The Newberry herald and news. (Newberry, S.C.) 1884-1903, 1888-05-17
"STEASGE REASONING"

Under the above heading our. local
cotcmporary, The Observer, has the
following to say OF The Herald and
News:
"Our esteemed dcotcmporarv, The Her
aid and News, has hitherto opposed Il
separate agricultural college on the
ground of expense. But since Mir.
Clenson's bequcSt 1t 1arOrs such col
lcge. 1t says, because we are an agrl-
cultural people, our tastes should be
educated and cultivated in that direc-
ton 'trlten this can be done tcithOW 0d-
dHiOnM cost 1t believes in educating
the farmer, if it costs nothing. 1t APP
pears to us that, because we are an
agricultural people, the farmer should
be educated no matter what it costs
especially rs he pays the greater part Of
the taxes. The State is amply able to
provide for and sustain Z separate agri-
cultural college, either with or without
the Clemson bequest; and should do so.
What does S75, 900 or 500, 900 amount
to anyway in the life Of 4 State?
But we are glad Of anything that will
fold; and that is really the best thing
about the Clemson bequcst.'
The Herald and News has only very
little to say in reply to this. We hope
that all who read this comment also
read what The Herald and News did
say. This is 4 very Shrewd piece of
argument on the part of our cotempo-
rary to create the impression that The
Herald and News only wanted the for
mer educated if it cost nothing.
This conclusion IS not true and can
not be legitimately drawn from any
thing said by The Herald and News.
We have opposed the establishment
ofan agricultural college because We
thought the same money that it would
require for this purpose could be more
judiciously spent and do more good and
reach more farmers if expended in
making more perfect our common
schools. In this way more of the chill
dren could be reached; and we claimed
that if the State was able to spend more
money in education and wanted to do
it 50 as to benefit the greatest number,
it would be better to give it to the COM
mon schools, and make them NOR.
efficient. And besides, All agricultural
college would be an experiment with
us, and an expensive one, and with the
constant cry for low taxes, we thought
it would not be Wise to make the eX-
pertinent. The Herald and News has
never denied that an agricultural col
lcgc would do good. 1t is education
and every time you establish an educa-
tional institution, you take step for
ward in the Improvement of the people,
but the question with US has been the
wisdom Of the State, spending the
money necessary to establish and main
tain such an institution, instead, if it
must be spent in education, Of helping
out the common schools aid in this
way reachingall the children, both boys
and girls.
So much for the position maintained
by The Herald and News heretofore.
We would like to see everybody
educated. And we say now,as we have
said before, if the people want. an Agri-
cultural College and are willing to pay
for it with or without the Clemson be-
quest why let them haveit.
With the Clemson bcqucst we can
consistently advocate the experiment
being made ofan Agricultural College
because the objection we urged to the
State making. the experiment, which
was the wisdom Of spending that much
money in an experiment, is removed in
accepting the Clemson bequest.
$4,000 or 100000 may not amount to
much in the life Of a state, but there is
a const;Tt cry for low taxes, and with
$4,000 or5 100, 900 appropriations annu-
ally,there cannot be much reduction Of
taxation. If our cotemporary is sat
isticd with our conversion we are.