The independent., 1903-04-16

DIR. Is. l.. Paine, Il. NJ. Hall, M. j.
Waugh, Henry B. Ward. A. Ross
Hill, ]. I. Wyer, L. A. Sherman, Lau-
renee Fossler, Lewis Gregory, John Fl.
Humpe, N. X. Griggs, s. H. Burnham,
Alexander Berger.
f. M. HALL, Chairman.
J. I. Wyer, Secretary.
FIRST NATL BANK, Lincoln,
Treasurer and Depository.
Nebraskans generally are proud Of
our state university; proud of its
chancellor and professors; proud of it's
students. The national government
has not been niggardly in it's help
although one might wish that more
land had been given to endow educa-
tt::G;;i institutions and less &c build build
UP railroad oligarchy. The legis-
latures of Nebraska have as a rule
given to the university with less hig-
Cling than is customary in making
appropriations. Have we reached the
point where it Is necessary to seek the
aid Of more powerful tax-collector?
Is 1t possible that a state-which has
been advertised far and wide as SO
wonderfully prosperous that it can
buy 100000 of Massachusetts, bonds
is nevertheless so poor that it must
beg two-thirds of building?
Have the sick and poor of Lincoln
SO increased under Rooseyeltian pros
perity that university organizations
alone require hundred-thousand dol
lar building in which shins may be
toasted while the condition of the
freezing and starving poor may be
discussed?
Easter services were held in some
thing less than forty different places
in Lincoln last Sunday--are university
students barred from participating II
the services at any of these places?
Receptions, interviews, social gath
erings and meetings Of all sorts
mot inconsistent with the spirit of it's
foundation" are doubtless valuable
aid to university progress. But what
sort Of a meeting would be ''incon-
sistent?" Would "the spirit of it's
foundation" be violated If some fine
day at one of those meetings "of all
Sorts the speaker should take occa-
sion to denounce Standard Oil meth
DDS?
The whole question brings vividly
to mind the vigorous language of DR..
John Bascom of Williams college in
his address before the Minnesota
teachers meeting, and later in his
debate with The Outlook.
is the president of a college-us-
ually the chief. figure in such trans
fo ~ @<
ceive the gifts of a millionaire whose
money. is known to have been wrong
fully secured?" inquiries DR.. Bascom
Such an act seems to me to be CEN
surable and mischievous. My critic
thinks, with equal decision, the re-
verse. The question is one of imme-
date moment.
"The first affirmation by which the
criticism is made good is that such
gifts cannot be rejected without first
establishing a standard of business
morality, and that there is much va
riety in these standards. This state
of things, instead Of being a reason
why the head Of an educational insti-
tuition may be without a standard of
business morality to guide his own
action and influence the action of
Others, is the chief reason why he
should carefully frame and constantly
defend such standard. 1t is not our
calling to give guidance where no
guidance is needed, but where it is
needed. We frame principles for the
very purpose of correction.
''The second supporting considera-
tion is that, If such standard is set
up, it is impossible to apply it in
specific cases. 1t is impossible for
boards of trustees to determine whe-
ther wealth offered for public use has
been Tighteously earned. But the
question is. whether money that is
known to be unrighteously acquired is
to be solicited and accepted. The way
in which the wealth OF the Standard
Oil company has been gained is no
teriens Articles, hooks, the reports
of congressional committees for thirty
years, have made it SO. No intelligent
man can plead ignorance. If should
say to my class, Monopoly is in it
self great wrong and can only be
established in connection with many
other wrongs and one Of the students,
should ask, How about the Standard
Oil company?' and / should respond,
L know nothing about the Standard