Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1883-02-22
GOV. J. E. BROWNS GIFT.
As OFFERED TO THE STATE
UNIVERSITY.
The Senator's Argument Examined
Motives of Legislators Not to be CUES
honed-Is the Donation as Proposed
C0nstitutiOaals-T The Negative Posi-
tiOn Stated

/ NEWS. on his proposed donation Of S5ll an ~
% %.ne StSte | psersity, Is masterpiece Of
plausible statement, Injurious insinuation and
specious reasonlng-such = letter Is requires
well considered reply. / desire, through
your Journal, to give 10 the public this reply,
! especially As il Is understood that Governor
Brown, having taken issue with the repre-
Of their decision. q
First. Then, as to the plausible statement,
! winch explains the motive of this proposed de-
nation The Governor claims that the poverty
OF las early years and his struggles then TO get
the means Of college education have 30 i'm
/ pressed hIm that he feels impelled. by pro-
/ found sympathy for the poor Young men of
/ thls STATE and >oUth Carolina, to make do
nation which Will aid them in getting the ad-
/ vantage Of = college education. 50 that they
may become useful and distinguished cifi-
/ zens. Hcclaims that he is not acfuated in this
matter by any such motive love of pOpu-
larlly ana oy no means ambitious To pro-
cure through great charity more power.
The statement Of his motive put him bv thu.
side OF The iluStriOns bsnefactOrs Of his race:
+ yet y itn these professions We set. him r-eouir
ing such security for his money TO
be given. and such a selfish disposition of
the same, - no other philanthrOpisf OF whom
/ we know anything has ever required, When
OOSeFsior Oilner gave from his moderate estate
j portion Of the same for the benefit OF the
{ state University. he did not ask the State 10
ale bound Tor nifty years for the safe keeping 0f
Sis donation; he gave II TO his chosen friends,
/ wiii power 10 select their successors in the
trust. When DR.. Terrell, Of Hancock, gave
from his estate 10 the State University. he
chose the trustees of the same to receive and
, manage his charity. and As vet not a
dollar has been lost of this fund
by neglect or dishonesty, sQ far
a. we have heard When
Jesse Mercer gave to the college named for
him. he did not ask the State TO become bound
for his bequest 10 the cause of education
" hen Seney made his magnificent donation
10 the Methodist Colleges of Georgia, he did
not stlpulate for a ffty-Year bond of the state
OF Georgia. Prom an extended observation of
the mode IN which this class of donations is
made in this country, / feel safe in saving that
trustees OF colleges, or special friends. are
usually chosen as the instruments To receive
and execute the same. Indeed. Governor
Brown himself admits that the Trustees of the
University, at the expiration of dfty
years, are proper persons 10 receive
manage and distribute this donation
by providing that they shall. AT
use the money as they do other funds Of the
University; and that. too, when according to
his idea the fund will be mach larger than il
Is now. 1t would seem II he can trust Board
of Trustees entirely unknown To him. he might
trust his charity with the present Board of
Trustees OF the State Univ ersity. We might
ask. too. IN this connection. why cannot Coy,
Browns four sons; or the survivor Of them,
or trustees selected BY them, receive this do
nation and manage it for fifty years. No
body questions their honesty and skill and il
fit to be visitors, they are certainly fit ia re,
celve and manage the money as their father
may direct.
From these views, | think it may be safely
SAID that there Is no reason on account of his
sympathy for poor young men to ask as Gov
ernOr Brown does. that the State shall become
bound for this donation. In view of the
wide expression of opinion in the State
against the plan of this donation. so far as il
seeks to mix the State Herewith. manifested
by the large majority against it In the House
of Representatives, and manifested bv the
press all over the state. Governor Brown
ought to give a direction to his charity which
viii avoid this opposition. His great ingenu-
ity and common sense can easily discover
other means to effect the same end.
secondly. say that the letter of Governor
Brown abounds with the most injurious in
situations against the members Of the Legis-
lature who opposed his donation. 1t would
seem as if a man who had suffered 20 much
from bitter insinuatiOns, would have learned
at least the lesson Of fOrbearance. Has he
forgotten how much has been insinuated
against him on account of his employment
against the Columbus Prisoners on account Of
the State Road lease. on account of the pur-
chase OF the Mitchell heir property, on ac-
count OF his supposed secret understanding
with Nelms, and on account OF his getting the
SenatOrship from Governor COlquItt? OF men
unimpeachable in private and public life.
