Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1886-05-07
OUR WASHINGTON CORRES-
PONDENCE.

OUR WASHINGTON CORRES-
PONDENCE.
THE GRAIN SUBSTITUTE FOR THE BLAIR EDUcA.
TIoNAL BILL-wHAT MIR. DANIEL AND NIB
TUCKER SAY OF IT-sEoRETARY A1ANNINa's IN
NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. PUBLIC BUILDING.
Especial Correspondence of the STAUNroN VINDI-
CATOR.l
WASHINGTON, MAY 5.-What is known as the
Grain Educational Bill is the substitute for the
Willis or Blair Bill reported by the House
Committee on Labor. 1t provides that al
proceeds of the sales of public lands belong
ing to the United States, and all fees received
at the general and district land offices and
covered into the Treasury during the next ter
years, beginning July 1, 1886, shall be dedi
Gated and set apart for the support of common
schools already in existence, or which may
hereafter be established, within the States
and Territories and the District of Columbia;
provided that the amount so expended shall
not exceed 81, 100000 per annum. At the ex.
piration of each fiscal year the Secretary OF
the Treasury shall apportion and distribute to
the several States and Territories and the Dis
trict of Columbia the amount of such sales OF
lands, and land Office fees in the Treasury,
Sin proportion to their scholastic population
between the ages of 8 and IA years." all mon.
eys SO apportioned and distributed shall be
expended by the several States, &C., in the
same manner in which they may expend the
revenues raised therein by local taxation for
the maintenance of common schools. The
bill provides that one-fourth of the fund Gre
ated by it shall be applied to the maintenance
of chronological, industrial and manual train
ing schools which are now or may hereafter
be established.
The bill is radically different from the Blair
Bill in all its features. The only thing in
common is the object-to aid in the support
common schools. 1t is proposed to distribute
the fund accord to the ratio of school popula-
ton, instead of upon the basis of illiteracy,
as in the Blair bill. This plan would give the
lions share to such States 20 Naw Z65E s Penn
sylyania and Ohio, which are wealthy and
populous and do not need it.
HON. J. W. DANIEL
was asked by me his views on the educationa
question. He said: II am member of the Com
mittee on Labor, and not of the Committee OF
Education. The Blair Bill has never been be-
fore the Committee on Labor, but when il
came from the Senate was referred to and ii
l,ofor tbo H.
Willis Bill, i'm its terms copy of the Blail
Bill, was referred to the Committee on Labor
in order to enable the House to get the sub
ject matter of an educational appropriation
before tit being apprehended that the Com
mittee on Education would bury the Blail
Bill
II am not at liberty to speak of what occur.
red in the committee, but the main struggle
there was to get the subject reported back te
the House without an adverse recommends.
ton. After varied efforts in different direc.
tons, the Grain Bill as substituted was report
ed but there was distinct understanding in
committee that every member should be deem.
ed free to vote in the House without regard to
his vote in Committee.
II wish to see an educational appropriation
bill passed by the House at this session, and
would vote for that bill which stood the best
chance of passage. In some respects regard
the Grain Bill as preferable to that of Blair,
because it does not contain the Objectionable
restrictions which the Senate placed on the
MISREPRESENTATION which excited widespread
opposition to the Blair Bill as tentative eff
fort in the direction of Federal control OF
State schools.
"And the appropriation of the proceeds OF
sales Of public lands designates what is likely
to be safe fund, not liable to the vicissitudes
of taxation; and obviates what some deem,
but not I, constitutional objections to the
Blair Bill
''For my part should vote for the appro-
priation as fixed by the Blair Bill, or for that
fixed by the Grain Bill-as the one or
the other might be more likely to sue
coed. And I shall unite with the friends of
education to exert every method to bring the
matter before the House and get it acted on.
do not wish to see the measure killed or de-
ferred. Whether the Blair Bill, or the Grain
Bill be made the basis of action, there would,
in all likelihood, be amendments to perfect
the plan agreed upon"
In regard to the amount that will probably
be received from the sources indicated in the
Grain Bill, Mr.. Daniel said the proceeds of
the land sales and fees for the past four years
had averaged more than 81, 500, 900 per year,
and there was every reason to believe that the
fund would yield the maximum provided in
the bill.
HON. J. RANDOLPH TUCKER
said to your correspondent of the Grain bill :
''Ihe substitute is not nearly SO good bill
for the South as the Blair bill. 1t proposes
distribution of the money on an entirely diff
ferent basis, and one that will be much less
to the advantage of Virginia and other States
having large illiterate population. So far
as l am concerned, however, am not in favor
of either BILL I do not think the proposition
for the National government to aid the States
in education is a wise one, and I believe the
sentiment of the thoughtful people of the
country is against it. That is a matter that
each State ought to control and regulate for
itself. 1t does not appear to me likely that
either bill will pass the House during this
Congress. know it has many able and earn
sst supporters, but I do not think they will
oe able to effect its passage"
PLUcKY NIB. MANNING.
Secretary Manning has not resigned the
treasury portfolio, many reports to the