer, ana yet the raissd curriculum is otsred is pro >f of amity towards the church colleges. If tds all;:il riiss 1 curriculum meant friendship, what doss this conf ;s*ed l^wirinj o ths curricujum mean?

66
ever he chooseg to do .so and decide for himself which is the higher course. He probably has both catalogues. I know he has Emorys, for the day after my last article ap peared, he wrote me for a copy and I sent it to him at once. He evidently received it and consulted it, for he tells with accuracy the number of students in Emorys sub-freshman class, although he fails to say that the number of students in the collegiate department at Emory College (not coun ting sub-freshmen) was during the past year 207, while the number at Athens, counting post-graduates, seniors, juniors, sophomores, freshmen and electives in both Franklin Col lege and the State College of Agriculture, was only 161.
I may add that it-might be proper to organize a sul>freshman class at Athens (I have heard it was established by the trustees the other day, though I have seen no notice of it in the papers); but if it were established with free tuition provided by legislative appropriations and funding acts, it would be illogical to deny that it was intended to create by it an unfair competition with the Gordon Insti tute, the Moreland Park Academy, Prof. Meagleys school and other similar institutions. Men are supposed to intend the consequences of their acts.
Here is an interesting paragraph which shows the Uni versity has suffered from the land scrip as well as the land scrip from the University. Col. Hammond says:
" To make room for other studies we crowd thesopho more year perhaps too much, but I submit that when it is considered how many other things the United States Acts of 1862 and of 1887 require us as holders of the laud scrip fund to teach, we cannot arrange our curriculum with the exact regard to a mere college course as freely or perhaps as scientifically right as we could do were no such contract obligation resting upon us."
But while there is doubtless much truth in what Colonel Hammond here says, his explanation does not explain The overcrowding of mathematics in the sophomore year is not in the Agricultural College course, but in the A. B.

67
course which, if I understand the catalogue, belongs only to Franklin College. That college ought not to be affected by the United States Acts of 1862 and 1887 unless Frank lin College is using the land scrip which was appropriated to the State College of Agriculture.
That I be not further tedious to your readers, I hasten to consider a personal complaint of Colonel Hammond. Referring to my criticism of his unhappy allusion to Mr. Seney he says:
"Had Dr. Candler asked some sensible, candid friend privately whether he could so inquire with propriety, I think the question would not have been asked publicly. I think his friend would have told him that it was unfair to leave off my words: It is wrong to assail a mans motives without strong evidence, which words stood immediately in front of the remark which he has thus garbled as quoted above. I think his friend would have t.>ld him that to class me witli certain lewd fellows of the baser sort, making charges against the dead, that his remark that he had not expected to see the vile slander introduced to public notice by a worthy gentleman, and he a Methodist, even though he should do.so by suggestion or illustration, and the capping of his climax with the words that such a man as Colonel Hammond ought to abhor such a charge, made his inquiry and his comments thereoii not only an absolute perversion of my meaning, but also insulting. They did excite in me just indignation, but I trust that even that .has passed away. I know that Dr. Candler did not intend them as an insult. I attribute them to his naturally combative nature."
That the public may clearly judge between us on this issue I reprint, even at the risk of wearying your readers, his original words and my comment upon them. I asked:
"May I enquire if Colonel Hammond designed to cast odium upon the cause of Emory College and the good name of her"benefactor by suggesting interrogatively a charge he was unwilling to make affirmatively when he penned the following:

68
"Suppose one should fix the date of Mr. Seneya gifts to Emory and Wesleyan Female College and then show that soon afterwards he obtained from Georgia the charter of the East Tennessee, Virginia and Georgia Railroad Com pany, so damaging to the Western and Atlantic Railroad, which it paralleled, and which the State owned, and then charge that the Methodists in the General Assembly whovoted for that charter were by Seneys gifts to her .col leges, bribed to do a wrong to the State? Would there not be just indignation."
On this paragraph I commented as follows: "I understand that some years ago certain lewd fellowsof the baser sort tried to give currency to this unworthy charge against the man who gave more to higher educa tion in Georgia than any man ever gave; but I had riot ex pected to see the vile slander introduced to public notice by a worthy gentleman and he a Methodist, even though he should do so by suggestion or illustration. It is a charge opprobrious to the Methodists of the State, as well as libelous upon Mr. Seney. It can have no standing among the respectable people of Georgia until they have become so degraded that ingratitude cannot disgrace them and the re quital of generous help with scandalous abuse will bring no blush to their cheeks. Such a man as Colonel Hammond ought abhor such a charge." It will be seen at a glance that the platitude which pro ceeded Colonel Hammonds allusion to Mr. Seney and which was omitted for the sake of economizing space, (for my article was necessarily long) does not, in the slightest change the sense of what he said, and that to omit it was not to "garble" his words. He is right when he says he knows I did not intend to insult him. For Colonel N. J. Ham mond, I have the high est respect personally, and on many occasions, both pri vately and publicly, I have expressed my esteem of him. But I .should be unworthy the position I hold and of the confidence of my people if I failed to resent any aspersion east on the name of George I. Seney, for his gifts to

69
Emory College and the Wesleyan Female College. Know ing Colonel Hammoud as a man of extensive resources, I could not understand why, from among thousands of pos sible illustrations of his truism concerning "a mans mo tives" he should have chosen the illustration he did choose unless he meant for it to serve other purposes than those of illustration. This was the most natural interpretation on the face of the paragraph, and was the more natural when I remembered that this sneer at Mr. Seney was uttered in certain quarters some years ago. Of this, how ever, Colonel Hammond says he had no knowledge and I accept in good faith his disavowal of any intention to re flect on Mr. Seney. His illustration was certainly, how ever, very infelicitous, and he should be thankful for the opportunity to disclaim its apparent purpose, for I was not alone in my view of it. Indeed, I may frankly conless it irritated me ana oeing irritaica l \va unwilling 1*print anything in reply without careful consideration. Hence I read the paragraph before it was printed to three prominent gentlemen, the peers of Colonel Hammond in age, experience, culture and piety. Without either of them knowing the opinion expressed by the other two, they unanimously agreed that my interrogation was proper and my comment just. At the suggestion of one of them I changed the last sentence which I had written thus: "Such a charge Colonel Hammond cannot fail to abhor," so that it read, "sucli a man as Colonel Hammoud ought to abhor such a char;." *
* All the three approved it -unanimously" as it appeared. The friend who suggested the change was the last to whom I showed the paragraph before it was printed. When it was published all ap proved it Commenting on the paragraph in a subsequent letter Co onel Hammond said : "I have no further comment to make except that I think that had I had so much doubt as to the propriety of any thing I had written in such a discussion that it took the bolstering advice of three friends as to its propriety, before pub ic utterance, it would not have been published " Quite likely, but when did Colonel Hammond ever d iubt the propriety of anything he ever said or did, or of anything he was about to say or do? Witness his in felicitous allusion to Mr. Seney.

70
I have desired to avoid any possible injustice to Colonel Hammond and have not applied to him an epithet as strong even as the word "combative." I complain of noth ing he has written. I neverwhine in controversy.
If I have done him injustice I regret it, and offer him apologies. The illustration which he chose to use was very infelicitous. Had he asked some sensible, candid friend privately if he could use it with propriety, I think his question about Mr. Seney would not have .been asked pub licly, and I should have been spared the necessity of even temporarily wounding my distinguished friend in dis charging a duty which I conceived I owed to the memory of the dead benefactor of the college over which I have the honor to preside.
W. A. CANDLER.

71
CHAPTER V.
CAXDLER TO HAMMOXD A PARTING WORD.
From Atlanta Constitution of July 23, 1893.
Editor Constitution : "The best of friends must part," and I must take leave of my friend, Colonel X. J. Hammond. I should have attended to the formality earlier after his notice that he must be going,* but undischarged responsibilities which accumulated during my absence in Kentucky last week have absorbed my attention for sev eral days past to the exclusion of other things
It is not necessary to multiply words in parting, for my friend and I may meet again; but I canno: allow him to depart without relieving his mind of some misapprehen sions under which he seems laboring concerning my fair ness on certain points. On the main issue of fact and law he seems now to have about agreed with me and when I shall have removed the few remaining misapprehensions which I have mentioned perhaps ^e shall see eye to eye.
In reference to the report of Messrs. I. H. Hand and AC. Hill on the land scrip, he says:
"I have been unable to find the paper "which Dr. Candler spoke of as a report on this subject. His language was: A report to the legislature some year or two ago signed by Hon. I. H. Hand and Hon. A. C. Hill, said, etc. I have been told that it is a minor.ty report of two leading Alliancemeu. If it be a minority report the doctor ought to have so called it, lest he should mislead his readers, as would a lawyer mislead who would read a dissenting argu-
*In his reply to the 'letter which makes Chapter IV of this book, Col. Hammona had said: "Other points need to be noticed, but cir cumstances compel the closing of these weekly letters.11

72
ment as the opinion of the court. I have heard of such conduct in 'justice-courts.'"
My friend seems to have an infirmity about not being able to find things. This report he will find ou pages 729 to 734, house journal, of 1891. (It is not found in Cobb's new digest,* but the book in which it may be found can be had at the capitol in Atlanta or at the office of the ordi nary in any county). I did not have a copy of the house journal when I wrote my first letter. (Since Colonel Hammond's constitutional provision was adopted the State does not publish its legislative Acts at sectarian institutions). I had a pamphlet copy only of the report signed by Messrs. Hand and Hill. It is a minority report, aa any justice court lawyer would know when I said it was signed by only two members and was a report to the legis lature, and therefore the work of a joint committee. The majority report is by three members (just one more thai* the minority), and itself is such interesting reading that I regret I did not have it when I wrote my first letter. That my friend may have a taste of both, I will in this letter give him a quolation from the majority report hav ing given him a paragraph from the minority in my former letter. That he may have no trouble in finding it, I will say that it is found on pages 756 to 758, house jour nal, of 1891, and in it is this paragraph:
"So interwoven are the two colleges that it is almost impossible to say what number of students are taught in each college, as students attending one receive the benefit of the other, if desired. We doubt if the legislature of the State by legislative enactment has ever located under the terms of the Act of the general government, the State College of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts, and this quesr tion should be settled c.nce and for all."
Put this alongside of section 4, of the Act of Congress, July, 1862, creating the land scrip, which provides that it
Col. Hammond in acknowledging liis error about the .\ ct of 1830, bad intimated lie was mis ed by Cobb's New Digest.

73
"shall be a perpetual fund and shall never be used (except as in this Act, provided in section 5), and the interest of which shall be inviolably appropriated by each State, which may take and claim the benefit of this Act, to the endowment, support and maintenance of at least one col lege, where the leading object shall be, without excluding other scientific and classical studies, and including mili tary tactics, to teach such branches of learning as are re lated to agriculture and the mechanic arts, in such manner as the legislatures of the States may respectively prescribe, in order to promote the liberal education of the industrial classes, in the several pursuits and professions in life."
It appears that the committee doubted, and with good reason, the existence of any legally constituted State college of agriculture in Georgia, though the money has been used twenty years. The institution which they de scribed as su " interwoven " with the University as not u> be distinguished in the matter of the students of each, seems to be a sort of phantom affair "now you see me; now you dont." Did the Act of Congress mean such an arrangement? Is the good faith of Gporgia to be put in doubt in order to allow the Agricultural College fund to be used for University purposes ?
Let my friend take choice between the reports, either the minority or the majority, as suits him. They are both interesting reading, whether read separately or together. They can be found in house journal, 1891, at the ordinarys office. Speaking with reference to my assertion that an Epis copal Methodist was never Chancellor of the University, (an assertion which is strictly true) my friend says:
"Why did he not tell how we tried to make Dr. Hopkins, when he recently left the presidency of Emory, the Chan cellor of the University, and were prevented only by the fact that he preferred to be at the head of the Technological College, where he is now so ably serving the State?"
I will tell him frankly, it was because I did not know it.

