a A PLEA FOR THE UNIFICATION UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA THE DENOMINATIONAL COLLEGES, BY REV. J. O. A. CLARK, D. D„ TOGETHER WITH The Memorial to the General Assembly, the Report of the Commission of Twenty-one, and the Governor's Special Message recommending the Report oi the Commission, MACON, GA.: J. W. BURKE & CO., PRINTERS AND BINDERS. lsrAt. A PLEA FOR EDUCATION. Tho cause which should most engage the hearts and minds of the people of Georgia is tire universal education of her sons and daughters. The system that shall educate the masses most effi¬ ciently is, beyond question, the problem of the day. The power the widest dffusion of knowledge gives to a people is well nigh universally acknowledged. We may differ as to the best means of attaining the desired end, but not as to its importance. We are, at last, aroused to the necessity of evolving and perfecting some plan that shall give to all the children of this great Com¬ monwealth, both white and colored, the benefits, at least, of a common school education. Much has been done and much is being done to effect this great result. Patient thought, we hope, will evolve a thorough and comprehensive system adequate to the wants of the children of Georgia and the enlarged de¬ mands of the times. The second in importance only, if second at all, is the most liberal culture of the gweatest number. Our State University and our colleges claim a very large place in our educational plans. To provide annually the greatest number of thoroughly trained and disciplined jreuth, and send them forth with a cul¬ ture commensurate with the advanced state of knowledge in all its departments, is a question .demanding the most serious thought of our primary assemblies, and the' representatives of the people in their legislative halls. Here, too, we believe that our people are being aroused to the necessity of devising large and liberal plans for a more advanced and liberal culture, and bringing it within reach of the greatest possible number. To contribute something to this end, is the design of the present paper. The plan herein proposed, whose outlines alone can be given, has been submitted to a number of our leading states¬ men, and educators, and by them indorsed and commended. At the earnest solicitation of those for whose judgment the writer has the profoundest respect, he has ventured to write out an abstract of the plan and give it to the public. If it result in awakening a more earnest inquiry, and in evolving some better 2 plan, the writer will be amply rewarded for his efforts to advance a cause very near his own heart. It cannot be questioned that the greatest difficulty with which the advocates of a more thorough and liberal culture have had to contend,.has been the conflict between our State University and the denominational colleges. These institutions of learn¬ ing have been maintained, the former by appropriations out of the common treasury of the State, the latter by the private liberality of the respective denominations. To keep up the former, all the people have been taxed; to maintain the latter, heavy demands have been made upon the liberal few, who have had not only to support their own colleges, but to foster, by increased taxes, the creature of the State. This condition of things would surely have been more cheer¬ fully acquiesced in, and been more heartily approved by the friends of denominational education, if the State University had not, by its curriculum, presented itself in an attitude of rivalry. Hence the conflict by which both parties have been made to suffer. The University has been jealously watched. Its plans of enlarged usefullness have been defeated by combinations of the friends of denominational education. Illiberal appropria¬ tions have been the result. The University has been compelled to hold on to its curriculum, and thus continue to be the rival of the colleges. And hence this foster child of a great Com¬ monwealth has been disappointed and baffled in her efforts to restrict her work to the higher and more liberal culture. Nor has this conflict brought any advantage to the denom¬ inational colleges, but much damage rather. It has raised up enemies even in their own ranks; for many of the best and most intelligent of the respective denominations have regarded the success of the University more important than the success of the denominational college. It has multiplied enemies among those without the pale of the churches interested. It has cre¬ ated against denominational education a feeling that would not otherwise have existed. The intensity of this feeliug is too apparent in that article of the State Constitution, which for¬ bids the appropriation of money by the State to denomina¬ tional colleges. And thus, and in many other ways, damage has resulted to both of the parties to this conflict. Such, in brief, is the situation; such the facts, the correctness of which neither of the parties will deny. Now, these things ought not so to be. There should be no 3 conflict between the friends of education. To harmonize these conflicting interests, to devise some plan by which the work of the University and the colleges may be made subservient to one another, and the cause of a more enlarged and liberal cul¬ ture be advanced, is the design of the present article. In the plan, whatever jt be, it is manifest that neither the interests of the University, nor of the colleges, should be com¬ promised. Unwise is that friend to the denominational college who ignores the necessity of the University; equally so the friend to the latter who ignores the necessity of the former. For this one thing may be regarded as certain; both the Uni¬ versity and the colleges must be maintained, and both will be maintained. He is no statesman who does not base his plans for the liberal education of our sons upon this undeniable fact. For the friends of the University will never cease to advocate claims which they consider superior to all others. Equally sure is it that the friends of the colleges will hold on to their convictions. The necessity for the colleges to them has been demonstrated more and more with increase of years. No ar¬ gument—no logic—no figures can convince them that they are wrong. Never will they consent to give up the collegiate edu¬ cation of their sons to institutions uncontrolled by themselves. The intensity of their convictions on this subject is unmistakably made manifest by their willingness and readiness to contribute largely to their own colleges, while taxed in common with the rest of their fellow-citizens, to support the University at Athens. There are legislators who may think the friends of denomina¬ tional education unwise, and who do not view its importance in the same light. But, whether they do or not, he is unfit to legislate for the wants of the whole people who does not form his plans with a proper regard to these convictions of the friends of denominational education. For these friends are numbered by thousands. They are men of education, of prop¬ erty and of votes. They are influential and powerful factors in the body politic—of sufficient influence and power to cripple the University, so long as an unequal and unjust legislation makes appropriations to the latter which are denied to them¬ selves ; and especially so long as the University keeps up its attitude of rivalry. In vain, to the friends of the colleges, will be all disclaimers of rivalry made by the friends of the Univer¬ sity. For, so long as the regular college curriculum at Athens, whether in whole or in its main features, is the same as that of 4 the denominational colleges, the University is a rival of the col¬ leges—a rival supported, in great part, by the taxes which the friends of Emoiy, Mercer, and Oglethorpe are forced by law to pay into the treasury of the State for the benefit of the Uni¬ versity of the State. Regarding, therefore, the University and the colleges as in¬ stitutions which must be maintained, we proceed to elaborate a plan which, if adopted, shall destroy all rivalry, unite the friends of both parties, and contribute largely to the advanced culture of the sons of our dear old State. More than this. We hope to set forth a plan that may be adopted by all our people of all denominations, of all classes, and of all colors—a plan that shall enlarge and dignify the work of the State University, and place our struggling colleges upon an enduring basis, and that, too, without doing violence to the clause in the State Constitution forbidding the appropri¬ ation of money to denominational colleges. That this re¬ straining clause of the Constitution has been fully obviated by the present plan, is the opinion of several eminent lawyers and jurists to whom it has been submitted. The outlines of the plan are as follows : 1. There shall be one great State University, to which the denominational colleges shall be attached as parts of the gen¬ eral plan. 2. The main seat of the University shall be at Athens, under the Board of Trustees of the University as at present organ¬ ized. Franklin College shall be continued at Athens, with a strict college curriculum. 3. The colleges shall be located respectively at Oxford, At¬ lanta, and Macon, under the same Boards respective!}7" as at present organized, no change being made in their respective de¬ nominational features. 4. The undergraduate 'curriculum shall be confined to the col¬ leges, whose right to confer degrees shall be confined to the de¬ gree of Bachelor of Arts. 5. The University shall locate at Athens an advanced school, with a curriculum embracing three years, to which the gradu¬ ates of the colleges of this State, or of any other State, or country, shall be admitted on presentation of the degree of A. B., and all others not graduates, who shall pass a satisfactory examination on the studies of the college, or their equivalents, 5 to the graduates of which school shrill be given the degree of Master of Arts. 6. There shall be at Athens a school, embracing two yeai*s for all who desire to pursue an advanced course of natural science, to which only those shall be admitted who have the qualifications for admission into the school of Master of-Arts. The degree in this school shall be that of Bachelor of Philoso- pky- 7. There shall be at Athens a normal school for the special "training and education of teachers, the qualifications for ad¬ mission into which shall be the same as in the schools above mentioned, which school shall be a separate school, or em¬ braced in one, or both of the schools, above named. The pupils in- this school shall be educated free of charge; they shall re¬ ceive an appropriate degree on completion of the prescribed studies, and shall be firmly bound, if their services are needed, to teach after graduation, at least four years in the common schools of the State; to which graduates, Commissioners of Schools, supported by the State, shall give the preference. 8. There shall be schools of Agriculture, the Mechanical Arts, Surveying and Engineering, and such other school or schools as the Board of Trustees may elect, either separate or embx*aced in one or more of the schools already named, as the wants of the University, in the judgment of the Board of Trustees,' may determine; the qualifications for admission to which shall be a satisfactory examination on such studies as may be prescribed by the Board, with the advice of the Fac¬ ulty. The graduates of this school or schools shall receive an appropriate degree. 9. There shall be a school of Law, the qualifications for ad¬ mission same as in the school of Master of Arts. The gradu¬ ates shall receive the degree of Bachelor of Laws. 10. There shall be a school of Medicine, qualifications same as above, the degree being that of Doctor of Medicine. 11. The above shall be the regular University Degrees, and shall be conferred by the Board of Trustees, on recommenda¬ tion of the Faculty. 