Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1914-02-19
LETTERS FROM THE PEOPLE
Carnegie Reasons for Divorcing the
Colleges from the state.

sible emphasis Is placed upon this recon-
mendation. 1t IL placed In the forefront
OF the summary &C the report just given
to the public press from the office Of the
Carnegie Foundation In New York 1t is
urged with a manifestation of zeal quite
unusual In an impartial report of scientific
experts. In this part OF the report alone
the language becomes Incorporate, tend
ing to exaggeration and elimination, and
sounding a note OF censure and punish
ment. The full explanation Of this atti-
tude of hostility toward the colleges is
nowhere to be found in the report itself
A new principle Of educational polity is
| enunciated, however, upon which the
recommendation is primarily based. The
new doctrine is thus stated There are
only two consistent policies that a state
can pursue toward institutions of higher
education the one, to "own and control
them completely. the other, to have moth
Ing to do with them at all. And this
alternative proposition is "cear-cut,"
says the expert. Surely it is as clear-cut
as bar OF steel, and Just as nfexble.
Any policy between these clear-cut ex-
tremes. any compromise to meet local
needs or desires, any combination of pub
lie and private support for instruments of
general uplft and progress, is inconsis-
tency and folly!
incidentally the experts say, in support
Of this principle, that the Isolation of the
colleges and dependence on private phil
anthropy is the situation in most of the
New England States" This is an error
of fact which experts ought not to permit
themselves even for the sake of argu-
nent. AS matter OF real fact, every
New England State but Connecticut has
its State aided colleges. Dartmouth, for
example, the nearest rival Of the Vermont
colleges, has a sung annual appropra-
ton Of 5000 But Dartmouths turn may
come next, when the Carnegie Foundation
has purged Vermont from the State aid
evil
| Let us see how this principle OF exclu-
sive control or nothing applies to we'll
known and typical educational institu-
tons. 1t condemns the policy Of Johns
Hopkins University. created and brought
to world wide fame by a man of interna-
tional reputation as a wise educational
administrator. 1t condemns the Univer-
sity of the State OF New York. founded
by Alexander Hamilton and now presided
over by a man who the other day was
presented with a gold medal in recognition
OF his wisdom as an educational leader
1t condemns Cornell University and three
other universities in. the Empire State. II
condemns the Metropolitan Museum. and
would make 1t necessary for the city To
| say to Mr.. Morgan: I'VE must own and
control your vast collection. or ask you to
| keep your precious art treasures at home
for the benefit OF your private friends. "
1t condemns-unkndest cut OF all-the
Carnegie libraries, the very cornerstone
and keystone OF which are shaped by the
policy OF uniting private benehcence with
public taxation. In short, every institu'
ton OF an educational character is con-
Idemned in which public and private re-
sources unite and cooperate in serving
the highest good of the community. II
Vermont has been wrong in the use of this
policy In support of It's educational life, II
has certainly been justified by distinguish
ed presidents.
This pronouncement Of new educational
policy is an excathedra judgment, ar
arbitrary edct Issued by the Carnegie
Foundation, like a ukase proclaimed by
the Car. We ask for reasons why State
aid must be cut off and the reply Is, Be
ont. This Johnsonian sort Of argument
may not satisfy vermonters, who will
hardly be inclined to bring down calamity
upon the colleges on the mere ipse diXi
Il OF a Carnegie propogondist. To be sure
there are certain allegations of turpitudt
in the Indictment OF the colleges. intended
mainly, however. as an argument for "thC
people," dust for their eyes The repor
hat \.
"demoralizing" the body polite of tn,
State-for which they naturally should bt
punished: that the colleges are squander
Ing their funds-the common argument o.
every opposition party in politics; tina
the colleges are using money that belong.
would go to these schools, according t
TO the rural schools-not a dollar Of which
the proposed scheme: that the college,
got along very we'll before they wer'
given State aid"-and therefore have beef
deceiving the people with their profes
sions Of neediness; and that the college
are inexcusably lacking in their faith II
Providence, because 1t Is evident tina
they will be cared for through privat,
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT not a scrap of evi
dence is brought forth In support of sucl
faith. All OF these things would be YER!
lrepreneNSlDle, II tney were true.
The real reason for this attack upon tn,
colleges we must look for outside Of tn,
report; and. curiously enough, we find 1
in the annual report of the CARNEGIE
Foundation for 1912. The new theory o
mo State aid without State control" 4.
there formulated (p. 1872 and expressed IL
the yer, language Of the Vermont report
In other words. war was declared agains
, State aided colleges. and Vermont hap
pened to be the flrst field that opened 70
action. This accounts for the extraor
, binary spectacle of a board OF scientific
experts rendering a supposedly disinter
ested report, and then engaging in a Wig
orous campaign to secure its adoption
employing the most up-to-date campaigi
methods and supported by million dol
lar campaign fund. 1t is perfectly appar
ent, therefore, that had our college presi
dents been as innocent and vlrtuous al
, Audrey in the play, 1t would have mad
no difference. The colleges were doomed
before the investigation began. The find
ings of the expert survey had no bearing
on the verdict of the court
One of the most remarkable things IL
the report Is the consola ton offered to tn
colleges With a provision Of the devas
tation to be wrought, the charitable ex
perts say to the colleges that sin the Ion.