74
I do not even remember to have heard so much as a rumor that Dr. Hopkins was approached on the subject. I now learn, however, that individual members of the board of trustees wrote him privately, and he declined thproposal. It is surely not to be supposed that I would have know ledge of such a correspondence. What assurances of elec tion they gave him or how well they might have been able to fulfil their assurances I do not know. I only hear that Dr. Hopkins, when President of Emory College, was writ ten to and asked to allow the use of his name in the elec tion for Chancellor, at Athens. Dr. Strickler was really elected, I believe, and declined after the election. It was perhaps thought best to sound Dr. Hopkins beforehand, because of his well-known opposition to the free tuition scheme of the University, for he had said in his report, as President of Emory College, to the Conferences in 1886:
"It is gratifying to say that there is a growing reaction in the minds of our people against an iniquity which has been too long endured. I refer to the fact that thinking men of our own and onher denominations feel that something is wrong somewhere, when they must not only help their own struggling institutions, but at the same time pay taxes to support a system of free college tuition in the institu tions of the State. Whatever our legislators may do in the days to come to remedy this injustice, our people should see to it now that their own college has no ground of complaint against them for failing to foster and protect it."
I d-> not know if this printed utterance of Dr. Hopkins was the reason for sounding him beforehand So far a* I know, however, he was never .elected, though Col. Hammoud says he declined. It may be that the reason he de clined to be called away from the service of his alma mater to the University at Athens was found in what he vigor ouely declared to be "an iniquity too long endured." He is not a man to participate in iniquity.

75
My honored friend gives us some more history after this style:
"When the University began Methodist and Baptist in fluence was not so predominant in Georgia as now. There were not a handful of either here. It seems, therefore", a little unfair thus to count against the University all the years prior to 1836, when our first denominational college was chartered."
This is not good history. The Methodists were more numerous in Georgia in 1801, when the University started than were the members of the church to which all the chancellors of the University belonged from 1801 to 1860. I cannot speak so positively about the Baptists, but as far back as 1805, they were strong enough to plan for a college of their own and petitioned the legislature fur a charter for it without success. I cannot give their numbers in the year 1801, but I doubt not they also were more numerous than the church of the chancellors, for in 1829, when Dr. Alouzo Church, of Vermont, was elected to the chancellor ship, the white members of the Methodist church in Geor gia numbered about nineteen thousand, and the white Bap tists were over twenty thousandthile in 1849 twenty years later the Presbyterians numbered but 5,059 (See Whites Statistics.) Among the Georgia Baptists in 1829 were such great men as Henry J. Ripley, Adiel Sherwood, W. T. Brantly, Sr., and among the Methodists I need mention only Stephen Olin, of whom in 1842, Alexander Stephens wrote to his brother Linton that he would not have given the advantages which he derived from Olins methods as a professor for all my college course besides." Olin was then a professor at Athens. But a chancellor was brought from Vermont, as Chancellor Meigs had been previously brought from Connecticut, Fiuley from New Jersey, and Brown and Waddell, from South Carolina. In this con nection, I might from some old Georgia newspapers of about that period "unfold a tale" of how Olin finally came to

76
leave Athens which would enforce all I have said. But I forbear. Let that go.*
Here is another brief quotation from my friends last piece:
"The States field of action is in the common schools and in the University and its branches. What she can not furnish in the former must be had in the latter, unless she abandons the field of higher education and turns it over to our denominational colleges and to colleges outside of Georgia. To that I am opposed. That Dr. Candler seems to favor."
My friend must surely know better what my postion on this subject is. He read my pamphlet of September 6, 1889, for he seems to read and preserve most of what I publish. It is well. It will do him good as doth the truth the upright in heart. In that pamphlet, from which he quotes bo often, he found the following words of mine aua he should not have forgotten to quote them:
"Most of the people in Georgia, who patronize colleges at all prefer th>j church schools. They do not say to tho minority who prefer to patronize the University at Athens. ^You shall patronize our schools; but they do say to the minority, If you prefer not to patronize a religious school, do as we do, and pay for what you prefer. They do not say, as they have been unfairly represented as saying, J0nly denominational colleges succeed, and only denomi national colleges should succeed, but they do say the State should not toll taxes from the denominations, and then devote a part of its funds to a policy designed to hin der he denominational colleges from succeeding."
. "Another scrap of history is interesting in this connection. About the time Dr. Olin left Athens, Judge A. B. Longstreet was also de feated for a professorship there. Some said it was because he was a .Methodist. But the most common belief was that it was for politi cal reasons, his views on nullification not being acceptable to the party in Georgia which then had predominant influence in the Board of Trustees of the University. Suppose two political parties, like those of Troup and Clark, in 1830, were again to appear in Georgia, and one should get control of the University. Would the school teach protection or free trade, bimetalism or monometalism ?

77
Referring to my opposition to the funding Act of 1891r he says:
" He is a great friend of the common schools, whos& bonds were funded in 1873 at 7 percent, for 100 years, at which he has not complained. The interest is the same as to both, the time doubled as to the common school. TheUniversity has no bonds to fall due in 1896, and should any body give her some and the State instead of paying them off should accept them and agree to devote their interest only to educating her sons at Athens, no great harm can come. Dr. Candler suggests none, except that thereby theremay be more students at Athens and fewer at Oxford than might be otherwise." *
I answer: The funding bill for the common school fund, approved February 19, 1873, was essentially differ ent from the Universitys funding bill of 1881, as any one can see by comparing them. As far as I can ascertain the common schools have never received anything from this source and it was repealed by section 43 of " an Act to amend; revise and consolidate the common school laws " approved October 27, 1887. This Act specifically declares of the common school fund that it " shall not be invested in bonds of this State, or in other stock except when investment is necessary to carry out the conditions of an endowment, devise, gift or bequest." Why did Col. Hammond roll out a Quaker gun in the face of this law of 1887. Was he ignorant of it, or did he think the public
* On pages 134 and 135 Col. Hammond calls attention to the fact that he mentioned this funding bill twice before [ replied and that I was nearly a month replying. He seems to attach much value to the fact as if it conta ned some deep significance. The explanation is very simple: The Atlanta Constitution used its Sunday editions only for printing all the Colonels pieces and most of mine, he writing one Sunday and I the m-xt. Hence, if any point was overlooked even for one letter it would be adjourned nearly a month. The point he made abmit this funding bill was so " empty and worthless I forgot to answer it until he made it tl.e second time.

78
iguorant?* Maybe he was again misled by "Cobbs New Digest." The common schools never received any thing from tho Act of 1873, but the University has already funded about $275,000, and from it reaps an indirect ap propriation of over $9,000 annually by thus doubling the interest which the people pay.
Against the University funding bill I have already sug gested its unconstitutionality because it increases the bonded debt of the State, or may do so, and because it does this in order to maintain an unfair competition with Mercer and Em-jry, though at the present rate the scheme fails, for Athens is behind both of them, the attend auce at Athens by the catalogue in 1892-93 being 161, in college (not 210 as Colonel Hammond erroneously states), 11 in the winter course of agriculture, "so-called," and 38 in law; while at Emory there \vere2U7 in college alone and 67 sub-freshmen.
The colonel continues: "It is true that, so far as the law is concerned, a Mussul man or an agnostic may now be a professor at Athens. And so he may be at Oxford or Macon, so far as the law is concerned. In each college the sole protection is the character of the electing body and none other is needed." Since the Colonel is head of the "electing body" at Athens, I should like to know if it is true, as I have heard,
*On page 137 of his book Co'. Hammond shows that this funding bill was repealed even earlier than I said viz: February 25, 187t>. This I did not know when I wrote, indeed I had no copy of the Acts of 1870 at hand. But in my opinion the Act of 1887 would have oper ated to repeal the Act of 1873 if the law of ISTii had not already done so. As the law of 1887 was an Act to '' revise, amend and consolidate" all the school laws then in existence, my opinion seems just, for it embraced the law of 187(5 with all the rest. In justice to Col. Hammond I am bound to say that I now have the best, of reason for saying he did not know the Act of 1873 had been re pealed when he first called attention to it.
On page 130 of his book, in the part added since "circumstances closed his weekly letters," Col. Hammond suggests that the passage of the Act of 1873 was an endorsement by the State of the policy of funding " school incomes. " If so its repeal indicates the with drawal of such endorsement. Why isn't the University's funding bill also repealed ?

79
that one or more instructors in the University are not members of any church. Such could not be elected at Emory or Mercer. The electing bodies at these institutions are so bound to the Georgia Conferences and the Baptist Convention as to make such an. election impassible. They may elect other than Methodists at Emory, for Patrick Mell once taught there; or they may elect other than Bap tists at Mercer, for there are Methodists in Mercers lawfaculty. But no man can be elected at either place who is not a Christian at all.*
There are sundry other petty sophistries and misappre hensions in my friends last communication, but I will not mar the peace of this parting hour by exposing them. The public sees through them already and he will too, by and by.
Now, let us all rise and join hands and sing that old familiar song, "Farewell, Farewell, is a Lonely Sound," or, if any prefer we will sing, "Then Youll Remember Me."
W. A. CAXDLER
The character ot the electing body!" But what guarantees that in a State school? Political, not religious, influences most com monly control iu the appointing of such bodies. The Board of Trustees at Athens in 1S:>U was increased in order to overcome polit ical influences then supposed to control it, and the body was consti tuted of an equal number of Troup and Clark men to prevent the recurrence of such a state of things. History may yet repeat itself in Georgia.

p*
i
80

APPENDIX.

An efifort has been made by some persons in Georgia to-

weaken the force Of what the writer has said concerning"

v

higher education by charging that his views were the pro

duct of his relation to Emory College as its president. The

injustice of this chaige will be apparent when the follow

ing pages are read. They are made up of three editorials-

which were written when the writer was an editor of the

Nashville Christian Advocate. They appeared in that

journal more than a year'before he was elected presi

dent of Emory College and when he had not the remot

est idea of ever being the president of that or any other

educational institution.

The conclusions reached in these editorials were the re

sult of an investigation of facts. The investigation was

made with no other purpose than to find the truth, and to-

present it as clearly and forcibly as the writer could..

He was in no wise influenced by personal or official inter-

ests; there were no such interests involved in the subjects

discussed.

It may be added without impropriety that if he had

consulted personal interests he would never have accepted

the presidency of Emory College. He undertook that

work with full knowledge that it would bring him losses,

but with the conviction that to do so was to undertake a

duty he owed his church and his native State. The losses

have/ been sustained. The duty has been discharged as

best he could. By the record he is willing to be judged.

False charges against the honesty and sincerity of his

motives do not change the facts of Georgia's school his

tory which he has set forth, nor impair the force of his

plea for the education of the masses, nor disturb his peace

of mind.