12. The Honorary Degrees, such as Doctor of Theology, and Doctor of Laws, shall be conferred only by a Board, to be called The Board of Fellows, which Board shall consist of the Chan¬ cellor at Athens, the Presidents of the colleges, and at least 6 three others, selected by .the Chancellor and Presidents, for their literary, scientific and liberal attainments. IB. There shall be an appropriation of five hundred thousand dollars to the University by the State, for the proper buildings at Athens, for libraries, apparatus, and appointments necessary to carry out this plan ; the arranging and perfecting of which, and the paying out of all sums under this appropriation, shall be vested in a Board, consisting of the Board of Trustees and the Paculty at Athens, which joint Board may delegate their authority to a subordinate Board, made up of representatives from the Board of Trust and the Faculty. 14. There shall be an annual appropriation of one hundred thousand dollars to the University by the State, to pay the sal¬ aries of the Professors at Athens, and to meet the current and contingent expenses; the price of tuition in the several schools, except the normal school, being such as, together with this ap¬ propriation and all present endowments 01* vested funds, shall meet the required demands, and leave a surplus of ten thous¬ and dollars per annum to be applied to repairs, improvements, libraries, apparatus, or any necessary outlay. 15. There shall be an appropriation of one hundred thousand dollars by the State to the University for each of its colleges at Oxford, at Macon, and at Atlanta, to be applied to necessary buildings, apparatus, fixtures, etc., the planning and pei-fecting of which, and the paying out of money under this appropria¬ tion, to be vested in a Board for each of the colleges, consisting of their respective Boards of Trust and their respective Facul¬ ties, or of a subordinate Board, made up of representatives from the Boards of Trust and the Faculties respectively. 16. There shall be an annual appropriation by the State to the University for the benefit of each of its above mentioned colleges, of ten thousand dollars, to be applied to Professors' salaries in the respective colleges, to necessary and contingent expenses; the price of tuition being in each as near as possible the same, and such a sum per annum, as, together with this ap¬ propriation and other endowments or vested funds, shall meet the wants of the colleges respectively, and leave the sum of two thousand dollars per annum to be applied to repairs of all kinds, additions to libraiies, apparatus, or any necessary outlay. 17. The above mentioned colleges, namely, Emory, at Oxford, Mercer, at,Macon, and Oglethorpe, at Atlanta, shall be consid¬ ered as parts of this plan and entitled to its benefits when their 7 respective Boards shall have subscribed to this plan, and shall have consented to have their charters so altered as to be con¬ formed to it. 18. This plan shall not be a law of the State until adopted by the Boai'd at Athens and the Boards of the respective col¬ leges, and not until the friends of the University as now organ¬ ized, and. the friends of the colleges, shall have raised respect¬ ively by private and voluntary contributions, in addition to their present endowments, at least $100,000 for Athens, the same for Emory, the same for Mercer, and the same for Ogle¬ thorpe, which sums shall be raised bj7 day of year, and which shall be expended or vested for the interests of the University and the colleges respectively, as their Boards of Trust, assisted by their Faculties, shall have respectively de¬ termined. 19. Other denominations may share in the benefits of this plan, and be adopted as parts of the University: 1st. When they shall have organized colleges, with buildings and outfits worth at least $50,000, and shall have paid for the same ; the value of the buildings, and the*paymeut of all debts to be considered and passed upon by a committee recommended by the Board of Trustees at Athens, and approved and appoii - ted by the Governor of the State. 2d. When each denomination, applying to be admitted as a part of this "plan, shall, in addition to the above mentioned fifty thousand dollars, have raised in cash the sum of one hun¬ dred thousand dollars—the raising of which sum shall be ap¬ proved and passed upon by the Board appointed as above— said sum shall be applied to such college to be established as its Boai'd of Trust and Faculty may determine. 20. All agricultural schools endowed or supported by the sale of public lands donated by the United States, shall be adopted into this plan, and be made a part of the State University. 21. All other institutions, not denominational in their char¬ acter, may be taken into this plan and share its benefits, when they shall have complied with like conditions to those expressed in article 19 of this paper. 22. The curriculum of the colleges shall bo determined by a Board, consisting of the Faculty at Athens and the Faculties of the several colleges; the curriculum of the colleges to be al¬ tered or amended only so far as the more advanced studies of art and science may be concerned, no power herein conferred 8 to be construed as giving to the herein mentioned Board any right to change, alter, or disallow any text-book which the Fac¬ ulties of the respective colleges may think best to promote the moral and religious interests of the youth committed to their charge ; the curriculum of the several colleges and the text books always being the same, unless modified by the restrain¬ ing clause above written; the terms for study and the vacations being also the same in the several colleges. 23. These colleges and the schools of the University shall be exclusively for the white children of the State. 24. The State shall assist, as the demands of the colored children of the State may require, in perfecting a university system for them, with its appropriate schools and colleges, that they too may have the benefit of the greatest possible culture suited to their wants and to their circumstances; it being the purpose of the Stale, herein pledged, to give to the colored children, at the earliest day possible, advantages similar to those conferred on the children of the whites. Such is an outline of the more important features of the plan proposed. The writer, in a single article, cannot give the rea¬ sons for each particular item, and the arguments by which each is sustained. -These are obvious to all thinking minds, and need not be presented in detail. But, for the benefit of the general reader, the following points may be stated : 1st. The University at Athens, even as now organized, is a State necessity. 2d. The denominational colleges are fixed facts, and cannot be surrendered by their friends. 3d. The former is supported by the State ; the latter by the private liberality of those who are equally taxed to keep up the former. 4th. There has been a conflict of interest, the State Univer¬ sity having been forced into a position of rivalry. 5th. This has given to the University.an immense advantage over the colleges, compelling them, thereby, to wage an un¬ equal conflict. 6th. It is unwise and suicidal to protract a conflict which has resulted in great damage to the parties engaged in it. 7th. Unity in design and harmony in execution, on the part of the friends of education, are vitally essential to foster and develop the higher culture demanded by the times. 8th. This higher culture cannot be acquired in an institution 9 fetteied by a curriculum embracing the more elementary studies taught in the college proper. 9th. The more elementary studies ought to be confined to the colleges, the more advanced studies, such, for instance, as the higher mathematics, being taken from them, that in the comparatively elementary branches they may be more direct and thorough. 10th. The curriculum of the college should be a foundation for, and introduction to, the higher schools of the University— the curriculum of our colleges being now far too crowded—au evil which can be remedied, if they continue as they are, only by extending the college course two years longer, or by re¬ quiring for admission into the freshman what is now required for admission into the junior class. In this direction the col¬ leges are moving. To its necessity they are being aroused. Old Harvard, we have seen it stated, has taken, or is about to take, the lead in this imperative advance, by requiring for ad¬ mission into the freshman class what she before demanded for admission into the junior. 11th. Perfection, in any department of study, can only be acquired by separate schools; hence the necessity for these schools in the University, and the wisdom of giving to them alone the right to confer the appropriate degrees. 12th. Confining the right of the colleges to confer degrees to the single degree of Bachelor of Arts, and giving the special degrees to the schools of the University, enhances the merit of such degree one hundred fold. 13th. The same is true of confining the honoraiy degrees to the Board of Fellows, comppsed of learned gentlemen, who, by their literary and scientific attainments, are best qualified to sit in judgment on such cases. 11th. Confining the colleges to the comparatively elementary studies, and giving to the schools at Athens the more advanced and special studies, secures that division of labor so essential to success—the schools and the colleges together forming the University proper, each distinct and separate, each doing its own appropriate and untrammeled work, but performing it bet¬ ter because distinct and separate; and yet the two combined making a unit in one comprehensive and all-embracing plan. 15th. Adopting the colleges into this general University scheme, making them component parts of the University, and allowing them to retain their denominational convictions, util- io izes and makes available valuable machinery already in opera¬ tion; unites the friends of the colleges and the'friends of the State University; does no violence to the opinions and convic¬ tions of those heretofore in conflict; and obviates an unwise and unjust discrimination against one of the parties. 16th. The cheapening of education in the schools and col¬ leges, so as to bring down its price to the actual cost, is a right which the l§tate ought to secure to her indigent sons who feel the need of the most thorough culture. 17th. Requiring a diploma from the colleges, or a satisfac¬ tory examination on the studies pursued in the college, for ad¬ mission into certain schools of the University, not only is a positive benefit to the colleges, but greatly raises the standard of professional education, and multiplies the number of learned young men in the professions. 18th. Fixing the curriculum by the joint Board named, is greatly conducive to that progressive development herein sought, and so much to be desired. 19th. Requiring certain sums to be contributed by private liberality to the University and the colleges, before this plan be adopted, multiplies the friends of education, develops the liberality of the people, and invites to more enlarged and gen¬ erous endowments in the future. 