The clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1883-1888, 1884-12-03

| COulu Hot De CuIOlCCds hC ldAC IL Via
in donating the bonds to the particular
Fund of which they form part, he in
tended to place them where the pros
pect of their payment, remote at best
would be to some extent improved.
The Trustees of the Fund by theil
action say that unless these bonds b.
paid Mississippi shall not share in the
benefaction. This is not in keeping
with the wish of the benefactor, as W.
will presently show.
1t is not our purpose to discuss thu
validity of the bonds. We may safely
admit, for the present, that they are du'
by the State. But suppose they are due
by the State and the State refuses tt
pay them, who Is to suffer? The Trus
tees say that the children of Mississippi
must suffer. In what way shall they
suffer? Say the Trustees: "By being de
prived of their interest in a donation
made to promote their education" Blu
why should they suffer? The Trus ee.
answer: Because they live on the soil
a State owing a debt which forms par
of the donation" How absurd this
seems! Surely in considering this n
ter the Trustees have acted unt the
mistaken idea that they have beer
giving some part of their Fund to the
State. This is not so. The State ha:
not received one dime, and the refusal
of the Trustees to make further apprO
priations does not deprive the State Of
anything which she before received. The
children, the schools and the teachers Of
the State will lose advantages which they
have heretofore received from the Trus-
tees, but the State loses nothing. SO far
from losing anything, the State has had
no control over any part of the amounts
appropriated for use in Mississippi, the
same having been disbursed by the
agents of the Trustees, who have been
accountable, not to the State, but to the
Trustees.
As we view the subject it makes no
difference that certain portion of those
who ought to be benefited by the Pea
body Fund live in one State and some
in another. The imaginary lines which
mark the territorial limits of the South
ern States should not be considered ex-
cept as a matter of convenience. The
question should be, Where do those who
should be the benefciaries of the trust
live? and how can the objects of the
trust be best promoted? 1t is curious
that the Trustees, finding that some con-
siderable portion of those whom Mr.
Peabody contemplated should be bene-
ficiaries live in Mississippi, and finding
also that Mississippi owes the Fund a
debt, should conclude that such bene6c-
iaries as live in Mississippi should be ex-
cluded from the benefits of the trust
until the State pays its debt.
But this is not all that the Trustees
have done. The same spirit which
prompted them to deny 10 the objects of
Mr.. Peabody's bounty resident in Mis-
sissippi share of the Fund, because
Mississippi has failed and refused to
pay to the Fund debt which the Trus-
tees believe to be binding, makes them
demand that the beDefciaries In this
State shall suffer for the good of those
in other States. This wi appear as we
proceed.
The face value of the bonds held by
the Trustees is 81, 100000. The amount
of interest which they claim has been
Illegally withheld from the Fund during
the last seventeen years, is $473, $50,
being $27 $40 year. Durin this time
there has been appropriated or use in.
Mississippi $4,000. From October,
1883, to October, 1884, the amount appro-
priated for Mississippi was $3.50. Now
to get s., $50, or trife more, the eduea-
Bile children of Mississippi are asked to
surrender from the school fund of the
State, annually, the sum ofs$27 $40, or
$2l 100 a year more than they will re-
ceive, for the benefit of the educable
children in other Southern Statesl Such
a proposition must be preposterous to
every intelligent person, not excepting
the distinguished gentlemen who COM
pose the Trustees of the Peabody Edu-
cationaI Fund. To state it, is to dispose
Of it. It needs no argument. II it does
not itIy represent the demand of the
Trustees, then we would be glad to be
on the subject.
As We said before, it makes no differ
ence that the State owes the amount
named in the bonds. The Trustees must
look to the State for that. When they
come to deal with the objects Of Mr..
bounty, it is difficult to COM
prehend the reasoning by which those
living in State which owes the fund a
Iebt should be punished FOR the benefit
f those living in other States. +,
Say the Trustees: Aud we wish TO
observe, and to emphasize the observa-
ion, that this recommendation Is not .
,unitory measure; but simply matter
( justice 10 the children Of other States !
( whose Interests and rights Is particle
'ants Of Mr.. Peabodyss bounty we are
rustees, bound to take care that they
ufEer no harm. Il seems to Is to be
OF only a punitory measure. but to bel
ne unwarranted By tie nature Of the
rust That IS % say. i is punishment
niirted upon class Of persons clearly
ndieetsa IS tie objects Of 8If. Peaboay's
haritable donation. because Of TIE sup.
esd wrongful act Of the State. n which =
,e4 happen q be. s.
All this seems 70 grow cut oi mis- 3
hen notion that De Trustees "a heir i
Isnaesnaenf e he Fund. 50 fsx IS Nc s
5.'ubi Is 6anserne1. hafe been 16SlinE +
IS The Sls[s They 81. referring g !.
& constitutional Amendments forbid
Sc lie payment q tie koeak
<tss lssfs Is vain IS md "a /.
.I@s' - 1tt.4iHeI that .1e F|aI s
81 IS sS.4 |.s1 |1 recipient q [as
...... 4|I@1 She 1 Il|f