The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1907-11-21
after preliminary remarks, read ex-

tracts from the new Carnegie board
report, showing that the board has
made strlcter rules for the coming
year than was the case in 1906. DR..
Smith continued: u agree with the
committee and with Or. Cannon that
the he board absolutely repudiates the
1907 conditions OF the Carnegie board
as absolutely inconsistent with that
which was before US In 1906. There is
no attempt to reconcile them, and
do not believe they can be reconciled."
Here the conference adjourned for
dinner, Or. Smith having the floor.
When the afternoon session opened
the Rev. Mr.. Christian. on the part OF
the committee. asked leave to with
port. except the paragraph which en-
presses confidence In the present
board. which request was granted.
Dr. Smith was recognized, and In
opening his remarks said he appre-
ciated the courteous and brotherly feel
IN g IN which the debate had been con.
Quoted. He said that however much
no and Dr. Cannon disa greed on the
question at issue, there was no per-
sonal difference. and he earnestly hoped
mat there would be no division in the
church against the welfare OF the sys-
tenn OF colleges.
The, Confidential Proof Sheet.
DR. Smith spoke OF the proof sheet
arked confidential and subject to re-
vision. He said the confidential reia-
tons had been removed by DR.. Pritch-
EFT, but that this did not make the re-
port final or correct THE report is
one subject to revision, is sent out to
the heads OF the various institutions
TO see II they agree with the Carnegie
board. Immediately on receipt of m.ns
advised Dr.. Pritchett of certain err
rors IN the report. and asked that
Efurthor publications be- Awfthheld..un tn
the board could file its objection"
:. Dr- Smith called attention to what
ne called allied. fnndamental error" in
i nsPa 81 Ri Wers nd told
had served OH the board OF Randolph.
Macon College, and that from the be-
ginning TO the present day there had
not been time when there were not
dolph-Maco Woman's College who
We're not Methodists
!, The ! I, g church ,,. has no ownership in
declared. 1T has influence. love, sym
pathS. but no legal control and no ac-
tual control as far as Randolph-Ma-
con eo Woman's College is concerned. In
stood it So" DIR. Cannon says in his
argument that since we are on the Car
negte foundation, we cannot be de-
read from the classiflcations made by
the Carnegie board, claiming that the
sWoman's College came under class five
l.a strong sympathetic connec-
not, being controlled or owned by any
ecclesiastical body and have no for
NAL connection with 1t.
NE DO report to this conference
continued DR.. Smith, but we do it as
a matter of preference. and we also
report TO the New York World Alma
nae and to various college registers
we haven't cast OFF the conference We
stand just in the same relation to the
Carnegie foundation. We repudiate
the statements they have read into
our correspondence in their new 1907
report.
confidence for the board. since it is
impossible here, in the limited time
TO review the whole history OF the ac-
know that the beloved Bishon5 John @
CRANBERRY nresided ut the ineatnr In
the resolution which the. committee
assn9Ss lis
leading to- the. placing of the w on ms
College on tile carne ie5s founda ton
was gone over In: detail. Dr. Smith
between himself and DR. Pritchett OF
the Carnegie foundation concluding
with the much quoted letter OF DR..
Pritchatt In which he stated that ne
thought tile passage OF this resolution
was. a very radical change in its poll
lev"
Or. Smith claimed that there was no
change In the policy: that the history
of the college showed bot, trustees
end professors. who were non-NIetho-
dists. No denominatlonal test had
ever been applied Historically or prac-
tically.
Must Give Them Discretion. 4
DR.. Smith asked that the colleges
5t,a nat tnn ~ W. lo1 n, a