20th. The plan herein proposed and outlined, contemplates the improvement of all the sons of the State—a united, har¬ monious and concentrated effort in the noble work of educa¬ tion—the development and perfection of a system which shall place Georgia in advance of all the educational enterprises of the day. These suggestions are presented for amendment, for devel¬ opment, and for perfection. The writer has not the vanity to believe that the details will all be approved. Nor does he be¬ lieve that they are the best and wisest that can be desired. But he does believe that the general plan may be safely adop¬ ted. Sustained by a single purpose to do good, and moved by sincerest friendship to the University at Athens, and to our de¬ nominational colleges, the writer gives this plan to the public, praying the blessing of Almighty God upon all our institutions of learning, both male and female, both white and colored, and upon the educational interests of his beloved native State. Georgia. UNIFICATION. COLLEGIATE AFFILIATION IN GEORGIA. Yesterday the following memorial was presented in the House of Representatives by Mr. Peabody, Chairman of the Commit¬ tee on Education, and referred to the Committee on Education : To the Honorable Senators and Representatives of the General Assembly of Georgia, met at Atlanta: The undersigned, your petitioners, respectfully present to your honorable body the enclosed article signed "Georgia," from the Augusta Constitutionalist, the writer of which is Rev. J. O. A. Clark, one of your memorialists, and an article from the Augusta Constutionalist, entitled "Franklin College," writ¬ ten by its editor, Colonel James Gardner, both articles propos¬ ing a plan for affiliating the University of Georgia and the colleges under one comprehensive and all-embracing plan, put¬ ting an end to the conflict existing between the University and the colleges, and harmonizing the educational interests of Georgia. The details of tho plan presented being simply the sugges¬ tions of one mind, it is not asked by your petitioners that the plan with all its details be adopted, but that a commission be ap¬ pointed by the General Assembly or the Governor, to consider the whole question at some future day, the General Assembly may elect, and report the result to the next meeting of tho General Assembly, the commission consisting of representatives from all the parties interested. Believing that this is a grave and important question, and well worthy the consideration of your honorable body, we re¬ spectfully submit this petition, being authorized by His Excel¬ lency J. M. Smith, Governor of Georgia, to say that the general 12 idea presented in the communication of "Georgia" meets his hearty approval, as well as the request herein made by your petitioners, all of which is respectfully submitted. John S. Wilson, J. O. A. Clark, L. E. Bleckley, Benjamin H. Hill, ■Julian Hartridge, George F. Pierce, Sr., H. K. McCay, R. Toombs, Joseph E. Brown, H. Y. M. Miller, B. Hill, Gustayus J. Orr, James Jackson, J. B. Gordon, C. J. Jenkins, D. A. Yason. The following letters fully indorse the plan proposed: Atlanta Georgia, January 28th, 1873. My Dear Sir: My intimate association for some years with educational enterprises, and the solicitude I have felt for the educational interests of our children, have led me to think much upon the subject you so forcibl}7 discuss in your article pub¬ lished in the Constitutionalist of December 13th, 1872. Its importance can scarcely be exaggerated. I am with you most heartily. We must have co-operation and not conflict between the de¬ nominational colleges and the University. The plan you propose may require some slight modification in details, but I do not hesitate to say that it is the most com¬ prehensive, and at the same time, the most simple solution of the existing difficulties I have ever seen proposed. I trust the Legislature will take action upon it, for I believe it to be con¬ stitutional, and think it ought to be satisfactory to the colleges. Your plan makes the University and aids the colleges. Yours very respectfully, J. B. GORDON. To Rev. J. 0. A. Clark, D. D. Atlanta, Georgia, December 25th, 1872. My Dear Sir: I have received and read with great interest your article on a system of education in Georgia. To say I approve your central idea is but a weak expression of the truth. Nearly two years ago I set out on this very line, and intended 13 to address the General Assembly on the subject. Causes I need not now enumerate interposed. I felt then, and feel now, I had rather be an hu'mble instrument, under Providence, of lifting up our dear old State on such an educational basis than to have a life lease to the Presidency. It did rejoice me to get your letter and find you were the author of the article. Some of its details you will abandon. But your plan is right, and it is the only practicable basis on which the great w;ork can be accomplished. You shall find in me a warm co-operator in your movement. I appreciate fully your noble purpose. I know well the feelings you experience in contemplating the scheme. The silly war between the University and the colleges, which ought to be to each other as the head and limbs of a common body, is a nar¬ row, insane, unchristian, and mutually destructive war, and ought to be, must be, brought to an end. I know the work will be a difficult one, and we shall need all the brains and fearless energy we can command, but it is a work brighter than a crown when accomplished, and it can bo accomplished. With an earnest prayer for your success, and with the ex¬ pression of a high personal regard, I am Yours very truly, BENJAMIN H. IIILL. To Rev. J. O. A. Clark. SPECIAL MESSAGE FROM THE GOVERNOR, TOGETHER WITH THE REPORT OF THE EDUCATIONAL COMMITTEE AND ACCOM¬ PANYING DOCUMENTS. Executive Department op Georgia, Atlanta, Georgia, February 2, 1874. To the General Assembly : I have the honor to transmit herewith the report of the Commission, appointed under a resolution of the General As¬ sembly, approved February 15, 1873, to consider the matters referred to in the memorial of the Rev. J. O. A. Clark, and to report thereon *to the Legislature at its present session. The views of the eminent gentlemen composing the Commission, upon the subject of the educational interests of the State, are entitled to great respect, and I recommend the suggestions sub¬ mitted by them to the favorable consideration of the General Assembly. James M. Smith. REPORT. Atlanta, Georgia, January 21, 1874. The Commission appointed by His Excellency James M. Smith, under the following resolution of the Genei-al Assembly of this State, approved 15th February, 1873, to-wit: " Resolved, That the Governor be requested to appoint a Commission of twenty-one persons, representing as near as practicable, the various educational interests of the State, and to meet at such time and place as the Governor shall desig¬ nate—said Commission to serve without pecuniary compensa¬ tion from the State—to take into consideration all the matters referred to in the memorial of Rev. J. 0. A. Clark and others, and to report to the next session of the General Assembly the result of their conclusions," met this day, in room No. 44 of the Capitol building, by the invitation of the Governor. Present: J. 0. A. CJark, Chairman ; John H. Fitten, Joseph E. Brown, William P. Price, Benjamin II. Hill, George N. Les¬ ter, J. T. Leftwich, David E. Butler, H. H. Tucker, David Wills, A. T. Mclntyre, H. T. M. Miller and W. LeRoy Broun. By request of the Chairman, the deliberations of the Com¬ mission were opened with prayer by the Rev. Dr. Wills. George N. Lester was chosen Secretary. The memorial referred to in the resolution was then read by the Secretary, the subject matter of wrhich is a proposed plan "for affiliating the University of Georgia and the colleges of the State under one comprehensive and all-embracing plan, put¬ ting an end to the conflict existing between the University and the colleges, and harmonizing the educational interests of Geor¬ gia." The Chairman read before the Commission an elaborate and able paper in favor of the general idea of unifying the Univer¬ sity and colleges, so that there should be one great State Uni- versit}', to which the denominational colleges of the State should bo attached as parts of the general plan, and showing the practicability and value of such a scheme to the education¬ al interests of the Commonwealth. An interesting discussion of the subject followed the reading 16 of the paper, in which Professor LeRoy Broun, Dr. II. V. M. Miller, and Ex-Govefnor Joseph E. Brown participated. On motion of Dr. Miller, the Commission adjourned to meet again at the law office of B. H. Hill & Son, in the Kimball House, at seven and a half o'clock, p. m. Seven and a hale o'clock, p. m. The Commission met according to adjournment. The Minutes of the morning session were read and approved. Mr. Benjamin H. Hill offered the following resolutions: Resolved, That our thanks are due and are hereby tendered to Dr. J. O. A. Clark, for the very able and exhaustive argu¬ ment presented by him on the subject referred to this Commis-' sion, and we do hereby appoint J. O. A. Clark, Benjamin H. Hill and George N. Lester to present the paper read by Dr. Clark to the Governor, and through him to the General Assem¬ bly now in session. Resolved, That we hereby memorialize the General Assembly to pass a resolution appointing, or authorizing the Governor to appoint a Commission of not less th§m five, nor more than seven, to perfect a plan for the affiliation, by mutual consent, of the University and the denominational colleges of Georgia, if it be found practicable; and if such affiliation cannot be ef¬ fected, then to perfect a plan by which the University and col¬ leges may be brought into a more cordial co-operation, and the great educational intei^ests of the State more effectually pro- molcd, and the opportunities of a dgher grade of mental de¬ velopment and culture may be furnished to the people of the State, through the instrumentality of a liberally endowed Uni¬ versity, saffi Commission to meet at such time and place as the Governor shall appoint, and to report to the General Assembly at its next session. After a full and free interchange of sentiment and opinion, the Commission adopted the first resolution unanimously, and the second resolution was adopted with but one dissenting vote. After a most pleasant and agreeable session, the Commission adjourned sine die. J. 0. A. CLABK, Chairman. Geo. N. Lester, Secretary. A PAPER, Prepared by J. 0. A. Clark, Chairman of the Commission appointed by His Excellency James M. Smith, under the resolution of the General Assembly, approved February 15th, 1873, to take into consideration the unification of the University of Georgia and the Denominational Colleges, and read by him before the Commis¬ sion, which met in Atlanta, Georgia, January 21st, 1874. 1. "Whether education should be by the State or by voluntary effort, has long been discussed. While some have contended, others have acted and educated, either in whole or in part, at the public cost. That it is the duty of the State to provide for the education, of her sons and daughters, either by undertaking the entire cost or by supplementing individual effort, seems now to be the opinion of all who regard education as of pri¬ mary importance. Our own State, acting upon this convic¬ tion, has adopted the common school system as the most prac¬ ticable to secure the desired end. With us it is an experiment— undeveloped, imperfectly organized, and but partially applied. Whether the system adopted will meet the wants of the chil¬ dren of the State is a question to decide which will require time, and for deciding which time ought to be allowed. Let us pa¬ tiently and hopefully await the result, approving what is valu¬ able, amending what is imperfect, rescinding what is worthless, and carefully observing the following cautions : 1. Let us pot attempt to apply to Georgia the perfected system of Prussia, or of the New England States, for we have neither the population, the teachers, nor the money. 2. Because of this let us not think Georgia altogether unprepared for a system of common schools. The Prussian system had its beginning; that of New England had its. Both grew with the grotvth and strengthened with the strength of the peoples whose wants they were intended to subserve. Time and experience, with increase of means and population, will enlarge and perfect the system, making it more available and giving to it a more universal application. 