Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1864-11-03
Tho Colleges.

wisdom or the attempt that mas oech
made to unite the colleges OF the State
with agricultural and scientific schools,
yet TO be created, In grand State Uni
yersity. The desirableness or having
but one college in the State was admitted,
but it was argued that this college
would work more successfully, If left
unlncumbered with other departments
that would be of no possible service to
those pursuing the college course; also
(aud more strongly that the school for
agriculture and the practical sciences,
such as is contemplated by the act of
Congress donating the proceeds of pub
lie lands for its endowment, would be
injured more than benefited by amalga-
mating it with the college.
In your issues OF Oct. 18th and 18th
this communication was assailed with
considerable spirit by a jealous cores
pondent who signs himself IN. b." AT
ter charging upon us in force, as we
thought, and in four fall columns, he
tells us, threateningly on retiring from
the field, that this was only slight
skirmish-the precursor of more Sc
rious conflict! We ought to be graft
fed with this admission that we are not
yet driven from our position, and mean
time, In anticipation Of that more Sc
rious conflict we certainly ought to ex-
anime again our Notifications.
But In the first place let us see what
damage has been done by the "skir-
mish."
an. B." commences by saying that
Educator" has recently given in your
columns some reasons why he thinks
the different colleges In the State should
not be consolidated. II you should refer
to our communication you would find
the plain statement, that eff the three
colleges, or at least the two in this part
of the State, could be united so as to form
one that should be like them In charac-
ter and operation, we should say, let it
be done" also 'if the colleges can be
united by their own free action, let it be
done by all means;" and yet again we
said that this union was "exce 3dingly
desirable" After saying this it is not
likely that we should give reasons why
| the different colleges should not be con-
| solidated," and we are unable to find
them in our communication. an. B.
meant perhaps that we gave some reasons
| why we thought the different colleges
| should not be merged in such State
University as was devised by the last
| Legislature. So loose a way of stating
an opponents position at the outset of
an argument, does not augur well aimed
attacks. But we should not perhaps
expect that one who is only skirmishtng
a little, should fire always in the direc-
| tion of the enemy. He will doubtless
find out just where we are before he
brings the big guns to bear upon as ia
that more serious conflict"
In our former communication we ex-
| pressed it as our decided conviction that
those colleges accomplish their true OBJ
ject best that are hampered by no out
side departments; and then gave our
reasons for thinking so. IN. B" respect
fully submits that we "take the position
OF begging the question" an. B." will
no doubt find great many reasoners
"begging the question" in the same way.
not excepting Euclid himself. And
then because among other statements in
defense of our proposition, we quote
President Hopkins of Williams College
as expressing the same conviction, we
are said to have "entrenehed ourselves
behind the ipse dsrtt Of President Hop
kins." A very unsuccessful dodge on
our part, we confess, for the moment
IN. B." finds us thus entrenched he
plants himself behind DR.. Wayland and
formidable array of stubborn facts"
stated in DR.. WIS report to the corpora
tion of Brown University in 1850.
Our opponent next complains that we
make assertions" without giving "facts
duu ob1tiollCoJ anu III tIc HtAt StuleuCS
qnotes us as introducing our "asser-
tions" by such phrases as ''those who
are acquainted say so and So" and eve
believe that investigation would show
that the same is true, &C." If then we
made assertions" we may at least have
the credit of being both safe and modest
In making them, But our opponent
does not like assertions, and therefore
he processes to state facts. Let US look
at some of these facts and discover if we
can wherein they differ from "asser-
lions" and if they should prove to be
mere assertions, would they not have
had just as much force if they had been
modestly prefaced with some such
phrase as 1--WE believe that investigation
would show" thus and so; and would
they not have just as much "effect upon
the minds Of grave legislators
"There is one feet" (the italics are our
OWN, says an. B." (which stands out