Iowa County democrat. [volume] (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1877-1938, 1898-03-17

eVhallsm or the rich, and Ii Is pa
ternalism which they should resist.
Inequalities OF the most injurius char.
aeter are by many held justifable be-
cause II is claimed that we need the
very rich to plan. organize and carry
on all important enterprises. Where
would our railways be, It Is asked II
we did not have among us men who
count their money by the millions
There Is scarcely n town in the land
where the people are not waiting for
a rich man to start some enterprise,
Business, churches. schools, all wait
upon the movements of the rich, The
idea OF self-help dwindles People fold
their hands and wait.
Il am strongly of the opinion that
there should be a similar cooperation
OF public and private effort In main
tanning all institutions OF learning, In
Guiding universities and | believe
that this cooperation Will secure the
best results, | cannot help resretting,
for example that MIR, Johns Hopkins
did not offer hts millions to the state
OF Maryland for the establishment OF
u university on condition that the unit
versity should be regarded rs the uni
versity OF the state, should be the
crown Of the educational system OF the
state, and should receive an annual
grant from the public treasury equal,
say, to four per cent, ON the value of
his endowment. In addition to the In
come of the endowment itself, This
would have been effected In such "
manner as to avoid injurious political
Influences, as the experience OF several
western states amply demonstrate,
What would have been the result of
such an arrangement His university
would have Il more ample income, and
could send n portion of this in direct
effort to improve the educational sys-
tenn OF the state. Tho people Of the
state would feel n greater interest In
It., because being supported In part
out of taxes. Il would belong to them
more than 1t does; and closer con
nection with the public life OF the
state would help to purify politics and
elevate the tone of the public service,
Il do not say that II ia altogether
wrong for lis to ask people of means
to assist In carrying on and develop
ing our educational institutions. and
am sure 1t Is praiseworthy In wealthy
Americans to give 30 generously as
some OF them do; but do say. with
| All Mt hnt Ia
should be more self-reliant and prac-
tce to greater degree self-help In
all spheres OF social life, the higher
education included, for that, like
every other grade of education, Is n
matter OF public concern and not
class interest, Nor must we over
look other facts In this connection
Private paternalism In education and
elsewhere has n dangerous tendency
to Dlutocracy Sometimes. oven II
not SO often as one might think. sup
port by the wealthy few Is made ylr-
tually conditional on management In
the interest OF these few. More than
once | have heard the opinion ex-
pressed that the most fortunate thing
which could happen to an institution
would DO the death OF wealthy ben
cfactor whose authoritative interior
ence was felt To be burdensome.
"0n the other hand the fact must
not be overlooked that private support
OF art. literature, learning. places the
burden OF sustaining and carrying
forward our civilization upon n few
people comparatively. When we ex-
anime into the number OF givers In
cities like New York, Boston. and Phil
aledphia, we find that 1t Ia a small one
indeed In proportion to the number of
wealthy people, and we are reminded
OF the saying. Many are called, but
few are chosen. There In In each
great community small list OF givers,
and that is all II the names Of con-
tributors to public institutions are
asked, the same names are repeated
again and again: and once outside If
the little circle. givers are rare. This
is not morally justiAable. 1t was not
part OF the design for which private
property was instituted that the great
bulk OF It should be used for selfish
enjoyment.
Another consideration In brought to
mind by the mention OF art. Art, es-
sentially public In nature. as a matter
OF fact never has fiourished when de-
pendent on private support. The at
mosphere OF private wealth Is antago-
nistic to Its growth.
I'VE may insist upon public sup
port OF public institutions, and mt the
same time afford scope for the largest
amount Of private philanthropy. Prl-
yate parties can do what. M matter
OF fact. states cannot at present be
persuaded to do, even II II Ia their
proper function. We must, as prac-
teal men, take into account the ex-
lsting situation. Private persons can
also go ahead OF public opinion and
lead II, ever placing high ideals be-
fore US The foftiest conceptions OF
civilization must ever first dawn In a
/ few minds and the trIIegt excellence