3. Let us not plead poverty as an excuse for indifference and neglect; and let us not, because we cannot do all we could wish, be 2 18 contont with doing nothing or but little. The educational question is one of the greatest problems to be solved by us. The educa¬ tion of the children is a necessary part of their maintenance. Education is the children's right and the State's prerogative. The need is pressing—time is precious. Poor as we arer no better investment can we make of our money—no richer inher¬ itance leave our children. The State being the common mother of all the children within her borders, to the largest ex¬ tent of her means, should at least educate all who are unable to educate themselves. Now that we may have some idea of the work to be done, we present the following facts, which we have carefully com¬ piled : Population of Georgia 1,184,000 Whites 639,000 Colored 545,000 Illiterates ten years and over 468,000 Whites " " 125,000 Colored " " " 343,000 Adult illiterates twenty-one years and over 275,000 Illiterates, minor 193,000 Adult white illiterates twenty-one years and over 62,000 Adult colored " " " " 212,000 White illiterates from 10 to 21 years 62,000 Colored " " " 130,000 Number of children between 5 and 21 years 425,000 Number of children in the public schools 40,000 Number of children in the private schools 26,000 In all at school 66,000 Leaving unprovided for the startling sum 359,000 The above we have taken from the ninth and la&t census of the United States. Allowing for the inaccuracy of this census, cutting down the sum total unprovided for to one half the number named, the destitution "would still be appalling. Let us compare these figures with the statistics of Massachusetts and several of the German States: MASSACHUSETTS. School population between 5 and 15 years 278,249 In public schools 273,661 In private schools 5,070 In all at school 278,737 A number greater than the school population of the State. 19 COMPARE WITH ANHALT. Its entire population Children at school... 197,041 35,848 COMPARE WITH BADEN. Entire population Children at school 1,434,970 . 195,000 In Georgia, we have one child at school to every seventeen of inhabitants; in Anhalt, there is one to every five; in Baden, one to ■every seven ; and in Massachusetts, one to every four. In Geor¬ gia, there is one child at school between the ages of 5 and 21 to every six of the children; in the other States, with which the comparison is made, there are nearly, if not quite, as many children at school as there are children in the respective States. The average duration of common school time, in months and days, for Geoi'gia, is two months and fifteen days; for Massa¬ chusetts, it is eight months and nine days. Such is the destitution in .Georgia—such is the work to be done. As to its importance, we may learn something from the late Franco-Prussian war. The results of the war of 1870 de¬ monstrated the weakness of all previous systems in France, and the necessity for a thorough reform of the whole system of education. The illiteracy of the French was enormous, and to it was attributed, by the French themselves, the disgraceful defeat of their arms. In the rank and file, this illiteracy was appalling. Nor was it confined to them. It prevailed to an alarming extent even among the commissioned officers of a people " who boasted that they were marching at the head of civilization." At Konigsburg, out of one hundred and thirty commissioned' officers, there were seventeen too illiterate to sign the monthly pay-roll. Before the end of the war, and while it was. most fiercely raging, the French saw the weakness of their system of education, and began at once to remedy its defects. In October of the war, Jules Simon, Minister of Pub¬ lic Instruction, "decreed the foundation of an elementary nor¬ mal school for male and female teachers." His apology for doing this, "at a time when every one was anxiously watching the fearful conflict raging in the very heart of the country—at a time when all other duties seemed to be absorbed in the one of national defense," was because, as he said in his .circular, " the unexampled misfortunes that have befallen the country during the last two weeks of the Empire should teach us the 20 lesson, never to be forgotten, that the only power which mates a nation invincible is the intellectual and moral power. This we must restore before we can hope for any victory on the bat¬ tle field." At the end of the same month, large sums were voted at Paris, ''for the establishment of new elementary schools," and "con¬ siderable sums were also promised to the already existing schools." In the middle of November, Oambetta, addressing a circular letter to the prefects and sub-prefects of his department, after charging that the Empire had kept the great mass of the people in ignorance in order to make them convenient tools of despotism, added, "It is our duty now to revive the drooping spirit of the nation, to develop the ideas of justice, patriotism, independence, and all other civil virtues; and thus, through an intellectual and moral new birth, to prevent the recurrence of such a catastrophe as the present." Again, at the close of the Franco-Prussian war, while the contest was raging between the Commune and the army, the Commune- behind their barricades, and while the guns of J\Ic- Mahon " were thundering at the gates of the city," were pass¬ ing resolutions " making elementary education free, secular and compulsory." . And the government of President Thiers, when he succeeded to power, began a reorganization of the army on the Prussian system, and "a thorough reorganization of the system of public instruction after the same model." " Thus," adds the report to which we are indebted for these facts, "the misfortunes of Finance may prove to her a wholesome lesson, and her very defbat become the source of future prosperity and happiness." Such were the results of the late Franco-Prussian war, and such the lesson which it taught the French. Let not our af¬ flicted State be discouraged, but learn wisdom from impover¬ ished and conquered France. Her enormous wab indemnity has been'paid, and, notwithstanding her troubled and crippled condition, her people have made great progress in their whole educational system. Let us, with equal spirit and equal confi¬ dence in our ability to retrieve the past, apply ourselves" anew to the great work before us. We have done something, and, no doubt, propose to do much more. Indeed, we and our sister States in affliction deserve much credit for what we have clone and what we propose to do. The Superintendent of Edu¬ cation, for Illinois, in his official report, awards us the praise 21 we have so richly deserved. "It is a noteworthy fact," he writes, !< that the most advanced positions yet taken on this continent, in respect to popular education, have been assumed by some of the late slavery-scourged and battle-scarred States of the South." Let us draw the same lesson taught us by the Franco-Prus¬ sian war from the Exposition of the Industries of All Nations, held at Paris, in 1867. In that great trial of national indus¬ tries, those States where knowledge was more universally dif¬ fused, and whose skilled artisans were more highly educated, easily carried off the more honorable prizes. The mechanics of Prussia, Belgium, Switzerland, and the United States, taught in the common schools, and trained in the schools of technol¬ ogy of their respective States, won the prizes over those of England, even in those departments where the English in other days had been unrivalled. This signal defeat of English labor and skill at the great Exposition aroused 'the British House of Commons to inquire into the cause. A commission of inquiry was appointed to investigate the wrhole subject. The commis¬ sion, after a patient and thorough investigation, reported the common schools and the schools of technology of the success¬ ful States as the cause of their own failure and the success of their rivals, and recommended, as a sure means of regaining their lost prestige, the establishment of similar schools for themselves. " The Paris Exposition," says the United States Commissioner of Education, in his report to Congress, "rudely shattered the dreams of the English manufacturers, by show¬ ing them how rapidly they were being excelled by foreign arti¬ sans. The result is shown in the vast increase of English tech¬ nical and artisan schools, The truth that it pays to educate workmen was very forcibly impressed upon the English mind." 4. As an additional caution to those already mentioned, let us guard, whatever school system we may pursue, against over¬ much legislation. They who control education should leave as much as possible to local or subordinate boards, and they in turn leave much to teachers. In this way there would be greater room for progress—for development. This thought we have found so well expressed in the report of the Commissioner of Education for Alabama, that we here reproduce it, giving to it our most hearty approval: "There is one thing, however," says this Commissioner, " against which I would raise a note of warning—too much legislation for public schools." His fear 22 was, that the public school system might be "legislated to- death." "Public education," he adds, "requires the operation of government only as a public trustee. It must be left, m a great measure, with the people themselves in their respective townships, to carry into effect the general directions of govern¬ ment. After the State supplies the funds, and provides the " most efficient means for their prompt and just disbursement, the filling up of the details should be left to the people as mueh as possible. The more the management of details is taken from the people and brought nearer to the central power of govern¬ ment, the less efficient will become the system of public in¬ struction." Giving heed to the cautions suggested, we advise, next, a union and concentration of State and individual effort as the system best suited to the genius and embarrassed circumstances of our peo¬ ple, and best calculated, in the end, to promote - all true progress. Let the State supplement the local boards, and the local boards by additional taxation—where the people are able to bear it, and there is a spirit of px-ogressive development—and by vol¬ untary contributions, improve their own schools, enlarge, beau¬ tify, adorn, and, by giving increased salaries, secure the most competent instructors. That system where the State supple¬ ments individual and voluntary effort, we are persuaded, is the best for us. But whatever the system, the freer it is from en¬ cumbrances, and the simpler its machinery, the more efficient it will be, and the greater will be the room for development. We want a system, comprehensive }Tet simple, diffusive, and as efficient, in its hu\nble sphere, as the great law of gravitation is in its—which is powerful enough to keep revolving worlds in their orbits round their central suns—to make the heaviest pro¬ jectile hurled from the biggest gun describe the opposite curve of its parabola with inverted velocity, but in the same time it described its first; yet gently diffusive enough to bring back to earth the lightest feather set in motion by the zephyr, and the smallest particle of dust or the tiniest mote that floats or dances in the sunbeam. II. Next in importance, is the liberal culture of the greatest number in the college and the University. We say next in im¬ portance, but next in one respect only; for there can be no University without the college, no college without the high school, no high school without the primary school; but as the lower schools depend for their efficiency upon the higher, the 23 college and the University are, for that reason, not second, but first in importance. The Superintendent of Education for In¬ diana has said: " A complete system of education has the com¬ mon school for its base, and the University for its apex." But he adds: "The common school cannot long exist without the academy or high school. The academy or high school de¬ pends in turn upon the college, and the college upon the Uni¬ versity. All are but parts of a complete system. The absence of any of these parts would produce deformity." This Super¬ intendent is a live man, and knows what he is saying. From one stand-point, the primary is the base, and the University is the apex ; from another, the reverse is the truth. The absence of any one is a deformity; all should be included in the same system. All should be supported or supplemented by the State, all being parts of the same comprehensive system, and yet dis¬ tinct and separate, rising by regular gradations from the lowest to the highest. Hon. Newton Bateman, of Illinois, at the National Educa¬ tional Convention, held at St. Louis, concluded "an able and eloquent paper" in words which ought to be written in letters of light: "The question for American statesmen is not how little, but how much can the State properly do for the education of her children ; that the one thing most precious in the eyes of God and good men is the welfare and growth of the immortal mind, and that to do this, Legislatures should go to the verge of their constitutional powers, Courts to the limits of liberality of con struction, and Executives to the extreme of their official pre¬ rogatives. 