The Middlebury galaxy. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1848-1850, 1848-04-04
From the VI. Chronicle.
Union OF COLLEGES.


been omen for the reception OF communica-
tons relating 10 the Union of Colleges,
but perhaps yourselves and the public may
have concluded that enough has been al
ready said upon The subject. Presuming
however that something more will be expec-
} ted from us, we send you this article, which
YOU would have received two or three weeks
aro. had it not been for the absence oil some
members oil The Committee.
We much regret that public attention has
been diverted from the merits oil the case 10
an incidental and unimportant question:
which does not affect the real issue between
these Institutions. The true question in
controversy is this: Which of the Colleges,
if eithc r, is in fault, for defeating the late
efforts for union
In II former note, we denied the correct
ness of q statement said 10 have been made
: (by whom we knew not] 10 the Corporation
OF The University, and byIhem regarded as
an obstacle 10 the further prosecution OF ell
forts for union. The statement referred TO
was in the following language,-"The Cor
poration did not present any new plln. be-
cause they were informed, that in the Com
miitee OF Conference, the Committee from
Middleburv said in the outset, that the sub
mission of The question OF location TO an i'm
partial committee was sine qua non with
lhem''-Since the publication of our note,
President Wheeler has assumed the respon-
sibility OF this statement, and so confident Is
he of IFS truth, that he expresses willing
ness ito 90 before a magistrate" Tor lie
purpose, we suppose. OF making oath 10 1t.
The fair Interpretation OF the above IAN
guage is this,-Ihat the gentlemen from
Middlebury, in heir official capacity as
Committee, took the ground I'm the outset,
that is, the first tking. That the business oil
tho Conference respecting union oil the
Colleges could not proceed. unless II was
conceded that the location should be deter
mined by impartial men.
Judge CoIlamer, with his usual courtesy
and canJor, gives his recollectons on the
suhjecr. He understood one member OF the
MIddlebury committee 10 say distinctly, al
an early stage of the Conference, that IN his
opinion the subject OF location must be SUBJ
mitted 10 impartial referees, and anoIner
member Of the committee was understood 10
assent 10 The same. He does not recollect the
words used in either case, he merely recol
lecis his impression. II will thus be seen
! that the recollection of Judge Collamer
comes far short of sustaining the strong and
positive declaration of President Wheeler.
! W hObiN iOt lOi ~ lIOtiCht GdSh Il ohu0Vh
of suspicion over the intentional veracity of
either Of these gentlemen they no doubt
I speak according 10 their present understan
standing of The case and yet we are as con-
! ident as before, that as committee, we
did not make the assertion ascribed 10 US.
Ii anything of the kind was said, it must
have been the incidental remark Of an indi>
vidual, which has left no trace in our mem
cries. We agree with Judge Collamer in
surprising that there has been some msun-
Outstanding on The subject.
/ Before writing our former noie, we re-
peacdly and faithfully compared our views );
endeavOred TO refresh each others memories
examined our private notes and The minutes
of The Conference but we could find moth
ing. either in our memories or our docu-
mems, that would in The least degree sus-
tain the statement OF DR.. Wheeler.
/ We think it may be made to appear from
( the circumstances Of the case that we could
uot have proposed such sine qua non.
In The first place there was no occasion
for il. The proposing OF any thing as an
Indispensable condition, manilestly implies
that opposition has been made. or that ii is
anticipated, againsLsuch condition. Now il
is certain that no objection was anticipated
by US, and that none was made against ar
bi:raIion. We took it for granted that this
method of settling The location would be a
greed TO without hesitation by both parties,
why then should we propose it as sine qua
non ?-As soon should we have thought of
proposing it as an indispensable condition
that the science OF mathematics must be
taught in The united Institution.
10 effect union of the Colleges, we
knew that one ofthree things must be done in
respect TO the location. Middlebury Col>
lege must be voluntarily abandoned TO be-
come Incorporated with The University at
burlington, or the University must volun>
tarlly relinquish the location and unite with
the College at MiddIebury. or the location
must be determined by impartial men, a.
greed upon by both parties. On our part. we
were not disposed TO demand that the new
Institution must, nj all events, be placed al
Mlddlebury. On the other hand, we could
not have supposed that TIE gentlemen from
The University, after having urged US 10
meet them and endeavor 10 unite the Col
leges, would gravely inform US, that thew
meant by union, the entire abandonment Of
Mlddlebury College. They indeed look no
such ground in The conference, vet recent
Developments seem 10 show that such. after
all, Is their idea Of union. As we were full
y convinced that the friends OF neither Col
lege could be induced voluntarily 10 aban-
don Their location we knew of no way to
determine The gu esticn but by impartial rel
erees. Mlddlebury College has educated
more man twice as many students, and
more than four times as many clergymen
rs The University; we therefore very nat
uraily concluded that our College would be
allowed 10 stand at least on platform of e.
quality with that Institution.
Ill well known that an unsuccessful attempt
was made 10 unite these Colleges nearly
'hirly years ago. The cause of failure at
NAT lime we cannot ascertain, but we know
mat some of the officers Of the University,
In their late efforts 10 obtain subscriptions
nave represented Middlebury College as
opposed 10 union, because, IN that former
effort the Commute, from Middebury
College were reported 10 have made it a
"Sine qua non that the united Institution