81
I.
ABOUT HIGHER EDUCATION IX THE UNITED STATES.
(From Nashville Christian Advocate, May, 1887.)
It appears from the last report of the Commissioner of Education of the United States that there are in our country 365 colleges and universities, manned by 4,836 instructors, and attended by 65,728 pupils. These institutions own property in productive funds, grounds and buildings, to the amount of $105,307,117.
These valuable "plants" are to a great extent under the influence, if not the direct control, of the church of God.* It is of record that they have paid good dividends of intellectual power and religious usefulness to their devout founder and patron.
The following paragraph taken from a recent issue of that great Presbyterian papec,the />iterfor,brim*$ the statistics down to dite, and enforces the conclusions drawn from the figures:
"The remarkable growth of American colleges is the direct result of American liberality. What has been accomplished has been accom plished not primarily by State, but chiefly by the church and indi viduals. No self-supporting system of education has been found possible for the people. The necessary cost of a college education is still paid, and for all we can see must continue to be paid, by philan thropists and patriots. The present Commissioner of Education, after an exhaustive study of the problem, finds that throughout our 415 colleges two-thirds of the cost of tuition and other necessary expenses are paid out of endowments, one-third only being met by tuition fees. And it is a fact worth remembering that while the ten largest State Universities have endowments of $17,699,000, the ten largest ecclesiastical colleges own $16,935,000 of property; and the ten principal colleges endowed by individuals are worth $21,8o6,000. It will seem no less strange to those who receive their information only through the non-religious journals, to be told tnat of 43,000 students who can be called students, only 10,000, according to gov ernment reports, are in the institutions from which religious teach ing is so carefully excluded. The proportion of students in denom inational and privately endowed colleges is greater to-day than it was forty years ago. And so far from these institutions losing their hold upon the--American public, they are steadily receiving from $2,250,000 to $8,000,000 a year in fresh endowments."

j

82

v-

Of these 365 institutions of learning, 278 are denomi

national schools, and in them 3,509 instructors teach over

50,000 pupils.

;

Most of the presidents of the remaining 87 non-sectarian

I

schools* are ministers of the gospel. States may furnish

1

money to make schools, but they must come to the

/J

church to man them. The learning and unselfishness

*

. required for such work are not produced in sufficient abun-

j)

dance outside the church to supply the demand.

;

In these facts a thoughtful person will find much

;

material for profitable meditation. In them the ignorant

."

.

religionist who looks with suspicion on learning, and the

arrogant scientist who looks with contempt on religion,

will alike find correction of their folly.

But chiefly the educational secularist will find rebuke

and instruction by a careful consideration of the facts

brought to our attention by the Commissioners report.

..

It has come to be quite the fashion in some quarters to

*

decry sectarianism in education, and eulogize educational

work performed by the State. Suppose in obedience to

this cry, the church should abandon the work of higher

education in this country. What result should we expect?

Nearly three-fourths of all the colleges in the land would

be closed, and more than four-fifths of all the students

pursuing collegiate courses in the United States would be

turned out of doors.

The church cannot abdicate this important function nor

renounce the educational policy it involves. If there is

any subject concerning which she has a right to speak and

to b& heard, it is the higher education of the people. No

secular agent, private or public, has done so much for the

cause as she. No one is doing so much. From Harvard,

the oldest, down to the latest established, there is hardly

an institution of learning in the country that did not have

Not half of the 87 are State schools. Such colleges as Harvard and Tale are counted among the 87.

83
its birth in, and its growth from, Christianity. If denominatioualism. be such a horrible evil as some -would have us believe, we should make haste to take down the walls of nearly all our schools of higher grade and brush the bricks and stone, for they were laid in denominational mortar.
But, after all, it may appear that church schools do rather better work, as well as more of it, than any other kind of schools. If we remember correctly, Daniel Web ster was graduated from that good old denominational college of the Congregationalists, Dartmouth, and John C. Calhoun was prepared for college at a Presbyterian acad emy conducted by the Rev. Dr. Waddel, subsequently graduating from Yale College, and bearing to the last the Calvinistic imprint of old Timothy Dwight, then president of that institution. It was Rev. John Harvard who gave the first money and a name to the oldest college in America> fend Yale was first projected as a religious school under the trusteeship of the ten principal ministers of the colony of Connecticut. In the establishment of William and Mary College, the Virginians voted "that for the advance of learn ing, education of youth, supply of the ministry, and pro motion of piety, there be land taken upon purchases for a college and free schoole, and that there be, with as much speede as may be convenient, houseing erected thereon for entertainment of students and schollars." The General Assembly asked for a royal endowment of the college, "to the end that the Church of Virginia may be furnished with a semenary of ministers of the gospel, and that the youth may be piously educated in good letters and manners, and that the Christian faith may be propagated amongst the the Western Indians to the glory of Almighty God."
Prom all of which it appears that from the earliest his tory of the Colonies to the present time, the church of God has done the most and the best which has been done for the higher education of the people in this country. The State, when compared with her, is but a novice in the busi-

84
ness. In colonial times the State took a hand in educa tion because, under the forms of a religious establishment, it took the oversight of the church. The work was left to the church to direct, and when under republican govern ment, church and State were separated it should have been still left so. It belongs to her, and she will continue to prosecute with success this godly work long after the world has condemned the awkward effort of the State as an unauthorized intrusion upon the field of personal and ecclesiastical responsibility. Her ministrations in these holy things will be welcomed by the people when the edu cational, ventures of the State shall have been discarded as relics of the impertinent paternalism of a monarchic age.

85
II.
A VICIOHS AND OPPRESSIVE POLICY.
(From Nashville Christian Advocate, May, 1887.)
In determining what ought to be the educational policy
of this country, it is important to know what the people prefer, because under republican government the will of the people should be respected, and when they indicate a decided opinion thty commonly have a reason for it. Do the people of the United States prefer that the work of higher education shall be done by the State or by the church? Let the answer be found in the facts reported by the Commissioner of Education.
From his report it apnears that in this country there are 278 denominational colleges and universities, supplied with 3,509 teachers, and attended by 53,856 students; while there are of non-sectarian institutions, (including both State and private establishments) 87 schools, with 1,327 teachers and 11,872 pupils. If these figures are com pared, it will appear that there is an average of about 193 pupils and 13 teachers to each church school, while there is an average of only about 136 pupils and 15 teachers to ach secular school. From these figures it is manifest the people of the United States have a decided preference for education by the church.
Their choice in the matter will appear the more remark able if we remember tiiat the 87 non-sectarian schools own property in grounds, buildings, and productive funds to the amount of $54,104,271, while the 278 denomina tional schools have only $51,202,846. Parents prefer send ing their children to church schools, though the teachers are fewer and the appliances of iu-itraction less costly than those of non-sctarian institutions.
What reasons can be given for this choice ol the people?

?
fit

3

86

fe

We opine the first and greatest reason is, the people of

this country who are able to give their children college

training are mostly religious people, and therefore prefer

that their children shall be religiously instructed as no

non-sectarian or State school can instruct them. While

religion does not always enrich people, irreligion does

much to impoverish them, and collegiate opportunities be

ing for the most part open to well-to-do people only, it

comes to pass that quite the largest part of the population

which patronize colleges is religious. Morever, before a

man cares for college training for his children, he must

have acquired a certain degree of taste and refinement,

and these also are very dependent upon religion for their

production. Having derived these benefits from their

churches, the people feel that the education of their chil

dren cannot be entrusted to wiser hands than those of the

churches, and the churches feel that their past achieve

ments and prospective successes must not be imperiled by

leaving the work of higher education to godless establish

ments.*

The people are wise to demand that higher education

shall be accomplished under the most positive and pro

nounced religious influences. The study of both the

physical and the metaphysical sciences raises so many

questions in religion that the work of teaching these sub

jects, if committed to persons like the teachers in State

schools, whose position is one of enforced neutrality, will

most likely result in producing indifference or hostility to

Christianity. Christian parents cannot afford to take the

risk on the piety of their children which education by State

schools inevitably involves.

Another reason why the people prefer the schools of the

church to the schools of the State is that they are more

accessible to persons of moderate means. The atmosphere

of State universities is for the most part stimulating to

* A school must not avoid simply becoming anti-Christian. It must not be neutral--unchristian.

87
aristocratic pretensions and extravagance. When tuition is made free at these institutions, the cost of attending them is still greater than the necessary expenses of a student at a religious institution which charges tuition fees. State schools in the United States can never be pat ronized by the masses. They are the luxury of the rich provided by taxation of the poor.
What right has the State to tax the poor, and the re ligious people who prefer religious schools, in order to provide colleges and universities for the children of rich men who are too godless to patronize a religious institu tion, and too stingy to establish schools of their own. If these gentlemen are too broad-minded to educate their aristosratic offspring at denominational colleges, why do they not unite in the establishment of broad, liberalistic institutions? Most of the people who patronize colleges in this country have been able to found schools for them selves, and have paid taxes to sustain schools for our privi leged classes besides. Surely the men whose culture over leaps all sectarian bounds, are able to erect institutions to their liking. That they do not do so, but depend upon the State to provide such institutions for them, is a shams. It is educational mendicancy. That the State bssfcows this charity upMi them is acrimj. It is robbing the poor to give advantages to the rich. It is unrepublican in every part. It belongs to monarchs to patronize learning and pander to the whims of privileged classes by exacting tribute of the common people.
Whatever be the right and duty of the State in the matter of elementary education, it requires no argument to prove that it has no more right to establish colleges and universities than it has to establish religion. It is quite time to begin a movement for disestablishment. The people have condemned the policy as unworthy of their patronage, and the people are right. It is a vicious and oppressive policy.

88

III.

DISESTABLISHMENT AND THE DISESTABLISHED.

(From the Nashville Christian Advocate, May, 1887.)

In the articles which we have been printing on higher

education in the United States we have insisted that the

State has no more right to establish colleges and univer

sities than it has to establish a form of religion. Accord

ingly, we have urged the disestablishment of the State

schools now existing in some states. The friends of these

institutions, as well as other friends of the general cause

of education, may be inclined to resist our proposition on

account of their fear that disestablishment would involve

;4

ihe crippling or death of these institutions. It is propeiv

therefore, that we consider the question, what effect will

disestablishment have upon the disestablished schools ?

We answer, that whatever might be the effect in other

directions, none of them would perish which deserve to

,

live. It is not creditable to the faculties of these institu-

"

tions to say that they would die if the State withdrew its

support. Other schools are living without this support,

and a school which, after years of State aid, is not strong

enough to survive in the open field of competition and on

a basis of its merits alone, is a school which is not fit to

live. The money now being spent on such a school is

worse than wasted it is squandered in sustaining an edu

cational swindle. We have too high an estimate of the

gifts and attainments of the teachers at these institutions

to believe for a moment that they could not sustain them

selves if the State should withdraw its help. They can

swim without the State holding its hand under them or

tying gourds about their bodies. More than this, we are

satisfied that if State aid were withdrawn, they would be

better sustained than they are now with it.

Until 1865, Harvard was more or less under the control

89
of the State. In that year its connection with the com monwealth was dissolved and the control of the University was vested in its alumni. At that time the total number of instructors in all of its departments was 45, and the total number of students was 936, and in less than ten years (1874) the number of instructors had increased to 110, and the number of students to 1,174, while the pro ductive funds and library showed almost as large a gain. The writer of the article on Harvard University in the American Cyclopedia says: "The University has no funded property from the public treasury, but has always depended upon the revenues from students and the gifts of individuals, which have far surpassed in number and mag nitude those made to any other American institution of learning."
In the same publication it is said: " Yale College ha* received but little aid from the State, and has depended mostly on the revenues derived from students and the gifts of individuals." Facts to the same purpose might be drawn readily from the history of other institutions of learning if our space allowed.
We make no question that the hand of the State which has been stretched out to serve certain schools has hin dered more than it has helped the cause of higher educa tion. The whole policy has been one which repressed the liberality of the rich by a too generous bestowal of educa tional facilities, provided by exacting taxes of the common people. It may seem a hard saying, but it is true, that this policy has been one of injustice to the poor and of demor alization to the rich. Worst of all, it has made educa tional cossets* of schools which would have been strong and enterprising if they had been left to work out their own salvation. It is not too late to save them now, and were they disestablished the stimulus thereby given to the zeal of their conductors and the benevolence of their
Cosset--"a lamb brought up by band " (Century Dictionary) t. e. on a bottle.