1 believe that an American State can and should supplant the district school with the high school, and the high school with the University, all at the public cost, exhib¬ iting to the world the noblest privilege of the country, a model free school system: ' totus teres atque rotundus.1" Superintendent William Harris, of St. Louis, at the same time and place, said : "The Government of a Republic must educate all its people, and it must educate them so far that they are able to educate themselves, in a continued process of culture extend¬ ing through life. This implies the existence of higher institu¬ tions of public education. And these not so much with the ex¬ pectation that all will attend them, as that the lower schools, which are initiatory in their character, and deal with new ele¬ ments, depend for their efficiency upon the organization of 24 higher institutions for their direction and control. Without the education in the higher institutions of the teachers of the lower schools, and furthermore, without the possibility hovering before pupils of ascent into the higher schools, there can be no practical effect given to primary schools." In the sense therefore we are now considering the relative importance of the schools, the University takes the precedence of them all. The youthful mind, during the whole process of growth and culture, until fitted for the work of life to which it consecrates its energies and powers, should, at every stage of its progress, have before it something higher to aim at. The young Scots¬ man, whose footprints have never been seen beyond the marshes of his native lowlands, knows not the joy of him who, from the tallest ridge of the Grampians, has a broader view of "the land of brown heath and shaggy wood," or of his more adven¬ turous countryman, who, having toiled up in other climes the ice-ribbed side of some Alpine peak, beholds Alp on Alp lift their tall heads far into the blue ether above him. The young countryman of Ennius or Cato who has drunk only at the Fons Bansdusea, or climbed to the summit of hoary Soracte, has never felt the deeper joy of him who has slaked his thirst at Castalia, or whose locks have been wet by the dews which fall on Pindus. The Grecian youth who, in some provincial town, under some indifferent master, pursues the study of phil¬ osophy, longs for the hour to come when, at Athens, he may ■walk arm in arm with Plato, in the groves of the Academy, or converse familiarly with Aristotle in the charmed precincts of the Lyceum. The young Englishman, who in some rural dis¬ trict, in some parish school, under some village pedagogue, pours over his dog-eared Phsedrus or his dog-eared HSsop, pines for the hour which shall transport him to Eugby, where he may read Tully and Homer under the gifted Arnold; and the youth, from the lowest to the highest forms, at Eugby, looks anxiously forward to the day when he may contend for prizes and fellow¬ ships at Oxford, or at Cambridge. Too much, then, cannot be said in support of the higher and more liberal culture. It is necessary to give efficiency to the lower, and indispensable to open new avenues to wealth and knowledge, and keep up with the immense advances all arts and all sciences are making. For the higher and more liberal culture we have a State University and several denominational 25 colleges. The former is a creature of the State; the latter are supported by the liberality of their respective denominations. .Between these, there has been a conflict of interests, a rivalry—■ a "want of harmony. The colleges could combine to defeat ap¬ propriations to the University. War in turn was made upon the colleges, culminating in a clause in the Constitution, forbidding the appropriation of money to denominational colleges. Now, no system can be successfully worked where this rivalry exists. It is mutually destructive and suicidal. Unification, therefore, above all things, is to be desired—not by destroying or essentially changing either, but by preserving both, and by harmonizing conflict¬ ing interests. Theii* respective friends are so committed to the University and colleges that neither can be eliminated. Both must be continued. 1. The necessity for the University-: 1st. To those who prefer not to send to a denominational college. To meet this demand, Franklin, with a strict college cui'riculum, must be continued at Athens. 2d. That there may be advanced schools at Athens, from which the elementary studies of the college may be eliminated. The higher education can only be acquired in schools which pre¬ suppose an acquaintance with the comparatively elementary studies of the college. Our colleges are institutions into which have been injudiciously crammed university studies. Our uni¬ versities are institutions with college studies, and with a col¬ lege curriculum in nothing hardly differing from the colleges. 3d. A University Georgia must have. But there is not room for more than one. Let us then have but one, and that one not a university in name only—not in ambitious and pretentious title, but a university in deed and in truth. 2. The necessity for the denominational colleges. They are already in operation, and have much valuable machinery which ought to be utilized. Whether right or wrong in their views of the importance and necessity, their friends do not intend to surrender them. This is a fact which no statesman, no educator should ignore. Here then let us pause to say a word to those opposed to denominational colleges. These col¬ leges are denominational, but not sectarian—Christian, but not bigoted. They are intended to throw around the young the safeguards of virtue and religion ; and the more religious they are, the freer from bigotry and sectarianism. They are called 26 denominational because they are under control of some particular denomination—not because their government or curriculum is sectarian. In government and curriculum they are not different from the other colleges in any important sense. In moral phi¬ losophy alone is there a chance to enforce one's peculiar religious views; and this is a very poor and unsatisfactory field for so doing. Not much chance to teach theological dogmas, such as divide the churches, in works on moral science. Indeed, in colleges widely differing in theological views, the same text¬ book on moral philosophy is often used. Theological seminaries are the places to teach church polemics, not the colleges. Take the writer's experience: first, his freshman year at Yale, under the control of the Congregationalists; second, the other three years of his under-graduate course at Brown Uni¬ versity, a Baptist institution ; third, as a professor for four years at Emory, a Methodist college. The writer, while at Yale and Brown, was a Methodist. Not a word did he hear, either in the recitation room or in the pulpit, calculated to unsettle his religious faith; much did he hear in both tending to lead him to Christ, and to keep his heart in the love of God. And while a professor at Oxford, never did he say a word to proselyte the faith of any one, but much, he trusts, to make young men vir¬ tuous and religious. We cannot commend too highly the following from President Woolsey's retiring address, when he resigned the presidency of Yale College into the hands pf his successor, Dr. Noah Porter; " And there is another thing which I hope will always be present here, with the consideration of which I will close this brief address. I hope that as long as the college lasts it will be the abode of religion; of teachers who believe in Christ and lead a religious life, and of scholars who feel that a noble char¬ acter is something infinitely more precious than learning. " He who feels himself called to be a teacher, who has the spirit of service to. God and man in this sphere, has the founda¬ tion on which all healthy experiments may be built. He, by his trials—even when they fail—will ever be qualifying himself for something better, in the way of imparting knowledge and establishing principles, than he has as yet attained to; and es¬ pecially he will be anxious not to leave untried all right experi¬ ments to promote an honorable and truly christian character in the institution where his lot is cast. "And now I close this, my last official act, with the prayer 27 to God that that this may ever be a Christian college, in the highest and best sense. May its graduates go forth to bless the world as men of principle, and as they advance in life, may they ever retain a just and fond affection for their Alma Mater- May its guardians, under the amendments of the charter, have that unity and devotion to the interests of the departments which shall- be a sure pledge of successful counsels. May its faculties keep in the van of their sciences, teach with a loving spirit, and feel that life is more and higher than learning. May its students be manly, truthful, honorable — able, by their strength of principle, to resist the debasing influences that are abroad in the land; may they, in short, be true Christian gen¬ tlemen." To these noble sentiments we add the equally noble senti¬ ments of Dr. Porter, in his inaugural on the same occasion which called forth the address of Woolsey: "The more Christian a college or university is, other things being equal, the more perfect and harmonious will be its cul¬ ture, the moi'e philosophical and free its science, the more exact and profound its erudition, the richer and more varied its liter¬ ature. We should be treacherous to our faith did we not be¬ lieve this and act accordingly. We rejoice that is still the judgment of so many who influence public opinion." * * * " The more Christian a university becomes, the less sectarian will be its spirit and influence." * * * " We have no favors for our faith to ask of science, and no patronage to solicit from erudition. On the other hand, we have no fears from either." * * * «qn the light of our past history, and what are to be the pressing demands of the country, we assert the opinion that Yale College must and will be forever maintained as a Christian University." These are noble utterances, concieved in the highest wisdom and deepest philosophy, whose truth has been attested by the enlightened and sanctified experience of the good and true in all the past history of denominational colleges. Our own noble colleges, which have struggled against poverty, against mani¬ fold and well-nigh disheartening embarrassments from their or¬ ganization until now, fully indorse the sentiments so forcibly and beautifully expressed by the gifted Woolsey and scarcely less gifted Porter. To day, the noblest and proudest monuments of American scholar¬ ship are the denominational colleges. Dartmouth, Harvard, Wil- 28 