The Farmville herald. [volume] (Farmville, Va.) 1890-1934, 1907-03-08
A DANGEROUS POWER.

A DANGEROUS POWER
Recently John d. Rockefeller gave
SD 600 900 % the General Education
Board. TO be used for the purpose OF
helping institutions OF learning.
The outlook of New York has this
TO say i'm regard TO the gi+
With this financial power in control
tine General Education Board is poo
sition To DO what mo- other body n
IN country can, at present, even az
tempt. Ii can determine largely what
institution, shall grow, and, ODD some
measure what shall stand still. OF de
cav. IL can look over the territory of
the nation. note the places where tnet-
isfamiue of learning, and start new
educational plants of amy specie ID
chooses, and revive old ones. IL can
do i'm many ways what tine Govern
ment does for education in France OF
Germany. Its power will Zoe enor-
nous. il seems as ii IL might ue auic
really 10 determine the character OF
American education. The funds Do
holds represent only "a fraction of the
amounts which twill really controls
by giving sum 10 an institution on
condition that the institution raise am
equal OF greater amount, 10 viii De aole
10 direct much larger amounts IMAM l'
possesses.
In commenting ON this the Norfolk
Landmark says that this power is a
distinct menace. The New York
Journal of Commerce has this 10 say
on the same subject:
For a long time it has been seriously
doubtful i'm many minds whether GER
tain of the gifts that nave come 10 /
universities and colleges from wealthy I
men have not in some ways had am i'm /
furious effect. There are many who /
assert that the consequence Of such /
gifts has been TO make Institutions un- /
duly w0rshipful towards wealth and /
10 place them i'm an attitude of too
ready concession TO the wishes of /
their benefactOrs.
If there has actually been some dan
ger Of the kind referred TO it must be
evident that this danger, whatever it
may he, is greatly intensified by the
manner of the recent endOwmeuts. Ii /
is a noteworthy fact, constituting o.
most new departure i'm education,
that these large gifts have been placed
i'm the hands of boards of trustees for
distribution to those who are TO Dene-
fit from them, instead Of being direct
ly applied. There can be no doubt in
the mind Of any close observer of ed
ucatiOn that the effect of this policy Is
greatly to strengthen the bond between
the giver and the recipient of money
under such conditions, and TO make
the latter i'm a la. -er measure than
ever before dependent upon the feel
ings and fancies of the former.
The Journal of Commerce then
states that this tendency is becoming
stronger and declares that it is a rave .
danger in which our colleges and uni
versities are put, when sums may be
cut of at any time, according to the
within or fancy of the giyer 1t says
further:
This is an influence strOngerfar than ~
that which is eXerted in the case of
single sums given at irregular inter
walls TO isolated colleges or universities.
A system Of giving which has its own
rules and customs, which is governed y
by principles Of selection laid down in
the beginning, which Families ,
throughout the country and embraces
those smaller institutions
that are hampered by narrow means,
Is an Infinitely more powerful force i'm Z
the shaping of opinion than any single c.
capitalist, who makes separate and Of 81
ten unconditional gifts TO be cOntrOll-
ed and invested by the institutions
themselves, could ever be. As a me- n
chanism for controlling academic
opinion, there has perhaps never been
anything in the history of education
that would compare with the board
system Of snbsidizing learning.
The spectacle of university pres- p
lent preaching the maintenance of OF
,)me of the worst abuses of capitalism fe
and another meekly bowling the knee l..
10 receive the money offered by those D."
or whose acts he had bur lately sug- rl
,ested social Ostracism as penalty, is
lot edifying. Instances can be given W
n abundance where the mere prospect be
# an immediate gift has changed the Il
Whole current of a college adminisira- M
Or's thought and made him trim his O"
ais on an entirely new tack 10 catch
he favOring breezes of prospect. The
rae and competition for large num- Sc
ers of students has greatly crippled til
hose who would uphold the older ira "a,
itiOns of Independent economic think
lg. Increasing numbers mean i'm ~"
reasing expense in college administ a.
on and lead to growing dependence
n wealth Of doubtful origin. This. lnl
mOng other reasons is ground for rel
linking that the enormous benefac- w.,
ons OF the past few years, whether as 49,.
enslons, endOwments or annual gifts '''
colleges, may put our academic
mixers into moral strait-jacket al
he same time that they are freed from ON
re cramping influences of limited IN,
leans. IN,
There is one feature Of this gift that Wi
c have not seen any allusiOn TO We
ave understood that the General ]
iucation Board will not aid institu- slo
1ns controlled by the State. If this pie
a fact, is il not an indirect discOurag- Sci
g Of legislative gifts to State institu- not
ms? Will it not tend to dwarf the ing
ate institutions and build up insti- %
tons controlled by capitalism? The &c.,
estion will, il seems TO us, open am '' .
ieresting discussion, and we should ,r'
,e to see what the Norfolk Land '. w
ark and other newspapers have TO ~.
y about il. ~