90
friends would largely exceed the value of the aid with drawn.
In addition to this financial benefit they would then be in position to enlarge their course of study so as to include instruction in religion and kindred subjects. The narrow ness of what are called State universities is nothing short of ridiculous. Pagan Athens would laugh at a university that omitttd to teach concerning the highest part of human nature. The neutrality upon questions of religion which is enforced at State colleges by their position is incompat ible with the work of higher education. It is impossible to teach any thing in philosophy with fairness and fullness if the teacher is restrained from discussing the religious side of the subject. Physical science will be taught very imperfectly if the instructor is not permitted to lead the class along the line where scientific knowledge impinges on religious truth. But, on these points, a teacher in a State school must be absolutely dumb, or he trespasses on the rights of citizens who are taxed to pay his salary. The spirit of independence in the man is thus throttled, and he touches the highest questions with the timidity and weakness of a ward politician endeavoring to straddle a dubious issue. Such a method inevitably damages both teacher and pupils, and is fatal to higher education. It operates from a position of enforced agnosticism, and re sults in a narrow culture.

91
IV.
HOW TO MAKE COMMON SCHOOLS SUCCESSFUL ESPECIALLY IN
SPARSELY SETTLED COMMUNITIES.
(The following address was delivered before the South ern Educational Association, assembled in Louisville, Ky., July 13th, 1893.
It is printed in this volume to present a phase of the edu cational question not so fully discussed in any other part of this book.) Mr. President :
Thomas Carlyle says: "This I call a tragedy that there should one man die ignorant who had capacity for knowl edge."
This is indeed tragedy. If one who might have seen loses sight, or if one who mi^ht have walked is lamed for life, we call it tragedy. How much more tragic is it for the mind to remain in darkness and for faculties to be crippled!
But this sad tragedy is enacted so often among us it has ceased to make the impression of tragedy. Even itsvictims do not realize the extent of their injury. The newspapers do not report it among their "crimes and casualities." Statesmen who would be aroused to intense interest and energetic action by an overflow of the Missis sippi or the presence of cholera, observe thousands strugling in waves of ignorance and tens of thousands perishing for lack of knowledge, and are not greatly moved by the sight. All the people witness this tragedy from day to day and from year to year without comprehending the murder of mind and the blight of life going on before them.
Nowhere in the English speaking world perhaps is this tragedy of more frequent occurrence thab in the South, and nowhere in the South is it more common than in our

92
^sparsely settled communities." This is true not because our people are sinners above all that dwell in Christendom, but because our difficulties are greater and our resources smaller. The population of the South is composed of two distinct and unmixable races, one not rich and the other very poor, widely scattered over territory equal to about one-fourth the area of Europe, or one-fifth of the national domain of the United States. The expansion of this state ment brings out all the perplexing factors of our difficult school problem, and the solution of that problem would be discovered to-day, if a perfect answer could be formed to the question assigned to this hour: "HOW TO MAKE
COMMON SCHOOLS KFFICIENT, ESPECIALLY IN SPARSELY
SETTLED COMMUNITIES."
Most of the people of the South live outside of all incor porated villages, towns and cities, and the common schoc.1 question of the South is in the main, how to make country schools efficient.
Take for example my own State of Georgia. She has of children between 5 and 18 years of age, (the period which in this discussion we will call the "school age") about 650,000,and not less than 500,000 of them are "country children." Her school problem is far more difficult than that of Massachusetts, a State, the area of which is only .about one-seventh that of Georgia, but whose total popu lation exceeds that of Georgia by the difference between 2,238,943 and 1,837,353 souls. The State of Massachusetts with 400,000 more inhabitants than Georgia, lias a school population of 130,000 less than Georgia.* (The children of Georgia do not get old as fast as the chil dren of Massachusetts, or else the Georgians have more children. Boston culture seems not to bring the blessing
In another place in this volume the difference is put at 93,000 in stead of 130,000. 'I his discrepancy is explained in this way: 'I he school age in Massachusetts differs from that of Georgia by one year. By that the figure is )K),000. In this address the number of children be tween 5 and 18 years in each State is given. This adds to (Georgia's children of school age about 40,000 children.

93

pronounced upon him "who hath his quiver full of them."^

Moreover, the assessed valuation of real and personal

property in Massachusetts was, in 1890, $962 per capita,

while in Georgia it was but $205; nor does this take into ac

count non-taxable bonds, of which Massachusetts has many

and Georgia has few. Furthermore, Georgia must provide

separate schools for the races if either race is educated, as

Massachusetts would also have to do if her negro popula

tion, instead of being only about 1 in 100, as it is, were 47 in

100, as it is in Georgia.

Leaving out of consideration for a while the relative

wealth of the two States, let us state the case in another

form. Massachusetts, with an area of only about 8,000

square miles, has a school population of 520,000; while

Georgia, with an area of 58,000 square miles, has a school

population of 650,000. It appears, therefore, that Massa

chusetts has on an average 65 children of school age to

every square mile of her territory, while Georgia has only

11, six of whom are whites and five of whom are blacks.

Massachusetts can, make her school districts of the area of

only one square mile and have on an average in each dis

trict enough children to give an enrollment of not less

than 50 pupils with an average daily attendance of 35;

while Georgia must make a school district of the area of

six square miles to secure an equal patronage if she should

educate the races together, or a school district of eleven

square miles if the races are separated, and her schools for

whites have an equal constituency with the white schools

of Massachusetts. But it is manifest that school enroll

ment and average daily attendance must be in inverse pro

portion to the distance of the children from the school

house, and that if there is but one school-house to every dis

trict of eleven square miles many of the children must be

at too great a distance to avail themselves of school privi

leges.

^_

When, therefore, Georgia with her 7,500 teachers secures

an enrollment of 381,000 with an average daily attend-

94
ance of 240,000, she has accomplished a far more difficult task than that which Massachusetts has accomplished when with 10,500 teachers she secures an enrollment of 376,000 with an average daily attendance of 278.000. Nor is this conclusion materially affected by the statement that Georgias schools run only 100 days while the schools of Massachusetts continue 170. Massachusetts is better able to pay 10,500 teachers for 170 days service than Geor gia is to pay 7,500 teachers for 100 days labor.
In this discussion I have considered the case of Georgia, because of that I am naturally better informed than of the case of any other State. But the condition of Georgia is very like that of all the southern States. The difficulties are the same in all, and the solution of Georgias difficul ties would be a solution of the school problem of the en tire South.
In all the South meaning by the word Kentucky, Vir ginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, Missouri and Tennessee we have an area of about 875,000 square miles, with a total population of 21,006.888; a school population of 7,250,000; an enroll ment of 4,500,000; an average daily attendance of 3,900,000, and about 100,000 teachers. The children of school age in the South make 33 per cent, of the population, though the children of school age in the entire Union are only 30 per cent, of the population, and in New England only 23 per cent. Many rich adults with few children on a small area have a school problem of far easier solution than that which confronts few adults of moderate means with many children scattered over a wide territory.
To put a school on every square mile of her territory, as Massachusetts can now do with her 10,500 teachers and only 8,000 square miles of area, the South must increase the number of her teachers from 100,000 to 875,000. To put a teacher for the children of each race on every square mile of her territory, the South must increase the number

95
of her teachers to 1,750,000, or about one-twelfth of her entire population must turn to teaching. Her teachers would be an army five times as large as her combined forces in the field at any time during the war between the States an ariny which her resources could not long sus tain.
The facts and figures brought forward in the foregoing remarks serve the double purpose of forestalling ungener ous criticism of our common schools by others, and of dis closing to ourselves our difficulties and the remedy for them. They show how widely our toiling brave people are scattered, and how many thousands of our little chil dren must pine in isolation and die in ignorance despite our best endeavors for their relief.
When a Christian reflects on these hard facts he has no disposition for censorious criticism. His heart in stinctively appeals in earnest supplication to the Good Shepherd, who leaves the ninety-nine sheltered by the fold and goes to seek with anxious care the stray lamb upon the mountains. He remembers with comfort how the Master one day "when, he saw the multitudes, was moved with compassion for them because they were tired and lay down and were scattered abroad as sheep having no shepherd."
The difficulty with our common schools, "especially the schools of sparsely settled communities," is two-fold: the lack of (1) more teachers, and (2) the lack of better teachers.
I. We need more teachers. The facts which we have been considering drive us to the conclusion that many chil dren are too far from the schools to be enrolled, much less to attend regularly. Many others who have been en rolled attend at great disadvantage and hence with great irregularity. A rain which raises the water in "the creek," a snow which fills the highway and a hundred other things common to country life, combine with distance to make the school of little or no profit to those who live furthest

96
from it the very class who perhaps most need instruc tion. Teachers and pupils alike are discouraged by theenforced irregularities; the teacher becomes careless be cause care does no good; the pupil is more confused than enlightened by such flashes of knowledge as reach him at the intervals of his attendance; and by and by the teacher is without a pupil and the pupil without a teacher, and the school closes. The teacher goes to another place and a new teacher comes to run the same course of vain effort, intolerable discouragement and inevitable defeat.
For this difficulty it is clear there is but one remedy. The engine is too far from the work to be done. The motive power, the schools, must be brought nearer. To da this we must have many schools, and perforce, they must be small schools. A number of small schools,, however feeble and insignificant they may appear, are more effective in the present condition of our section than a few large schools far removed from many of thepupils and irregularly attended.
We cannot hope to place schools as near together as they may be placed in New England. Our army of teach ers, after we have done the best we can and have recruited their ranks to the fullest extent of our ability, must still fight as the confederate forces fough t at Petersburg, with a thin line of battle and barely in call of each other. It will tax our resources to bring them within calling distance, and some will regard even a moderate proposal to increase their numbers as an unreasonable demand. But the demand must be made for doubling the force, and we must endure with patience the impatience of those who resist this demand. We cannot teach with only 100,000 teachers 7,250,000 children, scattered over an area of 875,000 square miles. To state this proportion is to prove it.
The South kept in the field during a four years bloody war upwards of 300,000 men. We must keep in the com mon schools at least 200,000 teachers during the next de cade. There is more involved in this war than was in-

97
volved in the conflict between the States, and it will cost not one-tenth as much to carry it on. To keep 200,000 teachers in our common schools will mean doubling the number of schools and doubling our school appropriations. Georgia must have 15,000 teachers instead of 7,500; Ken tucky must have 18,000 instead of 9,000. All the rest must double their force. In the long run a large force is cheaper than a small one. An insufficient force leaves al ways an increasing weight of ignorance to be lifted and a diminishing power of productive intelligence with which to raise it; while a large force diminishes the burden to be elevated and multiplies the power which brings it up. Teachers do not cost as much as soldiers nor as much as policemen. School houses cost less than saloons; educa tion costs less than ignorance.
II. We need not only more, but also better teachers in our common schools, if these schools are to be efficient, " especially in sparsely settled communities."
I bring no railing accusation against our common school teachers. Among them are many of the most patriotic men and heroic women who ever toiled and suffered and died to bless man in any age or clime. All of them are as good as our short-term schools and short-pay salaries will permit.
Our system of short terms and small pay must inevit ably operate to drive out of the schoolroom the best quali fied and retain the least competent teachers. A three or five months school, in the nature of the case, cannot be a good school for even that brief period. No really qualified man or woman can afford to make a profession of any em ployment which supplies work for less than half the year. A teacher, like other people, must live twelve months in the year, and if his school lasts only three or five months, his main engagement must be something else than teach ing, and the work of the school room become a mere side issue. To get the best teachers, the salary of a common school teacher mtlst be equal to a years support, and if we pay a years salary, there is no good reason why we should

98
not get eight or nine months work for it. Many of the> children, it is true, may not be able to attend for the full term, but some of them will be able to do so, and if otherscan only attend three months, it is all the more needful that they should meet good teachers when they do attend. As I have before said, good teachers cannot be had with out long-term schools and long-term salaries.
Some have fallen into the mistake of supposing that wecan improve the grade of our common school teachers by the endowment of normal colleges and the like, without increasing the appropriations to our common schools. This is a delusion which we should dismiss without delay If we could restrain the advancing years as Joshua made the sun stand still, so that the present generation of chil dren should grow no older whije waiting for their teach ers to be trained, and if all the while the normal collegesand all other colleges were turning out graduates by the thousands, we could not draw these qualified meu and women into the common schools when the machinery wasagain set in motion, unless we paid them living salaries. On the other hand, if our colleges were to turn out nomore graduates for the next ten years, and we would raise the salaries in the common schools to the level of a decent living, we would secure for most of the schools competentinstructors. Th ;re is not a school in the South offering a respectable salary which does not, in the case of a vacancy, have more applicants than it knows what to do with. Butcapable men and women will turn to other employment rather than enter schools which do not give teachers aliving. The more capable we make our college graduates the morfe surely they will go into other lines of labor, as long as the pay of teachers in common schools is less than the salaries of dry goods clerks and base-ball pitch ers.
And be it remembered, that small salaries hurt the schools for whites far more than they do the schools for blacks. Negro colleges, richly endowed by northern be-

nevolence are turning out many graduates. Coming out of these colleges they can not enter the law, medicine and other such professions, by reason of the prejudices of their own race, as well as by the attitude of the white people. They are excluded from merchandise by lack of capital. They must enter upon manual labor or teach school. An ill-paid school will bring them greater remuneration than manual labor. Most of them therefore now teach, and will do so with or without increased appropriations to common schools. But with white graduates, to whom all the professions are open, it is not so. Most of them, and the best of them, will not teach in the common schools without living salaries, which provide a years support.
In this connection, I venture to suggest that the salary system is better than the per diem system for paying teachers. The great law of supply and demand which ope rates in all business, (teaching as well as the rest) can then work out the much-to-be-desired result of providing good schools for both races. A competent negro teacher can be had for a smaller salary than a competent white teacher. This fact is ignored by the per diem system, and by consequence the negro schools often receive more than is necessary to secure competent teachers, while the white schools receive less than is necessary to secure com petent teachers. By the salary system school author ities may so divide the funds as to secure competent teachers for the schools of both races. If any draw back from this suggestion as if some horrible in justice were proposed, the remembrance of two facts will be sufficient to relieve their minds. 1. School salaries are not paid to endow teachers, but to improve schools and are to be fixed solely with reference to providing the greatest number of good teachers for all the schools. 2. The white people pay most of the school taxes and it is surely but simple justice that their money should be so expended as to secure good schools for their own children rather than to provide salaries for negro teachers above an amount

100
necessary to secure for the negro schools competent in structors. There is surely no good reason in morals or public policy why white schools should be made poorer than they might be in order to pay needless salaries to negro teachers without improving the negro schools.
Our common school appropriations must be increased, and when increased, they must be administered so as to give living salaries for eight months schools for both whites and blacks. This will give us mor and better teachers.
III. There is yet one other method by which our com mon schools can be made more efficient. Our people live too far apart. They must come together in farm-villages. The isolated farm life which we see all around us is with out parallel among any of the civilized nations of Europe or Asia, and our common schools can never reach their best estate while it continues.
The multitudes for whom Jesus felt compassion knew nothing of the isolation which our country people endure They lived in cities and villages and went out to their work. In Galilee alone, in the days of the Master, there were 200 towns, of 15,000 inhabitants and upwards. The same mode of life has prevailed in Europe from the most ancient times. Our Anglo-Saxon ancestors on the banks of the Elbe lived within inclosures which they called "tuns." These places secured them against enemies and provided for them a rich social life, and from them they went to their daily toil. When they had emigrated to Britain, their manner of life was not essentially changed. The early settlers in our own country also, especially among the Puritans, lived somewhat after the same sort. Perils from the savages made them huddle together, and forced upon them village life. The towns of Hadley, Hatfield, Northfield and Deerfield, on the Connecticut river, are to this day notable examples of this kind of living they remain villages of agriculturists. The old plantation system of our section operated to reverse all this, however, in the South. Homes were far apart; baronial domains stretched between neigh-

. 101
bor and- neighbor, and. to this day, though the old planta tions have been somewhat broken up into smaller farms, our people live too far apart,, -and the loneliness of rural life becomes the fruitful source of untold evils.
It is difficult to maintain schools and churches with a population so widely scattered, and then sub-divided among several denominations. The helpless wives and daughters at great distance from their natural protectors, become fearful and unhappy, as they read from time to time of outrages of lust worse than death. By consequence the country homes are often sold and agricultural pur suits are abandoned by -the people most competent to administer such estates, while habitations and employ ment are sought in some neighboring towns or cities where the family is secure, and churches and schools flourish.
The people who can not thus abandon the country are thus left by their more fortunate neighbors, more widely separated than before, with perils proportionately increased and churches and schools weaker than ever. It is evident that if this process is long continued it must beget the most distressing economic, social, moral and religious con ditions. Our people must be encouraged and helped to come nearer together.
Such a work, it is true, will bring many difficulties, but it will overcome far more difficulties than it will create. We cannot expect some old homes to be readily aban doned, nor aged persons to forsake the places where for years their atar fires have burned, where they have met joy and sorrow, where ten thousand memories gather, and ten thousand tender affections hold them.
But the yonng who are making new homes ca.i be in duced to mat. them close together, and the church and school-house should be made the rallying center around which these homes are made. If as many as a dozen families, or even a less number, can be induced to come together a nucleus will ,be formed which will draw others in course of time. The long-term school will follow;

102
books and periodicals will be passed from man to man,
and fromjhome to home; lectures and concerts will elevate and inspire, and a bright, active, intelligent, happy social life will take the place of the present weary discontent of
our agriculturists. Agriculture will not suffer from the change, but will be
improved by the quickened intelligence, deeper content ment, and more joyous life of the people.
Our rural people are really a sad people. Witness the songs that they sing. If a hymn is announced at a coun try church, though its sentiment may be never so joyful, it is almost invariably sung to a sorrowful tune. Mel ancholy airs express the melancholy spirit of a people made sad bv livine too much alone. And thus solitariness impairs their productive power hinders industry, and paralyzes invention. How different all would be if a rich village life should take the place of the present social leaniess among our country people.
With a brave, strong people dwelling in farm-villages, surrounded by the cheerful scenes of a thrifty agriculture; their children learning in well-kept schools; their homes free from fears of rude assault; their churches glorified by simple faith and vocal with joyous song; their social life sweet and pure, this southern land of ours would be come beautiful as the garden of the Lord the very gate of heaven.
With such scenes in mind and thinking to-day of all that our section has been and wishing for my people the best things in all the years to come, I cannot make for the South a better prayer than that of Burns for Scotland in his "Cotters Saturday Night:"
"O Scotia, my dear, my native soil, For whom my warmest wish to heaven is sent, Long may thy hardy sons of rustic toil Be blessed with health, and peace, and sweet content, And oh, may heaven their simple lives prevent from luxury's contagion, weak and vile. Then, howe'er crowns and coronets be rent, A virtuous populace may rise the while And stand a wall of fire around their much loved isle."

103
V.
"ANOTHER CHRISTIAN COLLEGE IN THE SOUTH."
(In. the spring of the year 1889, a movement was begun to establish a school of high grade for females, to be loca ted at Decatur, Ga., and to be conducted under Presbyte rian control and influence. It culminated in the estab lishment of that admirable institution, "The Agnes Scott Institute," founded by Col, George W. Scott, and named in memory of his mother. On November 12, 1891, the beautiful and commodious edifice was dedicated and the writer was invited to deliver one of the addresses on that occasion. The address which he delivered is printed in this volume that it may be read in connection with the foregoing utterances, and thereby, his views upon the sub ject of higher education be more clearly and fully understood. As relevant to such an occasion, he discussed the "value of "Another Christian College in the South," insist ing upon the truth of Guizots declaration that "in order to make education truly good and socially useful, it must be fundamentally religious." His remarks were as fol lows:)
MY FRIENDS: I rejoice with yon to-day in the dedica tion of this Christian college, founded by a great-hearted man to perpetuate the memory of a Christian mother, and to educate Christian mothers for the future. I am sure I fairly represent the church to which I belong when I say, nearly, if not quite, 150,000 Methodists in Georgia salute you to-day with words of congratulation and thanks giving. Georgians of every denomination, and of no de nomination, rejoice with you, and their joy would be even greater if they apprehended more-fully the significance of this occasion.
What do we here to-day? We dedicate "Another Chris tian College in the South." Such a fact means much.
Prior to the war between the States, the South had more children in college than did any other section of the Union. But war, that fell destroyer and arch-demon of vil, closed our colleges, dispersed their patronage, destroy-

104
ed buildings and endowments, and left most of our peopletoo poor to do anything for the rehabilitation of our pros trated institutions. Worst of all, from our poverty and other conditions resulting from the war, many of our people conceived a passion for wealth and a hunger for mere material prosperity, which has led them to ignore, if not despise, higher education.
And so it has come to pass, from having been the fore most patrons of learning in the country, the southern people have become the hindmost.
New England has one college for every four thousand square miles of her territory and five dollars worth of college property for every man, woman and child within her borders; while the South meaning by the word, Vir ginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Tennessee, Kentucky, Arkansas, Mississippi,. Louisiana and Texas has only one college for every seven thousand square miles of territory, and one dollars worth of college property 'per capita for all her people. Theaverage New England boy or girl, by reason of superior wealth, can afford to go twice as far to college as theSouthern boy or girl; but as it is, the New Englander hasonly about half as far to go as the Southerner to reach hiscollege, and on arrival finds it five times as well equipped. Massachusetts alone, which is about one-sixth as large as Georgia, and has ninety thousand less children to educate, has college endowments exceeding in value all the endow ments in the South by a million dollars; and little Rhode Island, whose area is contained in that of Texas over twohundred, times so small that if it were lost in Texas, theservices of a land-surveyor would be required to find it has college property valued at more than a half millica dollars above the total value of all the college property in the Lone Star State.
And great as is this inequality,it is daily growing great er. Of bequests and gifts to colleges and universities in the United States during 1890, institutions north of

105
Masons and Dixons line, received more than the entire value of every sort of college property in the South. The amounts received by the institutions of Massachusetts alone during last year, aggregated considerably more than was received by all the southern colleges during the same period. The Leland Stanford, Jr. University, with its eighty-three thousand acres of land and fifteen million endowment, is alone worth inore than all the college plants in the Southern States. And thus it appears we are falling behind even the West in educational enter prise.
It is well to look these facts squarely in the face and set about at once remedying the evil which they suggest. It avails nothing to plead our poverty as an offset to them. To offer explanations of them and excuses for them doesno good. That is an easy but very unprofitable task. Explanations and excuses can save our reputation only. But that does not greatly need saving. We should be most concerned to save the generation of boys and girls now about us, clamoring for the opportunities of a collegecourse. To-day is the day of their salvation. To-morrow will be too late, for they will soon pass the age of pupilageand when that is gone, it is gone forever. To save them to the purposes of educated, Christian manhood and woman hood, we must rely upon something more substantial than plausible explanations of our poverty and fair excusesfor our illiberality. Nothing will answer for this great work but cold cash and warm consecration.
Because I believe the munificence which founds thisadmirable institution, marks the beginning of a new era in the history of education in Georgia, ifindeed, I may not say a new era in the history of education in the South, I rejoice in this hour with joy unspeakable. The Scotts and, Pattillos and Harrises are harbingers of a brighter and better day in this confmonwealth.* Their example will be contagious, and from them, others will learn the high art of giving good gifts to colleges for the glory of God and
Hev. W. P. PattiHo, of Atlanta, had given $25,000 and Judge Y. L. 6. Harris, of Athens, over $6,000 to Emory College a short, time previous.

106
the blessing of men. The sight of such men is an inspira tion. The sight of a man who founds such an institution AS this, is so refreshing, and in the South so uncommon, I am tempted to ask our generous friend and brother to stand up and let us look at him, and see what manner of man is he who believes it better to invest money largely for the elevation of the race than to retain it for the grati fication of himself who finds his chief gratification in giving. A man who can do such a thing without dying and while still in the flesh is a most uncommon person. As great a man as the late Mr. Tilden, was capable of only post mortem, benevolence. He made an assault with intent to give five million dollars to a public charity, but died in the act. and his relations have since interposed to prevent such an act of violence acrainst tbo peace and dignify of Mammondom. But here is a man, still in life, of sonna mind and memory, and many years this side of the grave (we fondly hope) giving away thousands. It is a most uncommon and glorious spectacle.
But I know his modesty and forbear, forhe is like the first king of Israel, not only in that he is head and shoul ders above his fellows, but also in that when the people are most inclined to honor him, he is found "hiding in the stuff." Saul was a king of inches but one who does a deed of benevolence like this, the completion of which we witness, is every inch a king. In Europe, kings and princes have delighted to establish and endow institutions of learning. In this country we must look for such high service, not to men of regal birth but of royal souls, and with the unconstrained loyalty of grateful hearts we do reverence this day to the princely man by whose generosity this Christian school is planted. The crown which a lov ing people place upon his brow will provoke no enmity and bring no anxieties, and it
"Shall new luster boast When victors wreaths and monarchs gems Shall blend in common dust."

107
"While I rejoice at this dawning of a better day in Geor gia, I am especially glad that this is to be a Christian school. One of the most hopeful facts in the present history of the United States is that the higher education
and especially that of women is for the most part in the hands of the churches, and is likely to remain there. Of the 384 colleges and universities in our country, 288 belong to the churches; and of the 89,000 students in these colleges, there are over 70,000 in the denominational eol-
Moreover, these religious colleges will ultimately become the richest and best equipped educational institu tions 011 the continent. Many of them are so already, and every year will witness progress in this direction. Col leges and universities must depend in the main upon pri vate benevolence for their equipment and endowment, md the vast accumulations of consecrated Christian in dustry will, in the future, be dedicated to the enrichment of Christian schools. The wealth of these United States is in Christian hands, and the motives which will lead to its distribution for benevolent purposes are inspired and inHuenced by Christian instruction and creed. It must fol low, therefore, that most of such benevolence will be be stowed in the future upon Christian institutions. Neutral or negative institutions cannot reasonably expect such support. And this is well. It guarantees the permanence of euch gifts and insures the best results from them. The church of God never dies. States rise and fall; policies based on the popular will fluctuate with the caprice of the masses; personal and private enterprises perish with their projectors, but the church of God goes on forever! And lie who places in her hands the administration of his gifts appoints an executor who is immortal, and to whom is given the promises of divine guidance and the pledges of
The statistics are four years later, and therefore more accurate than the figures givan in the editorials taken from the Nashville Christian Advocate.

108
divine favor "as long as the sun and moon endure, through out all generations."
Furthermore, for doing the work designed to be accom plished by a college, the church, of all institutions, is the best fitted. Most students who secure a collegiate educa tion must spend four years away from home. The re ligious influence of the home in thus withdrawn, or oper ates at best under the great disadvantage of distance dur ing the most critical years of life. During these years opinions are formed, habits contracted and passions aroused which determine the character of all after-life. It is indispensible at such a period, if the student is to come forth at the end of the four years a Christian, that for the home influence which has been withdrawn, there shall be substituted in the college the most emphatic and distinct religious influence. In a republic like ours, where church and State are widely and wisely separated, such a definite religious instruction can not be had elsewhere than in a denominational college. Doctrinal vagueness and ethical generalities are not sufficient to curb youthful passions, form youthful opinions and control youthful habits as is necessary at such a time. An ambiguous faith and an indefinite instruction are not reliable securities against the perils which beset a boy or girl at college. Guizot said: "In order to make education truly good and socially useful, it must be fundamentally religious. It is necessary that it should be given and received in the midst of a religious atmosphere, and that religious impressions and religious observances should penetrate into all its parts."* All this I steadfastly believe, and I am glad this
Sir .\rchibald Alison, the author of the "History of Europe dur ing the French Revolution," noting the increase of depravity -with the spread of knowledge in France said: "It is not simple knowledge, it is knowledge detached from religion, that produces this fatal result. * * * The reason of its corrupting tendency in morals is evident --when so detached, it multiplies the desires and passions of the heart without an increase to its regulating principles; it augmentsthe attack ing forces without strengthening the resisting powers, and thence the disorder and license it spreads through society.' 'The invariable characteristic of a declining and corrupt state of society, is a progres sive increase in the force of passion, and a progressive decline in the influence of duty."

109
school is to be a. denominational school a Christian school --for outside the denominations there is no Christianity worth speaking of in this or any other land.
It is well for the people that the higher education of this country should be in the hauds of the churches. As I see it, the church must control with her authority and per meate with her influence the higher education of this great nation, or irreligion will become the mark of intelligence and ignorance the badge of piety among the people. If this should ever be the case, godlessness would become the fashion and holiness the jest of the people, and "modish vice would laugh obsolete virtue out of countenance." Ichabod might then be written upon all our institutions, for our glory and greatness will have passed away forever if such a condition of things shall ever take place. Against the approach of such direful possibilities an institution like this stands as a fortress of heaven, and he who estab lishes such an institution works a deed both of patriotism and piety for which all men should be grateful. You (ad dressing Colonel George W. Scott, the founder of the In stitute,) owe the public no apologies for placing this memorial of your devotion under the direction of the church of your faith and love the church which blessed with its benign ministrations your ancestry, and which will remain to guide with her instructions the footsteps of your posterity. You are rather entitled to the thanks of the entire Christian community that at the very outset you give to the Agnes Scott Institute a definite, strong, re ligious character. Let him who will, caricature it with the bad epithet "sectarian." For one, I thank God a Presbyterian has made a Presbyterian college which is not to be molluscan in the pulpy vagueness of its instruction, but which, vertebrated with a definite faith, will walk up rightly before God and man, bearing the burdens and do ing the work which only an institution thus organized can endure.
It is proper that this ceremony should be enacted

110
in the presence of the reverend fathers and brethren of the Presbyterian Church inGeorgia met in Synod. Let this institution be baptized amid their benedictions and pray ers, and if it shall s -rve to make the church of Knox and Edwards and Alexander and Hodge and Thornwell stronger in this section of the country, it will make this a. better land to live in, and will merit the favor of all good, men.
Finally, I rejoice that a mother in Israel, whose unwea ried ministries, unseen and unsung of men, produced such a son, is honored, through his devotion, by such a monu ment. By it, the name of Agnes Scott will be carried down to the latest posterity. Unborn thousands will en shrine that name in their hearts, and rise up to call her blessed. That name will be entwined among the schoolday memories of thousands of girls who in the years to come will tarry here awhile, and go hence thanking God they ever knew such a place. And when they have grown old they will whisper to childrens children in accents low and loving, the precious name of Agues Scott.
In the shadow of the monument, erected to the memory of this sainted woman, my mind reverts to the words of Robertson, of Brighton, concerning the monumental work of the Egyptian princess who cared for the infant Moses. He says: "In those days the Pharaohs of Egypt raised their memorials in the enduring stone of the pyramids,, which still remain almost untouched by time. A princess of Egypt raised her memorial in a human spirit, and just so far as spirit is more enduring thanstone, just so far is the work of that princess more enduring than the work of the Pharaohs; for when the day comes when the pyra mids shall be crumbled into nothingness and ruin, then shall the spirit of the laws of Moses still remain interwo-ven with the most hallowed of human institutions. So long as the spirit of Moses influences this world, so long shall her work endure, the work of the royal-hearted lady who adopted this Hebrew orphan child."

Ill
Ah I when one builds a monument like this a school which instructs and inspires human spirits he builds amonument which time cannot corrode or destroy, he buildsa monument before which the fleeting years pause in pass ing, to write ever new inscriptions of honor and praise. How holy, how almost divine is the toil by which is se cured the means to build such a monument! The homliesfc business is transfigured by it. The merchandise by which *uch gain is got is exalted almost to the level of worship. Why, sir, as I have thought of how you were using thefrait of your labor for the blessing of men and the spread of the truth, your vocation has become suffused with a poetic radiance an epic significance. I have thought of you as joining hands with the Almighty power, which, thousands of years ago in preparing this world for the habitation of men, slew hecatombs of beasts and creeping things, and hid away their bones under the soil of Florida that those rich deposits might, in these distant centuries,, so fertilize the earth as to soften the rigor of the decree of toil laid upon the sons of Adam, and multiply seed for the sower and bread for the eater. Thither have you gone and exhumed them and turned them into a vitalizing power which makes the harvest fields of the South to wave in double beauty and plenteousness.* But it has not been enough for you to unearth hidden resources and quicken the fertility of all our fields. You have looked deeper than secret treasures, and wider than waving harvests, to find the meaning of life and the purposes of God in the ages which have gone before and the years which are yet to come. You have found in the soul of man the goal towhich nature has tended from the beginning, and with the rewards of your labor, you have sought to develop the hidden resources of mind and to enhance the beauty of that fairest growth under Southern skies Christian, womanhood.
An allusion to the extensive phosphate interests of Col. Scott.

112
The fields bless such a man with their fragrance and fertility, the heavy-headed harvests nod in reverence as he passes by, the valleys rejoice and the little hills clap their hands. The prattling voice of childhood praises him and the faltering accents of the aged call his name in prayer. All nature blesses him. The heavens bend kindly above him, while from beyond the stars the voice of a sainted mothers approval comes softly falling down to mingle with the commendations of all good men and the benedic tions of the Almighty Father which rest upon his head to day.
God be merciful unto you and bless you and cause His face to shine upon you; guide you with His favor in the day-time and guard you with His faithfulness every night; establish the work of your hands upon you, and make His glory to appear unto your children.

STATISTICS.
For the convenience of his readers, and for the confir mation of his argument, the writer of this little book adds to the foregoing pages the most recent statistics of educa tion in the United States, which he has been able to ob tain. The figures given are from the Xcw York World Ahnanac for 1893, and are reprinted here precisely as they appeared in that publication.
There is a discrepancy between the common school pop ulation of Georgia as given here, and as it is reported by the official report of the State School Commissioner. The explanation is, that the school age as used here is from 5 to 18 years a difference of a year as compared with the period covered by the Commissioners figures. The differonce thus given in the number of children of school age is just about what might be reasonably expected from the different methods of calculation employed, and it assures us of the approximate accuracy of both the figures here given and the statistics of the Commissioners report.
The college statistics were compiled with very great care, as this writer has reason to know, and may be relied upon to be as nearly accurate as such estimates ever are.

STATISTICS OF EDUCATION.