liams, Amherst, Brown, Yale, Middletown, Princeton, Randolph- Macon, Columbian, Mercer, Oglethorpe, Emory, and. many others, at the Noi'th and at the South—all of them denomina¬ tional from the laying of their corner-stones down to the pres¬ ent day—were established in prayer and faith, and baptized with the tears of their pious and godly founders. Nor have they disappointed the hopes of the nation. The names of their graduates are graven deepest on the hearts of their country¬ men. Their success, and the immense amount of good they, have accomplished, have demonstrated the wisdom which con¬ secrated them to God, and devoted them to the cause of sancti¬ fied learning. Hence, with the lights of a past experience be¬ fore us, giving promise of yet nobler results and richer harvests in years to come, we would be unwise to give up our denomina¬ tional colleges. We cannot give up the education of our youth, while their hearts are tender, impressible, and easy to be acted upon by influences from without, to those who do not regard the culture of the heart of paramount importance, and a char¬ acter established in virtue and religion a greater treasure than all the riches of intellect. It is quite enough for us to give up as we propose, the higher culture to the University. This we would not do, as we are candid to admit, if we had less faith in the previous moral and religious training of the college, and in the preponderating religious influence in the Board of Trustees and the Faculties of the University at Athens. Indeed, the greatest opposition to the scheme we advocate has come from those who wish to make the denominational colleges universi¬ ties also, and who aim at controlling the higher, as well as the lower culture. But this, at present, is chimerical, however much we may desire it. The friends of denominational educa¬ tion may unite their respective denominations, and establish one university for each denomination in the entire South. But we repeat, there is place in Georgia but for one University, and it requires the union of all to make even that one a success. Universities may exist in name, being neither flesh nor fowl. But the life of a University is not in its name. A pretentious title, without the thing it represents, adds nothing to the use¬ fulness, dignity, or prestige of the institution assuming it. In¬ deed, the name University, as applied to many an American in¬ stitution, is a misnomer. The quicker the ambitious title is dropped—we*utterly disclaim any offense to any, and especially to those who have adopted the name in hope rather of what 29 their institutions may become than as applicable to what they now are—the better for our candor and our good sense. But we are ablet to maintain one University for Georgia. With Mercer, and Oglethorpe, and Emory, and Franklin, and with the Catholic institution soon to be established, and with those that may hereafter be established by the Episcopalians and others, as its colleges; and with its advanced schools—its schools of lit¬ erature, art and science, and its schools of medicine and law at Athens, and its agricultural school at Dahlonega—the Univer¬ sity of Georgia, as thus organized, would make a splendid be¬ ginning, and soon take rank with the very best in the land. Such an institution, indeed, would be in advance of anything on this continent. It would be what Harvard would be, were Harvard enriched by Amherst and Williams, the Institute of Technology at Boston, and the Agricultural College at Amherst. It would be what Yale would be, were Yale enriched by Trinity at Hartford, and the Wesleyan University at Middletown. And this can be done. There is no real obstacle in the w-ay. The difficulties feared by those friends of the denominational colleges who wish to control the higher culture, would all vanish. Let but the friends of the colleges and the University unite, and there will be no difficulty in elaborating a plan that will give satisfaction to all. Unite the University and the colleges, and the latter need have no fears about surrendering to the University the higher culture. Such a bond of union would exercise a salutary and controlling influence. It would give the greatest possible se¬ curity that no man of dangerous principles could be elected to a professorship in the University—that there would be no place there for the Darwins, the Huxleys, the Spencers and Tyndals of modern infidelity. But, without this connectional bond be¬ tween the University and the colleges—so persistent and bla¬ tant is the demand to divorce education and religion—no one can tell how soon the University may be surrendered to the in¬ fidel and scoffing scientists of these modern days. We close this part of our paper with the following from the report of John Eaton, Jr., United States Commissioner of Edu¬ cation : " Educators may well seriously inquire whether the tendency of the systems they are constructing are as thorough¬ ly promotive of the practice of virtue as they ought to be, and can be. Is not the standard of promotion from the lowest class in the elementary to that of the graduates from the highest pro- 30 fessional schools, limited too exclusively to intellectual attain¬ ments, and not sufficiently inclusive cf moral character? * * Are there not here suggested profound reasons for-a revision of our ideas of education? If the demand in the schools, and for promotion in the various spheres of life, is for intellectual sharp¬ ness only, can we expect the young to value or to produce much else? Yet no one, contemplating the means of promoting indi¬ vidual good or the public welfare, can be satisfied with an edu¬ cation which so intensifies intellectual activity as to overlook the necessity for the training and culture of the moral nature." The Commissioner enforces his views by a vigorous and pointed extract from the sayings of Dr. Tayler Lewis to the same end : "Experience has abundantly shown," says Dr. Lewis, "that no amount of mere fact knowledge, or scientific knowledge, in the restricted modern sense of the term, can give security that the man possessing it may not turn out a monster of crime and a deadly scourge to society." * * " Evidence is constantly ac¬ cumulating that the processes of the burglar, of the incendiary, of the counterfeiter, of the poisoner, of the railroad destroyer of the prison breaker, or the abortionist, etc., are actually mak¬ ing progress with the progress of crime. They are becoming arts, whether we rank them with the elegant or the useful." * * # « There is reason to believe that before long books may be written upon them, and that there may be such a thing as a felon's library. The same may be maintained in respect to what may be called the more .speculative knowledge. Where) wholly destitute, as it may be, of moral truth and moral intui¬ tions, it may only wake up the dormant faculties of the soul for the discovery of evil, and make them all more aCute for its perpetration." See the prophecy of Dr. Lewis fulfilled by the fact- that, lately, in breaking up an organized band of hoxxse- breakers, at Chillicothe, Ohio, the police found books for the instruction of novices in the art of burglary, and see his opin¬ ion abundantly confirmed by the case of Ruloff, recently exe¬ cuted for murder, at Binghampton, Kew York. In the plan we advocate, we propose one University for Geor¬ gia, and to make the colleges parts of it. All shall be under one comprehensive system, and yet each distinct and separate, the colleges giving up certain chartered rights and receiving in consideration of such surrender, necessary aid from appropria¬ tions made by the State to the University for its colleges. The details of this plan are to be found in the Augusta Constitutionalist, 31 in an article signed "Georgia," of which the writer is the an. thor. In respect to these details lie woxdd here remark, once for all, he is no stickler for them. There are no suggestions therein made which would not first be abandoned by the author himself, if they stood in the way of the adoption of his chief object—the unification, under some comprehensive plan, of all the educational interests of Georgia. I say this, because it has been to me a mat. ter of surprise that any one should suppose that the plan, if adopted, must be adopted with all of its details. Many of the details might be eliminated, and others substituted, with the ready acquiescence of the author. They are but the recom. mendations of one mind, and were thrown out as mere sug-ffes- ' OO tions. Hence, the author was the first to ask the appointment of a Commission to consider the whole question—to see, after consultation had, if the thing proposed be practicable, and if so, by what plan and by what details. Such a conference, it was believed, would result in good, whatever became of the plan submitted. A Commission of twenty-one representative men of Georgia, meeting for an interchange of views on such a subject, could only result in some practical good to the great cause of education. The Legislature voted the Commission ; the Governor has appointed it. To the plan proposed certain objections have been made which we will now notice : First, it has been urged by some, that the plan is a union of Church and State. The plan contemplates no such thing. If it proposed the absorption of the colleges by the University, and the control of the University thus organized by the denomina¬ tions jointty, under the supervision of the State, then there might be some reason for the objection. This would be truer still, if to some one leading denomination adopted by the State as the religion of the State, this control should be given. For there can be no union of Church and State, unless the State give to some Church certain immunities and privileges denied to others. But how can this be true of the plan proposed, which gives to certain denominations the same privileges, and affirms them to all others who comply with the same conditions, and which allows the State not even the right of supervision over the colleges, but leaves them to the absolute control of their own denominational boards f The plan is the very opposite of anything looking to a union of Church and State. If the State give to all denom- 32 inations alike, and to others not denominational, the same priv¬ ileges, and reserves no control whatever over the denomina¬ tions in anything that affects their faith or practice, where is there a union of Church and State? The State exempts the property of the churches from taxation. Is that a union of Church and State ? The truth is, the plan before us is a com¬ plete divorce of Church and State. For, by the express terms of the plan itself, the colleges are to remain denominational, to be under the control of their own denominational boards, the State having no right of control or supervision whatever—the boards electing their successors and their faculties in the same way they do now, and prescribing for themselves what moral and religious instruction they shall give to the pupils commit¬ ted to their charge. No more union of Church and State in this than under the now existing arrangement. The colleges and all others will be left perfectly free to worship God as they please, and to instruct their pupils in morals and religion, as their respective boards and faculties may determine. The State, under this plan, prescribes no religion, fosters none to the exclu¬ sion or injury of others, but recognizes all denominations as en¬ titled to equal protection, and with equal rights to govern their colleges in their own way. But under the existing regime, the State does proscribe religion. It does put under the ban for opin¬ ion's sake. It does tax without representation. For what is that clause in the State Constitution, forbidding the giving of 3 O o o money to denominational colleges, but proscription ? It puts under the ban the denominational colleges. It compels the friends of denominational education to abandon their convic¬ tions before they can receive