New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1872-02-10
The Education Bill,

| people, was resumed:
Mr.. Perez, of Mississippi, who reported
| the bill from the Committee on Education
| offered prOviso that the bill shall IN nc
! way affect any existing law for the dispo
sition of public lands, or the proceeds
thereof, or any portion of such lands OF
| proceeds, either by way OF homestead, re-
servation or grant to States, or otberwise
| nor be construed as preventing any lspo
| sition thereof which Congress may hereafter
! see fit to make.
Mr.. Finkelnburg intimated that he would
vote against the proviso, it as seemed t.
make reservation tor future railroad
| grants.
Mr.. Pollard offered an amendment pro
vid;ng that the act shall not have any
effect to impede, impair or suspend any law
| authorizing the prescription OF public LANDS
or their entry for homesteads; nor shall II
be construed as limiting in any manner the
power of Congress to alter or extend the
right of the homestead
Mr. Dunnell spoke in advocacy of the
bill. He saw nothing ill it recognizing the
right of the national government to inter
fere in education in the States. If there
was any such thing III the bill he would
vote against it.
Mr.. w. X Roberts asked Mr.. Dunnell if
it was proposed to exclude religious de.
Va
the bill!
Mr. Dunnell replied that denominational
schools as such were not estitled to partlcl-
patton in the proposed fund any more than
they were under the laws setting aside GER
tain township sections of public lands tor
school purposes.
Mr. Parker of New Hampshire, asked
Mr.. Dunnell whether he considered 1t
necessary to give 50 to the Northern States
in order to give 81 to the Southern States!
Mr. Dunnell replied that he didn't want
to give the Northern States anything.
Mr.. Parker-Then why do yous
Mr.. Dunnell-If it was proposed TO give
all to the Southern States, where it is most
needed, there would be an cutlery against
its untairness, as the lands belong TO all the
people.
Mr.. Farnsworth-Are the public lands
hereafter to be all sold!
Mr.. Dunnell-I don't understand that the
bill interferes with the past or future policy
of the government in relation to public
lands. If l felt that by voting for the bill
| should at any time ever SO indirectly
lessen the liberality of our legislation with
reference to settlers, would not vote for it.
Mr.. Farnsworth-Then how do you for
ever consecrate the proceeds of public lands
for the purpose if public lands are not to be
sold?
Mr.. Dunnell-lt means that the proceeds
of public lands, as annually reported to
Congress- shall be set apart.
Mr.. FarnswOrth-But if the public lands
are not sold how are you to get any pro
ceeds
Mr.. Dunnell-The proceeds of so much as
may be sold
Mr.. Butler. of Tennessee, spoke in sup
port of the bill, and got into a controversy
,,11
Wright as to the State school fund of Ten
nessee. He declared that the Democratic
party had stolen three millions OF it, and
the Republican party only three hundred
dollars.
Mr.. Garnett asked when was that!
Mr.. Butler-It was when you were a
member of the State Legislature and were
expelled from it. Laughter.
Mr.. Garrett said that the statement that
he was EXPELLED from the State Legislature
was willfully false, and Mr. Butler knew It
to be false. loud calls to orderl
Mr.. Blair, Of Michigan, expressed his ap-
probation of the BILL and said it was per
tectly fair and equal to the whole country
Mr.. Coburn spoke in favor of the bill, and
in reply to Mr. kerrs speech of last FRI
day. particularly as to the source from
which the school fund of Indiana was de-
rived. He denied that the Democratic
party had anything to do with it. II the |
Democratic party of Indiana had done
ything in the matter it was to break ,
down the system under which that school
fund was accumulated. The Democratic
counties in Indiana were the most ignorant !
counties of the State. While he was in
avor of the bill generally, he was opposed !
% the mode of distribution according TO |
population. He would have the fund dis !
ributed in direct proportion to the i
iteracy of a State, and in proportion to the |
amount Of school property and funds which |
/ State possessed. The States which had |
he least school property and most iliteracv !
hOuld have the greatest proportion OF the !
und. He offered an amendment to carry |
tut his views.
Mr.. Harris, OF Virginia. opposed the bill as |
step in the system of Capitalization and of /
submission to despotic power. He opposed |
t all, because it undertook to force on the !
country mixed school system.
Mr.. Storm opposed the BILL and, particu- |
arly, any amendment to it which would re- |
trict it exclusively to schools conducted in
he English language.
Mr. Kelley, OF Pennsylvania. eulooized the |
system of his own State, and
aid that while Virginia was making it fell
my to teach col0red child to read Penn
ylvania had provided a collegiate education |
or colored people both at Pittsburg and
Mr. Garfield disclaimed utterly the idea
hat the bill proposed any governmental
control of schools. 1t only required reports
Is to what is done in them to be made to |
congress, and the publication of these re
,orts would awaken emulation between the
everal States. He cordially supported the
ill and hoped it would pass.
Mr.. Stevenson. of Ohio. said that he
would prefer to vote money out of the
public treasury for the purpose of educa-
ion in the South. but he accepted this bill
IS step in the right direction He be
leved in the policy of taking what be could
Jet Tor school purposes.
Mr.. Shanks declared himself in favor of
he passage OF the bill, though he would
ot favor the sale Of public lands under
t, thus taking them from homestead set
lers.
Mr.. Dawes advocated not the details bat
he general scope Of the bill. He wished
hat every unoccupied acre of the public !
oman were by this bill consecrated for
UGH good and noble purposes They should
ee to it that those who have been clothed
nth the ballot in the South should have
be means of casting the ballot inteligcntly.
The debate was closed by Mr.. Perez. who
etended the bill and its details, and ex-.
ressed his conviction that the whole fund
TOnld be permitted to go where it was most |
eeded-tO the Southern States.
The first question was on Mr.. McNeelys
putting printers type and lux,
ype metal and printing paper ON the free
ST.
On the objection of Mr.. Hoar the amend
lent was ruled out of order as being rev
nue. message. which must first be CON
idered in committee of the whole
The vote on the bill and pending amend
tents went over until tomorrow, and then
he House adjourned
Of this bill a Washington special to the
t. Louis Republican says: