The daily Green Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1861-1865, 1863-11-10

was passed. lie denied mat luere Was reason 10
suppose that such would be the case. He had
received letters from the men most interested IN
such matters, to the effect that union might be
effected upon plan quite different from that
proposed in the BILL and which would meet the
appreciation OF the colleges. 1t was proposed to
unite the colleges under one corporation, while
each remained in is own locality.
| Mr. Deming Of Arlington as humble member
of the committee did not propose to he its cham
pioD. He would say however that at least twelve
members of the committee supposed that they
were acting as representatives OF the people The
arguments that had been brought against the bill
would apply equally to every important measure
of the Sc sion. The people did kn something
Of the question and they had heir representatives,
in the Legislature. Members were proposing IN
deed new way Of doing business aud legislatiDg,
namely, that every man should be instructed per
Sc in relation TO all the business transacted and
not trust to The representatives OF the people sent
to the Legislature for the very purpose OF repre-
sentng them and dong their business here for
them. He hoped bill drawn with such skill,
and so we'll calculated to accomplish its blsct as
this was, woud not be dismissed. He hoped
members would not be afraid 10 rhink for them
selves and vote as they Saw ht cause of the fear
of the sovereign people that had been brought up
to influence them.
Mr.. McAllister Of Mddlesex hoped the bill
would not be dismissed, but that the motion to
dismiss would be withdrawn, and the amendment
extending the tine for union would be adopted.
lie believed the best interests of the State de-
manded the passage Of the act.
Mr.. Dolph of Warren favored the passage of the
bill.
Mr. Parker of Middlebury sketched briefly the
history of the former attempt to unite the nsti-
tuition at Burlington and Middlebury Middle
bury College was unlusty treated, and had with.
drawn from the conference for that reason. He
stated that it had been insnuated that Middlebury
was aristocratic in spirit. TO show that this was
not true he related several incidents showing the
interest which the people Of Mddebury take 10
the welfare OF the students, and particularly those
who have nee1 OF pecunary assistance.
Mr.. Woodward of Westord urged that by es-
tabshing another separate institution, the existing
institutions would be weakened. This it must be
allowed will be the result, il a union of colleges is
not effected. 1t had been stated that Middlebury
College mad certain funds which would Je forfeited
by entering into the plan proposed. At the same
time it had been allowed that Middlebut} College
did enter 70 merry upon conference for this very
purpose. lie could not see why tn institution
COulu not now enter IdlO huCu plau Win tue
sane propriety as formerly.
Mr.. Smith Of st. AIbans, stated that all the
lines of argument that had been presented seemed
to him. naturally and properly, to tend to the con-
cuson that the bill under consideration should
pass. He was at loss to know how and why 1t
was that the gentleman from Rutland, DOM
opposed the bill. The gentleman from Rutland
approved Of a consolidation of the colleges, aud
YET, for some reason opposed the measure look
ing toward that desirable object. He might pos
sibly prefer the establishment of a separate iusti-
tuition at Rutland. With reference to the OBJ
lection that the people had not been informed
with reference to the matter, he thought it was
not true. The people had known that such q
college was 10 be founded, although they might
not have been informed of the precise shape 10
which this thing was to be brought forward. The
question then was simply what to do with this
fund. He believed union of the collegiate insti-
tutions as proposed by the bill, and use of the
fund to sustain such union would be the most
advantageous to the State at large.
Mr.. Wilson of Bakersfield, thought if there
was any provision n the charter of Middlebuiy
college which would prevent the removal of their
fund, that might be an argument Tor locating the
State University there, but not for dismissing or
refusing to pass the bill
Mr.. + Isk OF Nortlheid, was IN tayer OF an ag-
rcultural college and of all the benefits it could
confer, but he was opposed to some OF the pro-
visions of the bill. 1t provided to give the entire
donation to one locality, and to place its control
beyond any Legislature. lie thought this was I'M
just to the State at large. There should be some
way for towns that desired, to put in bids for the
benefits to be derived from the fund in question.
The fund should be kept in some way sacred, for
the State, and not given as endowment to any in
stitution.
Mr. Chandler Of Woodstock stated that the
bill had been drawn with care, andcopies present.
ed to the presidents OF the several colleges and
to members OF Congress fIrm Vermont. They
had approved the general features Of The bill, as
we'll calculated to accomplish its object, with the
exception of the President of Middebury, who
gave no answer, but when inquired of personally,
expressed the opinion that the bill wa drawn to
favor another institution. lie expressed the
opinion that if the bill passed, military, scientific,
and agricultural school would lie established at
Norwich, and Middlebury would continue to exist
as a separate classical college.
Mr. Parker of Midd1ebury, summed up briefly
his objections t. the bill. He believed it dsad-
vantogeous 10 the interests of the State a. lar e,
and Calculated to prevent union OF the colleges.
Mr.. Daniels OF Grafton, thought the bill if
passed would prove an expense to tae State.
Mr. Shaw OF Burlington, stated that the bill
could not by any possibility, if it become law,
be made IN expense 10 the State lie de6ed the
gentleman from Grafton to show that it could