THE COMMON SCHOOLS OF THE UNITED STATES.*

FUPILS.

lEstimad

STATES AXD TEBBITOBIE8.

Number of
Persons

No. Whole Average ,Teach-l,

5 to 18 Years

Number OBn rolled

ADttaeinlyd

ere.

of Age.

ance.

For

Salaries Total

Superin Expendi

tendents & ture.

Teachers.

P

ST. MctMic Ltie. Maine............. Xew Hampshire... Vermont.......... Massachusetts.... Rhode Island ..... Connecticut....... XXeeww JYerosreky..a............ Pennsylvania ..... M. Atlantic tiiv. Delaware......... Maryland. ........ Dist. of Columbia Virginia.... ... W. Virginia....... X.Carolina....... S. Carolina....... Georgia.......... Florida...........
6. (.'fiitrul l>iv. Kentucky. . ... Tennessee...... Alabama a....... Mississippi.... Louisiana........ Texas............ Arkansas ........ Oklahoma........ Indian Territory.
-V. Central l>lo, Ohio.............. Indiana .......... Illinois........... .iiiuliii.au........ Wisconsin ....... Minnesota ....... Iowa... ......... Jiissouri ......... X.Dakoiaa ..... S. Dakota a....... Xcbraska ........ Kansas..

162,300 141,433 84,6001 60,1JS 81,180 64,280! 520,300 376,!)86 85,380 51,4*2 164,500 128.905 1,496,600 1,054,044 376,238 234,072 1,498,300 1,026,1)67

48,200
308,500 61,940 &73.2UO 262000 OTJ.OOU 433,809 652,342 135,000

39.492 189,214 38,386 34!!,71!0 198,37<i 330,719 209,559
381,2971 94,019

618,200 617,400 540,226 4711,400
387,500 S12,41H)1
416,500

426,48
483,3371
301,615 327,856 130.709 516,07.!, 242,11J

1,048,900 654,300
1,OU,700

7UU/IDH 44V,I VI
35!l,257: 028(1,960,
503,755, 631t,721t
35,5*5. 78,043; 247,320

103,0621 7,314 105 , 42,096 3,134 118.7 t45,475 tl,375 t!37 278,602 10,646) 19
34,901; 1,455 188 , 84,304^4,093, 182.4 650,017 31,982 185.K 133,286| 4,465j 1<)2 I 699,037 24.925J 155.2,

24,35<J
I0t>,170| 29,010 193,536
123,087| 201,763; 148,003 240,701
62.005J

, 3,967
798 7,718 5,600, 6,535 4,263 7,509 2,641

180 184 179 116 96
60.: 70.: 83.: 120

245,409] 9,101 100 337,818, 8,250 90 182,467 6,318 73. laf,580 7,540, 85
91,820 3,003 100. 319,100 11,109 11G 6156,000 5 493! 75

560,293 23,561 3ti!l,OUO 13,441 5K!,34 23.U77
16,109 12^42
317,267 26,769 412,133 13,080
20,94 1.9C2 4S.327 4,40 146,315 10,555
12,102

Montana ...... Wyoming ........

26,060 14,420

1!),051|

1t2s.,s0d9o3; aCSaO1

Colorado ... .. Xew Mexico...... Arizona a ........ Utah ............. Nevada........... Idaho ....... . Washington .... Oregon .......... California u ....
TOTALS.

J6,000| 1&.1M, 71,720
UU,n40 286,577j

7313SP1] 43,700

, 7.U89 4G,7.I4

4,702 2U,3 7

5,K3I

a, 69,500 C.t,0 44,411 72^22 40,401! 221,756 146,589

2,5:i4
7. a>Z 4J7i 1,921 2,6411 5,434

X. Atlantic Div. 4,469,398 3,138,064 2,071,680 92,38!)|

S. Atlantic Div.. ! 3,053,982 1,823,7*2 l,130,2ir. 39.760,

S. Central Div... X. Central Div..

,,

,

6,643,761 5,055,969, 3^82,850 170,74til

Western Div....

15,87!

T8838.057 539,. 94 550,000
634,417 I,401^80 II,193,536
7^61,436

91,485593 87.12 814.41 890^83; 71.15 21.15 700.559 79.18, 15.41 72.46 30.70
1,022^97, 60.30: 29.30 2,167,079 78.36 26.70
70.43 26.66 3^40,190! 62.211 25.06 13^18,708 68.52 19.31

1^57,828 549,513
1,322,097 864.H23 556,643
1,054, 44BVJ8U1

286,613 81.93 11.77 61.33 20.92
900,638! 61.971 31.04 1,63U,!)83 50.80, 8.46 1,30,23 75.71 10.97
676,618 57.12i 3.3G 450,930 48.31 3.03 1,190^(54 58.46^ 4.94 5G4.2D9 CD.65] 9.10

1.92.V15 1,422,92^ 6660,00 1,017,75

2.308,505 68. 9.41 1,724,059 78.29! 5.10 6SW.OOO 55.83 4.SS 1.169.0S8 66.38! 5.91
t67,53 33.73, 9.45 3^J9oa iiS.52 11.27 1,021,337 58.13! 6.55

7,210,38 04,100,614
7,685,355 3,432 689 2,604,813 O2,52S,WJ, 4,438^)90,
,3S,1,472|
808,702
3,OKi,7(il|
207,001 108,7u(! 0818,005 5;i,r24 127,IW>i 2113 ,881 0183,800 0121.382 713,1182 087028 3.662,654

10,817,266 71.97! 19.31 6,403,4^0 79.75 17.35 13,512,778 72.86 25.37
5,438,841: 75.29 18.29 3,920,377 69.60 19.17 4,1S7,310 (i74iJ32.96
<i.70U^49 86.33 21.13 50J3IV43 75.15 13.42
6a;,!MB 71.26 30.30
1,199.630 81.04 24.82 3,2;KI,74:l 74.23 22.55 4,424,442 87.66 17.08
;i
577,601 70.07 47.76 22,y5J 60.55 45.34 2,4i;i..r)13 76.45 55.36
8I.S5!) 51. K S.C7 Itil/.IM 52.72 38.68 5::i,.l35 65.25 20.23 173,573 75.dll 32.56 lC!i1 ll20rrtiZ.G6:nlT.7!) 2,120,344 72.82i 47.76 l,058,22li 79.88, 23.30 5,187,162 77.38 35.39

30^20,107
6,975,049 9,41:l/)94 42,182,821 6,S3,123

49,006,135 70.21 23.65 9,288,503 59.72 8.22 ll,575,fin2.72 1.S6 t6,OS8,028 76.10 20.13
72.88 35.63

Vuited States.....118,812,76613,010,136[ 8^73^04369,634J 134.7J 595,791,090 148,724,647: 69.15817.76

* TUB above returns are Xor 1&90-91, nd comprise a nrtfliuiiaary staiemeuc by the Department Of ducatlou, subject to correction, t Estimated, a. Public school statistics for 1881MX) 6 Apliroxliuately.
1U

STATISTICS OF EDUCATION.

UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES OK UBKRAL ARTS IJl THE U. S.

FHOFESB Jt IXSTBS.

STCDBVTO.

1 STATES AM> TEBR1TOBIES,

T! =

^ 1891. ..

1

ji
tfa * |s
SeJ-*S "A&SS
p cC A 0) -
II

li a


I
2

Iff 3^

4 J
b> O of
la *"

Sa 3 =

it If

It
O

II

"*3 5*

1
3 "3

Xortk Atlantic

Division.

Maine............. j

37 16 52

510 .. 102 612

New Hampshire . . ]

18 17 48

256

4fc2i

Vermont.... ... Massachusetts ....

t

33

32 236

20 204

a5w0

239 392 2,720

302

203

442 4,857

Rhode Island ..... ;

Connecticut. ...... Sew York.........

a^ si

Pennsylvania ..... 26

11a9
100

35 99
423 109 329

a>
245; 4
140

35

326

193 .. 1,204

831 2^C4 4...4.G4

114 72 1,101

540 1,485 3,298

26 ....

118 318

467 2^65,

i10n3

37 1,246

352 2,031 .in..,8.5 1^34 6,833

South MlaiUic

Delaware.....".... 1

8 ..

j ...] 81 ....

Maryland ......... Dist. of Columbia Virginia..........

1^0

West Virginia. . . . 3

52 155

2>3

37
8215

3 17V 6321 889 276 "s l,S8i

98 170 303 228 .... 1,075 1,860 1

17 110 1!C> 1.,07T

6 307 1-SB3

3, 34 146 263 2 26 424

Xorth Carolina... 11

South Carolina. . . Georgia ..........

I"

Florida .......... J

44 2(j Id 2C

fi
3i1

18

126:
in

805 1,019
as1 62(>

IS 104 29 72<>.

36! 46:1 8:

17: 234. 2,407

13 61 1,3C4

5 j IS 2,152

_

| 545

youth I'cntral Hli-ision.

!
i

Kemucky ........ Tennessee. ....... Alabama ....... . Mississippi ...... Louisiana ........

13 24
;
i!

i*n

91 187

13 70

14 38

4 10j!

24 145 30,I 1,24,I 120! 368 2.21J1 2^3)
4 89 801 > 88 7^ 52 377 416 46, 205 747 !<28

5 36] 2,514 4. 95" 6,014
J 311 1.730 20 47 1,080 16 313 3,821

Texas .....

Arkansas..

9
J
|
5 1
S9J.17 72,009 58,766 571,150 70,000 278,501 636.552 108,062 317,080
4,300 126,907 68,000 134.050
6400 .72,100
54,000 49,300 7^40
55,910 100/>31 36,200 22,U50 124,600

Ohio............... Indiana ........... Illinois............ Michigan.......... Wisconsin......... Minnesota ........ Iowa ......... .... Missouri .......... Xonh Dakota..... South uakata..... Xebraska....... Kansas.... ....

Wcatcrn Ul vision

Montana ........ Wyoming ....... Colorado ....... Utah ............ Xevada.......... Washington.....

California........
TO1-A1S
y. Atlantic Div.. 8. Atlantic Div.. 9. Central Div... y. Central Div... Western Div.....

257 1,318
223 64U 296) 610 1.2171 1.96S1 321 158, 274,

708 2,411 4,483 14,118 1.187 1 5,548 164 850 3,248 4,9U3 S191 1,U72 210 1,053 7,05S> 7,717 98 2,107, 703 3,541 21,34? 18,849 1,223 7,257i 184 611 2,948 1,858 S6 566;

27,802 12,316, 19,872j 57,742^

United States.... | 430 2.151 4,713 1,969 8,472 3!>,OS5 47,535 2,86317,450 li

115

303,272 148,100 177,173 153,427 94,900 53,221 110,297 134,015
5,700 10,539
372,447 1.28K.842
10,08S

STATISTICS OF EDUCATION.
UNIVERSITIES AXD COLLEGES OF LIBERAL ARTS IX THE U. S.

Value of 1

ISOOME FOR THE YEAR 1890.

Scientific, Value of 1erinanent

STATUS

Appara- Grounds <& Productive From From From

AXI> TERRITORIES. rns, Buildinjrs, Funds, Product- State or Tu tion Total

j 1890. | 1890.

1890 iveFunds M nicipl Fees. Income.

i Aid.

|
Benefactions t lS9i

A'.Mlmitic I

Maine

.

Division. ......

1 $80,0001

$650,000 81,245,000

1

J30.395 $!H,9SO $2,COO

125.000 Massachusetts .... 1,020,000

Connecticut.... ... New York ......... Pennsylvania .....
S. Atlitntie /tirision.