sworn to obey the laws and constitution OF tile
State, he insinuates that as members OF the
General Assembly they were controlled in
their votes by opposition 70 him politically;
that his public position was the cause Of their
opposition to his scheme: that as sons of rich
men these members were actuated bv a base
spirit of envy of the poor, and desire TO keep
=
had been made to the rich these members
might have voted to receive il, lust as pre-
Sented: that some OF these members in their
opposition, were panderers 70 idnular ignor-
anee; that they raised the plea Of e0nscien-
uous scruples Is TO violation OF the cOnstitu-
ton without having such scruplcs. If the do
nation scheme of GOV. Brown is wise and cora
stitutlOnal. why assail the motives of the J
members of the Legislatures
Thirdly. Passing from these preliminary
views. We come To the donation sct,eIne itself I
and propose to test il by tile constitution OF /
the state, and by sound policy. AS 10 Gov I
Browns own opinion of the constitution, il I
may with prOpriety be said. il is not a disin- I
terested opinion; he gives his opinion IN a case
in which he has deep personal interest he
sides this objection. Governor Browns opin- I
ions on constitutional law have several times /
been reversed by the highest Judicial tribunal 1
in our land So we may say of Mr. Ham !
mond's opinion, to which much value is at.
tached, that while il is certainly disinter, !
ested opinion, il Is not infallible. Mf. Ham !
mond's opinion on important Questions of law |
have been frequently overruled bv the IN,
preme Court OF Georgia.
As to the opini9n e tRe Trustees OF the state
University: MLlcll has been invoked bv Gov
BroMH 70 sustain his view, we are at liberty i
70 say thal three al these gentlemen have said /
taat the trustees as a board have never de-
clded upon the constitutiOnalitv of the Brown /
Donation Governor Brown maintains and /
truly SO, That the constitution faYOrs donations
iOf purposes OF education TO the State UuiyeFsi-
~, yet we fail to see in the general spirit of /
that instrument and its general provisions. /
such clauses as Will support a donation, which /
through a period of fifty years and also to 1
sury. 80 - . -lrS /
The only provision in the constitution. as 1
we understand it, which furnishes a SORT of /
reason to sustain the donation. Is the nrovis /
ion about borrowing money, and il will he 4
seen, When tested, that this grovision cannot
be so used. There IS Ia doubt that money |
can he borraWed by the state to pay an exist |
ing DEBT, or to supply deficiency in the reve-
n1 nue.; but but how; we ask, could this provision /
the Finance Committee, had given the House |
official information that the State would have |
no use for the $500 until lss6f
The scheme Of GOV, Drewn, if it had been
placed in the Treasury, there to remain idle |
for three years, fifty thousand dollars. and /
take for u an the DAY Of deposit bond due in
date, and thereby fix a loss on the state of fen
thousand five hundred dollars, When we con
slider further that a per cent. bond of the |
state 70 run Atty years would bring cOnsid- |
erahle premium, we must add to the loss of /
the state above given, at least fifteen hundred h
dollars annually, and in fifty yeaSs seyerity- 4
five thousand dollars = ~..iS ~ -
1t is thus demonstrated that the Housa of /
Representatives did fIghf 70 reject the dona-
tion seseine, as means OF borrowing money
by The state. Gov. Brown seems himself to I
be aware of this view, and saws that his plan
ought TO be examined as a whole moi bT its
financial aspects simply. This Iilan Is thar
the state should borrQw the SO, 900, paw I per I
cent. lnterest-=that is, 50 500 yearly, 10 edu- /
cate "poor young men" who are promisins-
As the state will contribute 81 500 of this
yearly fund as a free gift FROM the Treasury /
and secure the residue OF interest
and all the principal, we wish to know |
the constitutional authority for such an
arrangement through the EegisISture Ac-
cOrding TO our idea of tbs constitution. no 4
such authority can be shown. Every feature
IN that llstenmert as TO education from the
iihsls le 81 the state or any other pubic fund.
the Colored UNIVERSITY is to be appllerf FOR the
benefit Of az Of the stndents-nf those able TO
pay and those not able TO pay. The amount /
Winch may be appropriated for the State Uni |
Yersity, as the condition OF the Treasury will
allow, Is to be applied for the benefit of az the
students of the same, without distinction. |
The amount, 10 be raised ky taxation or 9th
erwlse, for the cOncmon schools Of the State is
10 be applied for the benefit Of al, rich and
The donation scheme not only conflicts with
these plain constitutional provisions, but ii
cOnnlets with That provision of the cOnstItu-
tion which limits the power of the I.egisla-
tare.t9 make appropriations 70 the state Uni
yerslty from time % time. a. the condition of
the treasury VIII allow. II fastens on the
Treasury an appropriation for fifty wears con-
without any regard to the con-
dltion OF the Treasury. The donation scheme
also plainly conflicts with the implied inten- |
ton Of the trainers Of the Constitution of is77
IN creating debt 10 run for fifty years
We conclude, however worthy the objects of
the Donation may be, and all admit them To
" soa lhe pan proposed by Governor Brow.
was properly rejected by the House % &c.,
on constitutional grounds. TSEese
PROVISIONS OF the scheme as to the edncafion /
"a ppof aO.Ag men being unconsfftutionaI
iii.',l more so is the proyisfen II hich dfscriTni
! Liaees Lsts Detweea L2or yonng men themselves on