The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1876-02-05

for them he IL entitled TO the best services Of
his professors. Education, particularly Uni
yersty education, to be justly appreciated
must be bought with money, sacrifice, and
toll. The incentive to study is removed, or
greatly weakened, when the student feels
that he can afford to throw away thing that
is given TO him, and will continue 10 be given
TO him as long as be chooses TO demand II.
The first, the most important, lesson for
young man TO learn Is the great lesson of sef-re.
lance. An education bought by the barter of
this noble lesson is bad investment and how
is he encouraged to learn this lesson when he
begins lille an object Of State charity Such
a plan Is we'll calculated to ill the Common.
wealth with hungry candidates for office. for
they began life on public pap and will not
be willing TO reIinquish it. It will effec.
tualy wilt the noble pride, the manly sense
Of independence, the lofty individuality,
which have marked the Virginia character.
Free education, as general statement, is not
4 blessing, but curse.
3. The bill is manifestly and grossly un.
just to the colleges. The colleges ask for no
appropriation from the State treasu ry, but
they do demand that the work they are
doing should protect them from hostile legis-
iation. BY the offer of free tuition the Uni
versity attempts to underbid the colleges
to entice students from the colleges TO the
Univ ersity. This is unworthy and humiia
ting. The bonus of free tuition is not Of
fered to the students Of the professional
schools; the University finds no competition
in the colleges for this kind of patronage.
But it il restricted TO academic students,
for which class Of patronage there is COM
petition between the colleges and the Univer.
sty. Nor is it good thing TO give tuition to
Virginia students and exact payment from
students coming from other States. 1t will
produce hostile criticism, cause dissatisfaction,
and certainly ipjure the University. The limi-
tation as to age is worse than puerie. A large
majority OF the students Of our Virginia
colleges are over eighteen years. This re-
Strctiop, therefore, does not lift the Uniyer-
sity above competition with the colleges.
The restriction also is unjust to the student,
and philosophical. Many boy at sixteen
or seventeen is as much developed morally
and intellectually as another at eighteen,
nineteen, or twenty. To discriminate against
Il boy sixteen or seventeen years old who
may be fully prepared for the University is
to punish bIm for being industrious and
smart, and patronize laziness and stupidity.
The only sensible thing TO do in this connec-
ton is 10 require proper standard of admis-
sion.
4. The bill in another way is dangerous to
the University. a succeeding Legislature
may withhold the annuity it will be ex.
ceedingly difficult, if at all possible, to can.
eel, when once inaugurated, the plan of free
tuition. The condition of the University
will then be hopeless indeed.
| do not hesitate to express my full con.
yiction that the University, considered onlyas
financial scheme, deserves more generous
treatment than it has ever received at the
hands Of the Legislature. By the money it
keeps at home, aud by the money it draws
from other States, it fully returns to the
State Treasury all the funds appropriated 20
its support. The lowest view OF the case
iustities a liberal annuity. But the Uni
vcrsty is the glory of Virginia and Of the
South as an educational centre. The interests
and the honor of the State, in the highest
sense. are connected with its success. 1t is
more important, vastly more, than ali the
other educational schemes combined upon
which the Legislature, with hyish hand,
bestowed its patronage.
The Legislature can well afford to give
$4,000 per auuum, lrith0ut conditions, to the
University, even if the appropriations to
Other schemes must be diminished. At such
contamination every college in The State
would greatly rejoice. Is. PCRYEAR.
Richmond College, February 8, 1876.