State-aid, and effectually bars the doors of the State University against them. For, reverse the facts. Suppose the State Constitution forbade the giving of money to any but the denominational colleges, would not that be a proscription of all not denominational ? and would it not force them either to send their sons to the denom¬ ination! colleges, or, by private liberality, to found colleges of their own, while taxed to support the denominational colleges? And would not this be taxation without representation ? The plan under which we are now operating in Georgia, it is true, is not a union of Church and State. But it is infinitely worse. There is no church — no religion in it. It speaks in this wise- " Have no religion and I will help you." To divorce this un¬ holy union, to dissolve the bonds of this ungodly wedlock, to 33 relieve those who fjii'e now under the ban of proscription for opinion's sake, to extend the privileges now given to a favored class and give them to all the citizens of this great Common¬ wealth, is one of the leading objects of the scheme before us. It is that the State respect the opinions of all her citizens alike, and proscribe no one on account of his religion—and above all, that no premium be put upon irreligion, and no ex¬ clusive aid be given to it. Second. The plan is objected to by some because, as they say, they are opposed to the giving of money by the St ate to-denominational colleges, and would on principle refuse to receive State aid. We have already, in part, anticipated this objection. For we have shown that the State has no right to discriminate against de¬ nominational colleges. But suppose the State has the right to discriminate against them, and proscribe them;-and suppose that, as a matter of principle, no denominational college ought to accept State aid, how does this militate against the plan we propose? The State has its University to maintain. The de¬ nominational colleges, as its rivals, have retarded its growth hindered its progress, and, through their influence, defeated ap. 'proportions which it would otherwise have received. To put an end to this rivalry, which has been mutually damaging, the State offers certain aid to the colleges, which the colleges re¬ ceive as a valuable consideration for the surrender of certain vested and chartered rights. The parties at interest have re¬ spectively given and received a quid pro quo. And by this both have been largely benefited—all rivalry is forever at an end— both are established beyond a contingency of failure—both are left untrammelled to do their own appropriate work—the con¬ stitutional objection is fully obviated, or if not, the way to the repeal of the forbidding-clause is made manifest and certain— and there has been no surrender of principle on either side. Oglethorpe received aid from Atlanta; Mercer accepted aid from Macon. All the citizens of Atlanta and Macon alike, both Prot¬ estant and Catholic, both Jew and Gentile, were taxedto pay the sums donated to these denominational colleges respectively. Did these colleges i*efuse to receive the aid thus given? If it was right in principle to accept assistance when Catholics and Jews and others were taxed to pay it, how can it be wrong in principle to accept it from the State, out of the taxes which the denominat'ons themselves have paid into the common treasury ? 34 Third: The plan is objected to by some because they are opposed to denominational colleges and toish to see them abandoned. There lire those who say that they heartily indorse the changes pro¬ posed in the plan, and will receive the colleges into the Univer¬ sity scheme if the colleges surrender their denominational fea¬ tures. This would be like Hamlet with the part of Hamlet left out. But let us give to the objection a respectful answer. "We have already seen in what sense the colleges are denominational—that they are denominational, but not sectarian. And we have seen that their friends will never abandon them. A wise statesman ? therefore, will form his plans with reference to this stubborn fact, and make the best of it, whatever his own opinions as to the wisdom or folly of denominational education. He will not keep up an antagonism which works injury to both parties. Not ignoring the denominational feeling, he will accept it as a thing which must be conciliated, and which ought to be utilized. In¬ stead of fighting it, he will conciliate it, and make it available. If devoted to the one work of enlarging and magnifying the State University, he would rather see the colleges attached to the University even in their denominational character, thanJ;o see them rivals of the institution whose success he has so much at heart. He would advise the State, instead of antagonizing the denominational feeling, to utilize it and bring it to aid the State in the great work of educating her children. A wise legislator, therefore, will advise the State to put an end to all discrimina¬ tion against the colleges, by expunging- from her constitution a clause which is inconsistent with charity and true republican¬ ism. For if the State discriminate against the denominational colleges, she does, we repeat it, proscribe the colleges. She does more than this—she proscribes the religion thej-profess— a proscription which is neither democratic nor republican. But it may be answered that the State opens the doors of her University to all—that if the denjominations will not send to the University, and prefer to keep up their colleges at their own expense, they have no one to blame but themselves. Is this true? It is not. For as long as the denominations hon¬ estly hold on to their convictions, believing denominational education to be best for their sons and daughters—believing- it so strongly as to keep up their own colleges by voluntary con¬ tribution, while the State supports the University—so long are they as effectually shut out from the State institution and the 35 superior advantages State aid may give to it, as if there were a statutory law forbidding the sons of Baptists, of'Presbyte¬ rians, and of Methodists, to enter the State University. And is not this taxation without representation ? The British Gov¬ ernment did not forbid the colonists from drinking tea; but it put such a tax upon tea, while it denied to them the right of representation, that the colonists, rather than drink tea, emptied it into Boston harbor. But who are these that are denied State aid ? what then- number, their wealth, their intelligence, their influence? It has been said that the great mass of the people are without the pale of the denominations. Let us see if this be so. The white population of Georgia, in round numbers, is 630,000; the communicants of the Baptist, Methodist and Presbyterian churches, in round numbers, are about 200,000. But remem¬ ber, that of the 630,000, fully 230,000 are below the age of fifteen ; while very few of the communicants are below that age. This would give us 200,000 communicants out of 400,000 ; that is, about one-half of the white population above the age of fifteen are communicants of the three churches named. But add t® this those who are one with these denominations in sen¬ timent and feeling. If this be so, where are the masses ? Con¬ sider, too, that the religious class is the sober, the frugal, and the industrial class. Then we might ask, Who pay the taxes? It is safe to say that three-fourths of the taxes are paid by the three denominations mentioned. Kemember, farther, that the plan contemplates its adoption by the Campbellites, the Episco¬ palians, and the Catholics, who may found colleges, and come into the same general plan. If this be so, we ask again, Where are the masses? Where the votes ? But, r^ore than this, when this question is understood as it will be, those called the wool- hat boys will vote for it, for their eyes are opened at last to the importance of education. They will favor education by the State in all departments—in the college as well as in the ele¬ mentary and high school. Unable to educate themselves, hav¬ ing no property, but having votes, they will help their children to the higher education. They will favor a plan which cheapens the higher education, and brings it nigher to them. Tuition is so high in the colleges as, in a great measure, to shut out the poor; and it is the price of tuition, more than anything else, which keeps the children of the poor out of the colleges. Now, the plan proposed brings tuition down to its actual cost. 36 And what this cost will be, let me illustrate. At Emory there are five professors, including the President, whose united sala¬ ries amount to $10,500. The price of tuition there is. $75 per annum. Give to Emory from endowment, and from State aidr but $5,000 a year, and give to her two hundred paying stu¬ dents, and it will bring down tuition to $27 50-instead of $75 per annum. Before we proceed, we propose to say an additional word upon the constitutional prohibition. No doubt this prohibition received its greatest strength from the fact that the colleges are the rivals of the University, and have hindered its growth. Hence, many good men advised it, gave to it their support, and favored its adoption. Their purpose was to strengthen the Uni¬ versity—to give it such aid as to place it beyond competition. But it did not cause competition to cease—it intensified it rather. While it prevents the colleges from receiving State aid, it does not bring to the University the aid it was intended to secure; for the colleges are too strong for the University. No aid can be given to it but through the Legislature. The colleges have but to combine, and the University is weakened. Now, all this competition—all this rivalry—will cease the mo¬ ment this plan is adopted. And the moment this rivalry ceases, that moment the only forcible reason for the prohibition will be removed. But, it is said, the feeling against the giving of aid to deaom- national colleges is a growing feeling, both here in Georgia and elsewhere. And no wonder, when we remember how bra¬ zen and open-mouthed all irreligion now is, and how increased is the demand for "intellectual sharpness only"—a demand so strong that many g^od men, wThose claim to be Christians we cannot question, are willing to divorce education and religion in our schools, as if the latter were a hindrance to the former, or as if—provided the religion they profess be true, and not an old wife's fable—the former without the latter were worth a fig. But aside from this, we may still ask why is the feeling men¬ tioned a growing feeling ? The same reason for it exists every¬ where. It is because it underlies all existing systems of edu¬ cation in this country. Not so in England and the Canadas, where denominational antagonism is beautifully harmonized. The denominational colleges are the rivals of the State institu¬ tions. The colleges are independent rival institutions, having no connectional bond with the State Universities whatever. 