1(19,630 2,005,733
51,200 619,300
t

Mist. ;.f Columbia. AV. Virginia.......

204,050 30,000 340.800 20,2(Hl
131.0IHI 39.(NIO
'fffn':>

S. Ceutml JUrlsiou.
Kentucky ......... Tenne-soe. .... ....

74.5IHI

LoniMana ......... X. Ctul nil J>ii-is!n.

58/wU (11.081
740

217,:i(IO

Wisconsin .... ... Minnesota .... .... S Dikoti Western Division.

214I6C3 219,138 12(1,225
lo](KK) 29,720 71,000 175,300

37.">,000 5,013 (KIO
625,110(1
7^1 5!>!374 495 000
5,599,000

529,436
4,710,811
.... .''....
4,( 81,241

75,000 1,419,000 1 mm. nan l,6Sl,l(l(i
2:ivxio
S27.5IH
^ To/KK

i.OOO 3,0:15,000
4M.OOO 1.391,048
lsti.150 :r>7,K(Ki 2113,000 775,2112 20,000

779,75(1 2,175,om
4(l9."il"
imtM

1,177,000 1,S47.4(IO
574.(ioo crclooo ..........

5001,235 2,025,XI 3.1S7,K2.r. l,i!U.X63 241S.500 2,4:17,824 1,U.OOO
180 000 o."),000 I,043,d0fl 1,762,050

5(I72,(K12 1.711.12!) :|,X49..1>..I 1.5<IS,IK12
.S91..11I1 1,::24,S7(1 1,231,714
25,000 11,1100 1,23,700 463,500

22.501 $8,400

232,082 149,] is
sivliio
264,566

4.9SO 52,250 25,512 77,116 11,409 25,271 111,580 50,949
1,000

14,675 Z!,OHO 40,000 25.000 20,125 53,050

67 750 121,100 :i;i,74:{ 4::so

400 SOO
300 17500 12,500

2S4,.ifl4 119,253 203,411 10:t,724 Kt 0112 63,537 8I,43
:looo 1,0(10 48,710 26,917

126,600 23.000 46.M4 194,821 112,570 ("i 000 54,0110 34.40C
iSiifOC 80.000 72.125

5,383
*
225,821 M2.434
14,000 332.872J
3(10. 1(10,222
80,540 5,500 46.454 2S,iO 19,000 7.SJO
70 488 151,092 22.784 22,o:>
76,778 ("i.MC 1(1,031
222,273. 1(MI,154 213 .190 154 05 i 61.613 41,613 136.218 237,!HI5
l,xoo
6,500 13,204 81,172

48,003 1.424.872
496,096 1,738,757
5S,100 C39,l:JO

050 384,355 222,119 457,98(1 1^91,276 25,000 450,270

7.140 1(18.127
222;431 41,909 111.049 123,040 92,514 19.821

128,800
iii.ooo
2.550 25:<.000 24,600149,350
.0,003

140 nno 364.:t24
82,524 C4.247 209.8X3 139.228 13,11

132,200 53.448 18,525 40000 100,710 103,078 5,500

738.344 21(2,241 628,018 5(10 l:>3 315,160 228.749 328,101
399,213
:i2.ioo
52.0a-
145.546 244,549

413,189 109.150
141.127 76.4H3
205,380 143.000 772 Sim
163,965 7 (HO
28,512 66,097 99,800

1,500 3,000 23,800

113,000 1,700,OOC)
5,50t>

3,000 354,000

3,000 900

2,874
3.950 1,188

10,238
(12,000 2,C88

171,270

Utah ............. 25,000 1,000

240.00C 15fl,(KK

91.00C ........

28,750 28,000

5,63.1 . 39,384

I

28,000

3,850

578,666

12,666

1,466

13,200 302,000 237,000 14,249

California ......... 372,700 1,909,088 2,232,596^ 125392

TOTALS.

J. Atlantic Div . . . $4,010,803 S21.Slfi.374 $39.155,565 $2,060,398

S. Atlantic Div.... 876,425 6,791,500 6,483,206 265,067

S. Central Div..... 578,871 0,353,583 0,201,713 397,148

N. Central Div.... 2,725,176 Western Div...... 444,050

24,150,299 5,147,588

19,300,335 1,098,523 2,929,596 144,941

6,660 11,277 98,348

10,400 24,727 01.885

5157,518 $1,599,836 176.915 364J1S2 31,500 -.!.0(13 868,809 1,270,495 171,375 110,608

lO.SOO 5,744 312,772

8,849 3,030 70,700

$4,499 944 $2,933,656 920.806 982.3d3
1,014.353 452,401 3,844,189 2,220.853
522,626 253,875

United States.....!$8,C35^8a 04,259,344 74,070,415 $3,966,083 SI,406,117 $3,764.984 10,801,918 gi,849,203

110

119
INDEX.
A
Agricultural Land Scrip. .32, 55, 56,57, 66, 67, 71, 72, 73 Alison, Sir Archibald............................. 108 Amherst College.................................. 39 Anderson, Hon. Thomas F......................... 47 Arminianism .......................... ....... 52 Atlanta University ............................... 35
B
Barnett, Hon. Samuel............................ 39 Baptists in Georgia, 1829.......................... 75 Blackmar, Prof................................... 36 Boyesen, Prof. H. H............................... 37 Bowdoin College...............................36, 39 Brantley, Dr. W. T., Sr ........................... 75 Brown, Charles McDonald Brown Fund............ 35 Brown, Chancellor-............................... 75 Brown University.... ..........................36, 39
C
Calvinism ....................................... 52 Church, Dr. Alonzo............................... 75 Church Schools ................ 8, 9, 38, 47,48, 49, 81-87 Clark, Gov. John .............................. 76, 79 Clark, Hon. John T-.............................. 9 Colleges in United States-..................... ... 8 Columbia College ..... .................. ...... 39 Common Schools, Appropriations thereto by State of
Georgia............................. 11, 27, 28, 29 Common Schools, Children of School Age........... 14 Common Schools, Country Children, 14,15, 16, 17, 20, 21 Common Schools, Funding Bill, 1873 ............ 77, 78 Common Schools, How to make Successful.......... 91 Common Schools of New England (See New England).

120
Common Schools, Statistics of United States.. - - -113-116 Common Schools, Rental of W. & A. R. R......... 4, 26 County Academies ....................... 19, 20, 23 24 Crawford, Hon. Wm. H ........................... 24 Curry, Dr. J. L. M................................. 40 Cuthbert, Agricultural College .................... 33
D
Dartmouth College ............................... 36 Dahlonega Agricultural College.................... 33 Debt, Claimed by the University from the State, 31, 35 Denominational Colleges in United States....... 8, 9, 10 Disestablishment and the Disestablished. ........... 88
E
" Educational Bill of 1889." ....................... 4 Educational Statistics United States............. 113-116 Emory College ........... 3, 14, 18, 50, 51, 65, 79, 80, 105 Emory College, Alumni ......................... 9, 10 Emory College, Curriculum ....................... 50 Emory College, Patronage......................... 66 Emory College, Sub-Freshman Department......... 66
F
Farmers Alliance of Putnam County............. 5, 22 Farm Villages............................ 100, 101, 102 Fiuley, Chancellor................................ 75
G Gilmer Fund..................................... 35 Gordon Institute, Barnesville................... 16, 66 Guizot .......................................... 108
H Hammond, Hon. N. J.................3, 5,6, 7, 23, 31-79 Hampden and Sydney College..................... 39 Hand, Hon. I. H.........................56, 57, 71, 72 Harris, Judge Y.L. G..... ......... . ............ 105

121
Harvard University ........................36, 39, 89 Haygood, Bishop A. G........................ -49, 52 Higher Education in United States................. 81 Hill, Hon. A. C.......................... 56, 57, 71, 72 Hillyer, Hon. Junius.............................. 20 Hopkins, Dr. Isaac S-..........................73, 74
I
Industrial College for Girls-...................... 34
J
Jones, Hon. C. C ................................. 63 Jones, Mr. Charles Edgeworth................ 26,35, 63
K Kentucky, Common Schools of.................... 97
L Lamar, Hon. L. Q. C............................... 9 Longstreet, Judge A. B............................ 76
M McWhir, Rev. Wm................................ 24 Massachusetts, Educational Work in............... 36 Meagley, Prof. W. E............................... 66 Meigs, Chancellor................. ............... 75 Mell, Dr. Patrick H-........................ 14, 20, 79 Mercer University .................. ..... 4. 9, 53, 61 Mercer University, Duty of Baptists to. .......... 19 Methodists in Georgia, in 1829..................... 75 Milledgeville, Agricultural College................. 33 Military Institute, (Ga.) See Moreland Park Academy Milledge Land Gift............................... 35 Moreland Park Academy.......................... 16 Morris, Mr. Sylvanus........................... 52, 53 Moses, Hon. R. J.................................. 51
N New England, Appropriations to Colleges........... 36 New England, Appropriations to Common Schools... 36

122
New England, Colleges............................ 104 New England Academies........................... 23 New England, Kducational Policy.................. 36 North Carolina, University of...................... 39 Nunnally, Dr. G. A...........................4, 13, 19
O
Olin, Dr. Stephen.............................. 75, 76 Orr, Dr. J.G................... -- ............27, 41
P
Palmer, Dr. B. M-................................ 40 Pattillo, Rev. W. P ............................... 105 Pierce, Bishop George P ........................ 40, 48 Pound, Prof. Jere M............................... 53 Pennsylvania, University of ....................... 39
R
Ripley, Rev. Henry J............................. 75
3 Schley, Governor... ............................. 25 Scott, Mrs. Agnes.............................. 103, 110 Scott, Agnes, Institute......................... 103, 112 Scott, Col. George W....................... 103,105, 109 Seney, Mr. George I....................... 51,68,69, 70 Sherwood, Rev. Adiel ............................. 75 Smith, Governor James M......................... 32 South Carolina, University of....................... 39 Stephens, Hon. A. H......................... 14,20, 75 Strickler, Dr. G. B................................ 74
T
Technology, School of.......................... 33, 34 Terrell Bequest.................................. 35 Thomasville Agricultural College................ 33, 34 Tilden, Hon. Samuel J............................. 106 Troup, Governor George M...................... 76, 79

123
U University of Georgia........................1,2,9, 16 University of Georgia, Act of 1830............46, 47, 62 University of Georgia, Alumni of......... 9,15,18,37, 55 University of Georgia, Appropriations thereto...... 4,
11,29,30,31,32,33, 34 University of Georgia, Report Board of Visitors 1881,
3, 48 University of Georgia, Charter Amended .......41, 51 University of Georgia, Curriculum.... 39, 49, 50, 65, 66 University of Georgia, "Debt Due"............... 31, 35 University of Georgia, Funding Bill, 4, 33, 58, 59, 60, 61 University of Georgia, Free Tuition, 4, 32, 39, 46, 47,
48,49,59, 65 University of Georgia, Income............... 12, 35, 44 University of Georgia, Land Scrip diverted to, 32, 55,
56, 57, 66, 67, 71, 72, 73 University of Georgia, Lottery for................ 29 University of Georgia, Sub-Freshman Department, 65, 66 University of Georgia, Unfair Policy.... ......3, 4, 37
V
Vicious and Oppressive Policy..................... 85 Virginia, University of...................... 12, 18, 39 Virginia, University of, Tuition Fees............... 39
W
Waddell, Chancellor.............................. 75 Washington and Lee University ................... 39 Western and Atlantic R. R., Use of its Rental .... .4, 26 Wesleyan Female College ......................... 69 William and Mary College-........................ 83 Wrightaville, School at ........................... 16
Y
Yale College.... ............................36,39, 89