SUPPLEMENTARY
TO THE
LEGISLATIVE REPORTS.
VOLUME ELEVENTH.
Location of the Indiana Agricultural College ---- Mr. Dunn's
Bill, H. R. 347, --- Debate in Continuation.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
TUESDAY, April 27, 1869.[EVENING- SESSION p. 119-FOLLOWING Mr. OSBORN p. 141 to 145.]
Mr. BUSKIRK, (Mr. Welborn in the chair) following Mr. Osborn, said:
Mr. Speaker: I did not propose to take up much time in the discussion of this question, for the reason that the matter has been heretofore considered in debate, and I presume every member has made up his mind how he will vote. And what I have to say to night will be in reply to what I consider a severe attack by the gentleman from Putnam and Hendricks [Mr. Osborn.] This matter was discussed at length during the last session and by courtesy of the House I had an opportunity to present the claims of the State University; and the interests of Putnam county also represented in that debate by her distinguished Representatives [Mr. Neff and Orborn.] But the gentleman complained of the Special Committee.
Mr. OSBORN (interposing.) What I complained of was, that the Committee did not let me know of the time of its action on this matter, and that the Committee did not know Putnam county was asking for the location.
Mr. BUSKIRK. Neither have the Committee or the House yet learned that Putnam County is asking for this location.
Mr. OSBORN. Then I will now inform louse of the fact.
Mr. BUSKIRK. And if the gentleman was acting in good faith when he moved to out "Monroe County," why he did not propose insert "Putnam County" in lieu? But he did not do it. Hence, it seems to me, that,if his County's proposition has been ignored, it is because it was not considered worthy of attention. But, what does he do? He moves to strike out "Monroe County," and the "State University," wherever they occur in the bill, and insert-nothing-not Putnam County not Marion County not Tippecanoe-not Hancock; because he would combine opposite the claims of the county of Monroe. 1 understood the gentleman's tactics very well. If his county is asking for this location in good faith, why not try its merits and come here upon its own strength? instead of arraying an opposition and making an attack upon Monroe county which I think is wholly unwarranted?
In the first place the gentleman tries to complain of the action of the Committee. In my judgment the Committee has but done its duty, as the Chairman [Mr. Ratliff] has stated. There were but three propositions before the Committee: That of the original bill [Mr. Dunn's H. R. 347] locating the institution with the State University, and the propositions from Mr. Purdue and Tippecanoe county. I must differ with the Chairman when he says no other proposition was talked about; but they did not consider others because they were not referred to them. And I presume there is not a member of this House so utterly ignorant of parliamentary law as not to know a Committee has no right to consider a proposition that has not been referred to them. But the gentleman said he was not notified of the meeting of the Committee. I do not understand that it is the duty of the Committee to go around and notify gentlemen that they are going to meet. And I understand that this Committee determined upon their report after two evenings session.
page: 330[View Page 330]Mr. OSBORN (to Mr. Buskirk.) Was you notified?
Mr. BUSKIRK. No sir. It was by the merest accident that I met and remained with the Committee. And, if I mistake not, the gentleman [Mr. Osborn] himself was in the House about the same time. The gentleman says he had no notice as to where the Committee would meet, I presume, if the gentleman had been in his place at the time, he would have heard the announcement. The first motion in these proceedings was, that the bill be referred to the Committee on Education. Then the gentleman from Grant [Mr. Ratliff ] moved that it be referred to a Special Committee of one from each Congressional District. The amendment prevailed, and its mover, in the usual way, was first named on the Committee. And, as I remember the Chairman said he had to notify the gentleman from Marion [Mr. Stanton,] and that he need not notify the gentleman from Putnam without Putnam was competing for the location. It seems then, either that Putnam was not competing, or she had not very strong claims.
The gentleman says the report of the Special Committee establishing this College in connection with the State University took the House by surprise. Why, sir, Monroe County has been asking and competing for this location ever since the grant was passed by Congress. It has been notorious, that on this floor-perhaps the remark should be confined to this House-we had as much strength as any other point. Then how could the House be taken by surprise? I think the gentleman was about as wide of the mark in this, as in many other statements he has made on this question.