37 It is natural for the States to foster their own institutions and hinder the success of their rivals. But let the denominational colleges unite .with the State Universities upon the plan we advocate, and the feeling against them will subside. And es¬ pecially will this be the case if the colleges surrender to the Universities the higher culture, and confine themselves to the undergraduate curriculum, and then cease to be rivals, and become feeders to the State institutions. Fourth : The conflicts where the common school system\ prevails, growmg, as is said, out of denominational rivalries, are cdleged against the uniftcatioyi of the colleges and the University. They who speak thus understand not the plan we advocate. In it there is no possible reason for the jealousies such as have occa¬ sioned strife in other places. For this plan was devised to obviate these veiy jealousies, and does effectually obviate them. Here there can be no conflict between the denominations them¬ selves, or between the denominations and others. All the evils complained of elsewhere have grown out of contentions for precedence and controlling influence. The strife, where it does exist, is narrowed down to a conflict between the Protestant element on the one hand, and the Catholic, aided by the infidel and profane, on the other. The bone of contention is the Bible, the Protestants demanding its introduction into the common schools, the Catholics and their allies warring against its ad¬ mission there. Hence, to gain a controlling influence in the Legislature and in the Board of Commissioners, has been the o aim of the parties. This is "an evil. But *it is not an evil to which this plan is liable. The evil complained of attaches to the common school system in its elementary and academic de¬ partments. There, a single board has control. On that board, Protestants and Catholics strive for the mastery. To secure a majority is the struggle between the parties. Now, the plan we advocate affects not the elementary and hia;h schools; if it did, and could be applied to them, it would even obviate, and not foster, the evil mentioned—for, the de¬ nominations being left free to manage their respective schools in their own way, all occasion for strife would be at an end. Indeed, that the denominations should control education even in the lower schools is an opinion which numbers its supporters by thousands; and this opinion is largely on the increase. To it the denominations may be driven in order to secure them¬ selves against the atheistical and infidel policy of many who 38 control popular education. Accused of bigotry, they are being- pushed to the wall by a minority far more bigoted than them¬ selves. ' The evil complained of, therefore, is chargeable to the common school system, in its elementary and academic departments, as the common school system is now managed—not to this plan, which has to do with the colleges and universities. In this plan there is no joint board, as in the common schools, having jurisdiction in any matter affecting the conscience of those who hold conflicting religious opinions ;■ for the respective denomi¬ nations retain their own boards. These hoards are now homo¬ geneous, and must remain so; and being homogeneous, they manage their internal affairs in their own way, controlling the moral and religious education of their pupils, without inter¬ ference from any quarter whatever. The Methodists will con¬ trol their own college just as they please, and just as they do now; the Baptists theirs; the Presbyterians theirs ; the Catho¬ lics theirs; and so of all the rest who may establish colleges under this plan. And this is the true theory of religious liberty and republican education; any other theory is proscription. Our theory seeks neither directly nor indirectly to interfere in matters appertain¬ ing to the conscience. It, indeed, has been adapted even in States whose government is monarchical, and in which there is a union of Church and State. Monarchical and Episcopal En¬ gland and the Canadas have adopted it, subsidizing by parliamen¬ tary grants, all denominational schools alike, whether Protes¬ tant or Catholic, whether those of the established church, or those of dissenting churches. TheHght of the denominations to receive aid from the State, and to be left free in the moral and religious training of the young, we are persuaded will, ere long, be universally allowed. Episcopal England but re¬ cently voted down Mr. Gladstone's Irish University Bill, and voted it down because the great English Premier eliminated from the bill the right of the consolidated Irish University to teach history and moral philosophy. The majority in the House of Commons defeated the bill because it put fetters on the conscience of the Irish—by which defeat, the great Com¬ moner himself well nigh lost the Premiership of Great Britain and Ireland. The bill of Mr. Gladstone was essentially the plan we propose. It was the unification of the colleges and 39 University of Ireland; this is the unification of the colleges and Universitj' of Georgia. His bill eliminated the denominational and religious element; this scheme retains it-. The opposition there was not to unifi¬ cation. Unification was a tempting bait and a thing greatly to be desired; but, as it was to be had at the price of the right to teach morals in the schools, it was defeated. The signal de¬ feat of Mr. Gladstone's Irish University Bill evinces a growing catholicity of spirit and an increasing respect for the conscience of mankind. And hence, in proportion as this respect for the religious conscience is manifested, may we hope that this scheme will grow in public favor, But we may be reminded that the English method of giving aid by Parliamentary grants to denominational schools is not working as efficiently as its friends desire. This is because the English method is too complicated. It occasions friction— which friction arises from both denominational and govern¬ mental inspection. "Can two walk together except they be agreed?" If not agreed, strife must be the result. Again, the English method depends too much upon the lib¬ erality of the denominations. The burden falls too heavily on the generous and beneficent, and especially upon the clergy. There, Parliamentary aid is not given, except to those who can help themselves. This system, therefore, does not reach the poor; hence, its inefficiency, as a common school system, to dif¬ fuse popular education. But be it remembered that we do not apply our plan to the common schools, but to the colleges and the University ; and be it remembered that in this plan there can be no friction from governmental inspection, becayse there is none. In the Canadas, however, not even in the lower schools is there any report of friction. There, all is harmony. The report from the Canadas is, that denominational antago¬ nism is perfectly and beautifully harmonized. How, by deny- in ^ to the State the right of inspection over the denominational schools, except the right to demand of colleges a strict account of their expenditures of all sums received from the University, we secure this plan against the evil which has hindered, some¬ what, the success of the English system. One of the real merits of the plan we propose is its cheapness and its perfect simplicity. It requires no more machinery than is now used. The colleges continue under their present boards, who o-ovcrn all their internal affairs, elect their own successors 40 and their own professors, preserve the same curriculum, which is appropriately collegiate, introducing to the higher schools of the University. The colleges confer the.single degree of Bach¬ elor of Arts, giving all other degrees to the higher schools. Here there is no governmental or any inspection, beyond them¬ selves. In return for the aid received from the University, they confine their work to the undergraduate course, and become feeders to the University; that is all. Nor has the University any cumbrous machinery. There is no need of any joint board of regents, on which all the colleges shall be represented. The present board at Athens, organized and appointed as it now is, is the only board needed. Let that board govern the Univer¬ sity schools, having no jurisdiction whatever over the colleges. Let the influence it .exercises over the colleges be that of ex¬ ample. In one way, indeed, the University will exert a silent but profound and controlling influence for good. The graduates of the colleges, all of whom have pursued the same curriculum, when admitted to the University schools may be examined, to see who are the most proficient—who have done their work best. To the highest may be awarded prizes and scholarships in the schools of the University. This brings the graduates of the colleges into comparison. Now, this is a great desideratum. The necessity for inter-collegiate comparison is sadly felt elsewhere in our own existing systems. It is a ques¬ tion now agitating many of the leading educators of the coun¬ try how inter-collegiate comparison can be secured. It cannot be brought about under the present systems, because there is no connectional bond between the colleges themselves and the higher schools. * Dr. McCosh, the able President of Princeton, is reported to look upon this as one of the great demands of the times, and necessary to give roundness and completeness to the best edu¬ cational systems of this country. But, because of-this absence of any connectional bond, he sees not how inter-collegiate com¬ parison can be effected. What is lacking in present systems is easily supplied by this plan. The way in which this is done has been suggested. For many other special advantages of the plan before us, we refer to their summing up at the conclusion of the article from the Augusta Constitutionalist. Lastly, it is said that the scheme is worthy and generous, hut that the State is too poor to adopt it. A word dismisses this objection. 41 -Clie plan may bo adopted, at once, and not one cent be voted at present, except what is necessai'y to meet the additional ex¬ penses in the schools of the University. Indeed, without the addition of a single penny, both the University and the col¬ leges would be much better off than they now are. The pres¬ ent embarrassed condition of the State and of individuals may lead us to expect, at present, nothing liberal from either. But it will prepare the way for liberal endowments in the future, and secure them beyond a peradventure. And the time will not be distant when State and private enterprise shall place the Uni¬ versity of Georgia, as then organized, upon a basis as solid and lasting as the granite of her mountains. The State, we believe, should recommend this plan, even though itjreccive not the indorsement of all the denominations. It will silence those who may oppose the University. If any col¬ lege refuse aid when aid is offered, and the right to keep up de¬ nominational education is still preserved, the college so refusing will be without excuse. For this will be a very different thing from the present attitude of the State toward the denomina¬ tional colleges. The State now gives aid to the University and denies it to the colleges. She whould under this plan extend a helping hand, not only to the University, but to the now pro¬ scribed denominational colleges, and leave them to educate their youth in their own way. But if the University be the party objecting to a scheme so fair and just and equitable, which seeks her exaltation and magnifies her work, the colleges must be excused if they continue their opposition, and refuse their votes and influence to perpetuate privileges that are denied themselves. We invoke, in conclusion, a spirit of harmony. Let tolera¬ tion direct our counsels; let us aim at conciliation, fraterniza¬ tion unification. We have been too much and too long divided in our educational plans. Lot unity in design, unity in execu¬ tion, bo our motto. This is an age demanding the largest charity. Let'chairty be the key-note to which all our ideas of educa¬ tional development are accommodated. Under her benign and holy influence let us form plans for the education of all the sons and daughters of our dear old Commonwealth, both white and colored to the full extent of the means with which God has en¬ dowed us; supplementing where supplementary aid is needed, and distributing freely and gratuitously to all whom poverty keeps from lending to the State a helping hand. Commission appointed by the Governor, Under a resolution of the General Assembly, approved March 2d, 1874, authorizing the Governor to appoint a commission of five to perfect a'plan for the unification of the University and the denominational colleges, and to report the same to the General Assembly at its next session, the Governor appointed the following gentlemen to serve on said commission : Eev. J. O. A. CLARIv, D. 1)., Ex-Gov. JOSEPH E. BROWN, Gen. J. B. GORDON, Hon. B. H. HILL, Rev. DAVID WILLS, D. D.