The voice of freedom. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1839-1848, 1847-11-18

somewhat surprised that they did not propose asuo-
sttute IF they had expressed preference iora To-
eating committee, selected from the citizens of this
Commonwealth, it would have been, l have no
doubt very respectfully considered by our Corpora
ton.
Again: You decline the proposition for union,
"bccause the late muniicent subscription to the
University is, by express terms of the bill, rendered
imperative and void in case its present location IS
disturbed" This objection is somewhat rcmarka-
Bile. You surely have not forgotten, and your
Board we're, no doubt acquainted with the fact that
one of your own Trustees drew the bill, and intro
duced the condition objected to, without the direc-
ton or consent of the Conference. You wellrenem-
Der, presume that when the bill was discussed the
gentlemen from the University insisted that the
dition of forfeiture should be retained, while the
committee from Nliddlebury College unanimously
and strenuously opposed it; and as we could not
agree on that point VIC concluded to refer the matter
to our respective Corporations. subsequently in
formed you that Corporation had sustained their
committee and thdt they desired your Board to re-
move that condition from the bill. In your reply,
you expressed doubt whether your Corporation
would be disposed to strike out that clause, and at
subsequent date, you say " Our Corporation met on
Tuesday, and after mature delibcraon, came to the
conclusion as the charter reported made the late
subscription void if the University should be remov-
ed from this place, and considering the crcumstan-
ces under which that subscription obtained they
did not see how it could be otherwise, that both
their moral and legal duty to the public and to its
creditors, required them to Decline &c. thus max
ing that condition in the bill the main reason for ter
mnatng the negotiation. If that feature in the
proposed charter was so Objectionable why did your
committee place it there, and strenuousy insist on
its being retained? And why was it not at once
removed by your Board, when particularly request
ed so do do by our Corporation?
Your last objection is, that if the subscription is
forfeited and other property sacrificed the funds Of
the University may not be sufficient to meet its
heavy liabilities. But, Sir, did not that subscription
exist three months ago? and were not your liabilities
and obligations to creditors, much the same on the
10Th of July last, when your Executive Committee
50 earnestly requested us to appoint committee to
consider the question of union? Have the facts in
the case materially changed since August, when
your Corporation ReSolred That an earnest effort
ought now to be made to unite the two eminarios 2?
If your heary liabilities" justfable cause fol
foreclosng the question at this stage of its progress
after so much expense of time and care, they surely
might have furnished strong prudential reason fol
RETAINING altogether from the negotiation
| Such are the reasons which have determined the
Corporation of the University to decline union
notwithstanding their decision will, in their owl
view, perpetuate "a Liadrdnce to the cause IF SOnC
learning, and ,oastefM oYpHcation Of public chart
ties" 1t is but Justice however to say, that thi.
waste of charities is not probably great rs youi
Corporation have suppos cdi for am quite confident
that all candid minds, acquainted with the history
and results of hIiddlebury College, will maintain
that the funds appropriated to its support have Meth
er been wasted nor misapplied.
The concluding sentence in your resolution seems
to require a brief remark Your Board "decln'
the proposition for u union in the form in which /
has come before them" This may imply that &c
made the proposition, which you know is not tin
case. The bill which You reject WIS the joint resuI
of both committees. Then your l@e5aage appear
to convey the idea, that the form only is obJechonS
BILE: if this be So and your Board were really desir
GUS of effecng a union fair and equitable terms
why did they not propose some modification of tn
plan, as was done by our Corporation, and then b,
further negotiation we might have reconciled con
ficting views, and come to a harmonious result.
But l will pursue the subject no farther. As thi
protracted correspondence, which has occasione
both of us no little solcitude, is now brought to
close shall confidently indulge the hope that what
ever may have been our differences of opinion i
respect to the subject under review, nothing has oC
CURED, and that nothing will occur to interrupt til
most friendly personal relations between us.
, am, dear Sir,
t With high respect and esteem,
Yours very sincerely,
b. LABAREE.
! Rev. President WHEELER.