The gentleman says that the Committee was in great haste to make their report. They certainly were in no greater haste here, than we were at the last session, when days and weeks were occupied with this matter. It has been over five years since the question was first agitated here. It was in 1864 and '65 that Monroe County made her application here. Instead of hurry, I think there has been delay for which the Legislature is not excusable in this matter.
The gentleman took up considerable time in the discussion of location, and attempting to show that the General Assembly has riot the right to locate this Institution with any other Institution. I will not weary the House with the discussion of this allegation. It is a grand discovery which the gentleman has made without any preparation! He comes in with authorities and books piled upon his desk, (but still without preparation,) to show that this House has not the power to locate this Agricultural College with any other Institution. But I say I will not weary the House upon this subject, for it has been fully discussed here time and again. Still, it is very singular, that it has been left for the from Putnam and Hendricks, to make discovery, when it is notorious that the States of Pennsylvania, New York, and almost every other State of the Union-some 12 States out of the 16 that have accepted this National dowment-the States of Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, I believe-I can't mention every State by name without a list of them but some twelve of them have located their Agricultural Colleges in connection with other Institutions.
I will read here an extract from the lately printed speech of Prof. Daniel Bead before the General Assembly and the people of Indiana, which will suffice for this:
If you unite the two funds by making the proposed College a department of the University, you can at once expend every dollar coming from the grant, upon the strictly Agricultural and Mechanical arts: if you attempt to make it a separate institution, you must expend most of the fund to proving elementary instruction-the very institution which you now have in the University Hence those State which adopt the wisest educational policy, having turned over this fund to create or support a department in an existing institution which already affords much of the instruction required. Thus Connecticut has given her share of this bounty to the Sheffield Scientific School, which is a Department of Yale, Rhode Island has given hers to supper a Scientific school in Brown University. Vermont unites hers with the endowment and scientific collections of Vermont University. New Hampshire forms such a connection with Dartmouth as to make the new institution essentially a department of that institution. Massachusetts alone of all the States, divides the fund, giving one-third to the school of Technology at Boston, already having large endowment, and the remainder to the Agricultural School at Amhurst, which enjoys all the advantages of Amherst College. New Jersey gives her portion to establish a Scientific School in connection with the New Brunswick College. New York unites her whole share arising from nine hundred and ninety thousand acres with the immense Cornell endowment. Kentucky and Wisconsin give their portion of the grant to their State Universities. While Pennsylvania, Maryland, Michigan an Iowa, give theirs to Agricultural Colleges which have been established before the grant was made.
Yet the gentleman from Putnam argues gravely, that this cannot be done.
Mr. OSBORN. Did not Kentucky first establish her Agricultural College, and then attach the National endowment?
Mr. BUSKIRK. I do not know. And, sir, I do not care whether you attach this College to the University, or the University to the College. I want them united, as Colleges of the Indiana University. I would remark, that the people of Monroe County and the people of the State of Indiana, as represented by the Trustees of the State University, come in here and ask that the State Agricultural College may be located in connection with the State University.
The gentleman says, however, that this cannot be done without abandoning the University page: 331[View Page 331] -that it cannot be done without abandoning the leading objects of the University. If I understand the University,it is an incorporation of schools in the various departments of learning; and where each department is separate and indepedant-to itself. And if this Agricultural College is located there with the Indiana University, it will be a separate and independent Institution. There would be separate departments for Law, Medicine and the natural Sciences-an Agricultural and a Military department, etc., and each one separate and independent from all the others. It is not necessary that all these departments should be united in one, in order to carry out the purposes of this grant in good faith.
But the gentleman says: The State University is a sinking Institution, and has been continually calling upon the State for assistance, now, I say, Mr. Speaker, that that statement is erroneous. Till within a few years past the Indiana University never asked the State for a dollar. Till within a very few years this University has been abandoned to its late. Never until two years ago did the State of Indiana make an appropriation, or offer aid in any way in behalf of the State University. That institution has been struggling in poverty for many years; but since the State came to her assistance, no Institution in the State has been more prosperous.
Mr. STANTON. I would like to know from the gentleman from Monroe, whether or not that Inititution has enjoyed the aid of the State to the extent of the proceeds of 45,000 acres of land?
Mr. BUSKIRK. No, sir; that was a National grant-the original endowment. I do not know exactly what was the original endowment. The funds arising from those land sales amounted to about one hundred thousand dollars. Subsequently Congress donated nineteen thousand acres ol land, and the State University still owns about 14,000 acres of that. The gentleman says that the State University is a sinking institution, requiring the support of the State. The State University has, for the past two years, had an appropriation of eight thousand dollars. That is all. Doubtless it would have been a very different Institution, if it had had a sufficient endowment to employ all the professors and teachers the Institution demands, But, I say, at the present time there is no Institution now in the west that is in a more nourishing condition. By the report of the Trustees there are about three hundred students now in attendance-attending the College proper. The preparatory department has been cut off; and heretofore there have been sixty and seventy to a hundred students connected with the preparatory department. And I make here the prediction that if this Agricultural fund be united with that institution, in five years time the Indiana University will contain more than have hundred students. The only trouble is there has not been a sufficient endowment. And what does the gentleman propose to do?-to establish two State schools, and both with insufficient endowments!
Mr. Speaker, I find that I am getting very tedious in answering the gentleman's argument. [Cries of "go on."] I will soon be through.
The gentleman has said something about our Railroad. Well, I presume it is not the best-and perhaps it is not the very worst railroad in the State. I find no difficulty about getting home that way from this city. I can leave Indianapolis at 9:20 in the morning, go to Bloomington and transact business, and get back at 6 o'clock in the evening. It has been made an objection to our locality, that the railroad facilities are not good-that there is but one road. But there are crossings of that road at Mitchell, thirty-five miles south, at Greencastle forty-five miles north, and at Gosport fifteen miles north. So that objection cannot be a very grave one.
The gentleman makes another argument here-of course it was done wholly without note or preparation-which I shall call his I Ass-argument. It should cut, I think a very small figure in the location of this Institution at Bloomington or Greencastle. It seems from the gentleman's showing, that, in Putnam county they have been spending a good deal of time and money in mule and stock raising. Very well; that, I suppose, according to his taste, indicates a suitable locality for this College. But I would remark thereupon, that while they have been raising asses in Putnam county, we have been raising men in Monroe. [Laughter.] I could refer to many justly distinguished men who have been reared and educated in Monroe county; and I am proud I here to-night in the representation of the industrious, public spirited, reading, thinking and intelligent people of the grand old county of Monroe, which has furnished for the State such names as Whitcomb and Howard-the latter having lived and married there-besides three governors of the State, and others that I might mention-leaving myself out.
Mr. OSBORN (in his seat.) And Harlan and Voorhees.
Mr. BUSKIRK. I might name hundreds who have graduated at Bloomington as distinguished as these, but, not having prepared myself for this speech, 1 must omit them.
The gentleman says Putnam county offers as a donation one hundred thousand dollars and forty acres of land for the location of the Agricultural College. Well, what of that? I say that is as nothing in comparison with the proposition that is made for the location in connection with the State University. But page: 332[View Page 332] the gentleman says the Trustees of the State University have neither power nor right to give it away-and it is to be supposed that the gentleman's assertion settles the law. But it seems that such Trustees in other States have done this thing. Let us for a moment compare the propositions made by Putnam County with those made by Monroe County and the Trustees of the State University. He says, Putnam County proposes one hundred thousand dollars and forty acres of very good soil. But the Trustees of the State University offer to turn over to the Agricultural College the University buildings and grounds at Bloomington, which with the land fund amount in value to to about four hundred thousand dollars: The value of the campus buildings, Laboratory, Library, etc. is one hundred and fifty thousand dollars; that of the University fund, about one hundred thousand dollars; and the fourteen thousand acres of land, about one hundred and fifty thousand. Then, in addition to that, the County of Monroe offers fifty thousand dollars.
Mr. CORY (interposed to ask;) If the Agricultural College were established in connection with the State University, by whom would its affairs be administered and controlled?
Mr. BUSKIRK. This bill says the Trustees of the State University and the Trustees of the Agricultural College shall have joint control; and there are five Trustees of the State University and five of the Agricultural College.
Now, sir, I wish to refer to the offer made from Tippecanoe County. And I admit that it is liberal; but compared with the offer made from Bloomington,it is still insignificant,because it does not offer the requisite facilities. As I understand this proposition, Judge Purdue proposes to give one hundred and fifty thousand dollars, payable in ten years, without interest. And Tippecanoe county proposes fifty thousand dollars, payable in three years, also without interest-making two hundred thousand dollars. In addition to that, I understand that, if the College is located at the Battleground, there is a proposition to give some school buildings they have up there, which in my judgnemt, would be of very little use, because they are not adapted to wants of this institution. Now, what is the object of these donations? It is to enable the Trustees to procure the necessary materials and labor to erect the College buildings on the ground selected for its location. And would this small sum of fifteen thousand dollars a year suffice to erect the buildings in time to put the College in operation before the expiration of the time required in the grant? Certainly not. And let me make the prediction to-night, that, if you locate in Tippecanoe County upon the proposition of Mr. Purdue; you will find interested parties here applying for an appropriation of one hundred to two hundred thousand dollars to complete the buildings-just as we have already found it in the erection of th buildings of the Normal School, the Northern Prison, the House of Refuge and the Soldiers' Home.
And where is the necessity for this? The State owns the buildings at Bloomington-they belong ow to the State-all that would be necessary to put the College in operation in thirty days. It will only be necessary to establish a chair of Agriculture. We have already a school of military science there. And the law says, the leading object shall be to teach those branches of science relating to Agriculture and the Mechanic Arts. I do not care whether you call it the leading object or not-there will be the Academical, the Agricultural, the Mechanical and the Military departments at once in operation.
Mr. Speaker, I will only say this further it is in the experience of those older and larger Institutions in the countries of Europe, that Agricultural Colleges can't be sustained alone-that unconnected with other Institutions of learning, they will soon die out. The State of Illinois has made a mistake in locating her Agricultural College alone in Champaign County. It is languishing to-day, and has never had more than fifty students. The State of Michigan also has made a sad failure in this matter. Then where is the wisdom of these gentlemen corning here and asking you to follow these examples in another vain attempt to establish an independent Agricultural Institution? Time will prove that it will not succeed; and the inevitable demand will come sooner or later for a State endowment. And what farther will be the result of such an act? There will be two rival Institutions of Learning under the control of the State, and both depending upon her cherishing care. Would it not be better to unite them in one, and build up one grand Institution of which the State might be justly proud, than to have two, three or four Institutions on our hands-none of which would be, in any just sense, either efficient or respectable? It certainly would be much better, sir, to locate this College upon the Monroe proposition-better as to the consideration of dollars and cents-and better as to the economy of time and the expense of professorships. And the Institution will need no more assistance from the State. You will be able to establish at once all the departments of the Academy, law, medicine, military, science, agriculture and the mechanic arts. Tuition at the State University is free, and has been for a number of years: and if this College is located in connection with the State University, the young men of the State can come in and avail themselves of all the advan page: 333[View Page 333]tages of every school in the University, without paying a single dollar for tuition.
I shall not refer to the propositions in detail as they come to us from Marion county, and as they have been modified since the last session of the General Assembly, for, I presume the gentlemen representing that County will be able and ready to do so with sufficient pertinency. I am satisfied, however, that their propositions are far in advance of those from Putnam County, or for any other locality, except Bloomington.
I find, Mr. Speaker, that I have occupied much more time than I expected to consume when I got up to answer the gentleman from Putnam. I will not trespass any further upon the time of the House to-night.
Mr. VATER then took the floor, and the House adjourned.
