The daily morning journal and courier., 1895-01-23
YALE VARSITY VS. ST0RRS.
MORRILL, FUND AND GOVERNMENT
 APPROPRIATIONS.

Dy
 The suit that was brought by Yale
 University, in September 1893, in the
 United States Circuit court, for the
 purpose of restraining the treasurer of
 the state from paying the income of the
 Morrill, fund, established by act of con
 gress in 1862, and the annual appropri- ations from the national government
 under act of congress in August, 1890,
 to Storrs Agricultural college, in ac-
 cordance with legislation adopted by
 the General Assembly in 1893, is still
 pending before Judge Shipman. The
 Morrill, fund amounts to one hundred
 and thirty-five thousand dollars, and Is
 set apart exclusively for the advance
 ment of agricultural education and sci
 ence. The state pays an annual inter
 est of six per cent. on this fund Yale
 has been the beneficiary of the fund
 through a long period of years. The
 act of the General Assembly in 1893
 transferred the use of the income from
 the university to Storrs. The same leg
 is lation also transferred the annual
 appropriations granted by the United
 States government, under act or con
 gress, August 30, 1890, to Storrs. The
 initial appropriation was fifteen thou
 sand dollars, the amount to be in-
 creased one thousand dollars annually
 until the sum reaches twenty-five thou
 sand dollars per annum, where it is to remain steadily. Yale received the ap-
 propriation during 1s9O-1S9S inclusive,
 making a total of sixty-eight thou sand dollars. The university contends
 that the act transferring the moneys
 from the fund and the annual appro- prIation is illegal. The defendant in
 the suit, the state treasurer, filed a de- murrer, setting up as a defense that the suit is one brought against Con- necticut in effect and therefore cannot be maintained. The counsel for the university were ex-Governor Charles R. Ingersoll, eX-Judge Henry Stoddard of the Superior court and Lewis H. Bristol of New Haven. Major 10. Hen ry Hyde, jr., of this city, represented the state in the defense selected by Treasurer Sanger. Ex-united States Patent Commissioner William E. Si monds of this city, was associated with Major Hyde in the interest of Storrs A5 lCullul eil COllG6Gs NIL tollipiluS Altlo been one of the ablest friends and sup porters of the agricultural college from the outset, and is a member of the board of trustees.
 The suit was argued before Judge Shipman with marked ability by the counsel representing the interests in volved. Judge Shipman decided that | he could grant the injunction restrain ing the payment of the money to Storrs | until the case is finally decided in the | court But he also held that the court | was powerless to order 1t paid to Yale | University. So far as the suit is now | concerned it is open to the filling of l other demurrers by the defense. At I the present time the question is under | consideration by the authorities, in- | yolving payment of a lump sum to | Yale in liquidation of it's claim. This ] would adjust the controversy and re- | move the litigation from the courts. | It is considered a matter involving grave doubts whether the university I can win in the contest.
 Tn the opinion, restraining the state t-cast'er from paying the income of the Merrill fund and the current annu- l Al cet PA OpAA0lAOiio AlOlii lAC SONNl HlllClll I tn Ftorrs Agr!cultu, N college. Judge | Sb,. 'ri n says:
 q am not willing, by silence, to have | 1t inferred that I absolutely concur in the position of the complainant's coun- sel that since the establishment of the complainant's college by its endow ment, under the Federal statute of 1862, the state of Connecticut has no power to establish another college under the provisions of that act, or to make any other disposition of the appropriations under the Federal statute of 1890 than those which it had specified in the state statute of 1863. The complainant's think that having selected an appointee, the state had, under the United States act of 1890, no new power to select another appointee or to en- dow it, and that the power of appropri- ation was exhausted, and that as to colleges which had been established un- der the act of 1882. the appropriations, under the act of 1890, are directly for their benefit, and not for the benefit of new institutions. The provisions of the act are vaguely expressed, and a con- struction of the statute is postponed until decision is necessary.
 q also doubt whether the selection of | the complainant by the act of 1863 was more than a selection to be the cestuy que trust of the fund, arising from the sale of the particular land scrip, which had been then donated, and included an absolute and ex- elusive right to receive moneys which should thereafter De appropriated by a right incapable of interrup- tion, although the state had by it's si- lence of two or three years assented to the payment to the complainant of such tions."
 The act of the Connecticut legisla- ture, concerning which the suit was provides for arbitration, one arbiter being appointed by the General Assembly. The legislature of 1893 ap- pointed ex-Judge Dwight Loomis of the Supreme court. Yale is also author zed to appoint one arbiter, who with Judge Loomis, will appoint a third. All interests involved in the controver- sy would be adjusted by arbitration in ,ase that course should be adopted. The idea Of paying a lump sum to the has not yet taken definite