The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1907-11-21


and when i offered here the resolution
ysliteIt has been reported fnvornbiy in
substance by the majority, my nrgu.
8ment and resolution was based OH gen.
ci.aI statements made before this docu-
i ment was heard of.
Dr. Cannon went into detail as to
f the formation of Randolph- Macon Col
icgc and as to the different founda-
tions for the various academies The
Woman's College ut Lynchburg was
shown to be the product of a land
boom scheme, the Riyermont Iana
Company giving 100000 in money and
land to secure the institution.
CDR Smith. II oweyer, was before them
as the representative OF Methodlsni and
Eas Representative of the Randolph
Macon College board" lie declared.
"'The president of the Rivermont Land
Company objected to plan to estah-
fish n college under the control OF
those Methodists.' honor DR.. smith
for his remarkable and extraordinary
ability In these matters. but reserve
the right of disagreeirg at times from
his Judgment. we not only under.
stood thesee institutions to be ours,
but their Representatives went before
our people in the thank offering moVe-
Inent and so stated. No claim has ever
been made that these were not our IN
situations In different sense from
certain other schools which are under
our patronage cut not our control.
The Dcnominntional Test.
The history of the Carnegie Founda-
ton was described, with the provision
made by Mr.. Carnegie that 1t should
not be applicable to State institutions
as such and to denomnational institu-
lions as such. 1t was generally under
stood that in order to secure the Car
negie Foundation 1t became necessary
for the board to pass the resolution
which they did on August is, 1906.
stating III substance that in the con-
duct of the Randolph Macon Wonan's
college and in the choice of trustees.
officers or students no denominational
tests are applied, nor are denomina-
tional tenets taught to the students.
when the resolution Of August 16.
1906, was passed every trustee was a
Methodist. They were parceled out by
usage, fourteen to Baltimore Confer
ence and thirty to Virginia Confer
cnce. with an equal number OF preach
,crs and laymen In the board. Every
oficer OF these institutions. including
emies. were Methodsts. This body
would have been astounded at che sug-
gestion OF putting any one at the head
OF one Of those institutions not Meth.
odist.
amy action taken which seeks to
minimize the relation OF Randolph
Macon College TO the conference dies
in the face of all her history. and
brands as false those who have. repre-
sented the college In our pulpits and
the press.
The time has come" said DR.. Can
non. when we must know where. we
stand. I do not impugn the motives OF
any members OF that board, hut we
cannot follow any man blindly. II they
are the trustees Of Methodism we have
a right to review their actions. There
were members of that board who did
not vote for that resolution declaring
against denominational tests. In TAX
ing their action the Randolph Macon
board could not have referred to the
past. II they refer to the future we
have right to know what they meant |
by it.
The Carnegie Foundation had in their
possession a copy OF the charter and
catalogue of Randolph-Macon College.
The charter plainly declares. and they
knew. that the board was aeif.per-
one. aud in the catalogue 1t
L. stated:
@sBut the officers In charge com
slider themselves under obligations
10 conform TO the moral standards
and religious uxaEcs OF the Mcth0-
dist Episcopal Church. Sontl,, under.
2 whose -nuspicck the colleges were
founded,
DR.. Smith says that DR.. Prltchett's
letter was read to the board meeting.
Or. Pritchett knew the conditions we'll.
He was an educator and Methodist OF
for years, and we'll knew the
OF the Randolph. Macon
system He wrote this letter to the
brethrenof the board and warned them
that the matter of the adoption OF the |
by the trustees did not seem
to the Carnegie board so much a matter
of course as 1t seemed to be 10 the |
college board. DR.. Pritchett states in
radical change in tho policy of tile
college.
Or. Pritchett goes on to say: SIT IS. |
however. OF the first Importance that
the college should deal with the mat
ter in entire sincerity"
Il do not believe" said DR.. Can
non. that the trustees thought when
they adopted that resolution that they |
were takins$ any radical step. But ri
say that -.thsr board did not go TO |
bottom of the matter. ! am not spon-
sor for any of DR.. Pritchett's state
ments.3I asked DR.. Smith whether Or.
Pritchett had objected to the appear
ance of the name of the Randolph
Macon Womans College In our Vir-
sinia Conference year book. DR.. |
Smith said that he had agreed to have
Its name starred with a note, Inde-
pendent self-perpetuating board OF i
trustees DR.. Smith admitted this to
the committee. These facts indicate |
that the Carnegie board understood
that radical change had taken place.
and that hereafter the Randolph |
Macon Woman's College would be put
by itself as not In the class with other
sof Virginia Methodsts. We
are not9willing by legal technlcalityl
to come into possessions that We're
never Intended for us. Mr.. Carnegie
did not intend this for us. We are ,,
on the list by legal technicality. The
legal and the moral ownership of
these Institutions must not be divld-
ed. Only fifty-flve colleges in this
county have been able to meet the re-
quirements, While sos have not come
under the provisions OF the Carnegie
Foundation. There are $50 institutions
in this country whose trustees are
selected by some special qualification
or denominat1onal test.
Simplicity OF pnper,