Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1916-02-21

, for increased approximations. when lac
was engaged in raising @n endowment
fund. Mr. Carnegie. after showing
great unwillingncSs Ia give any con-
siderable sum TO "A state university.
agreed to make his large Subscription
: I" this fund only bccauS. of the exist
enc" of an Incorporated alumni assoc
citation 10 whose care 1t would be COM
mittcd The endowment fund is held
by Il board OF alumni trustees. not by
the state OF Virginia not by the board
Of visitors. Without ia: alumni or
Ghnizatiou, the 100000 given by AIR.
Carnegie wouid hav" gone elsewhere.
Aiuuui who have been active IN uni
vcrsity affairs since they left the col
lcgc walls are convinced that such an
institution az proposed would seriously
njur" the university. ana not accom-
plish what is wished for womcn's cdu-
cation.
without these students. whose opin-
ION YOU think il foolish to consider.
there can be no University of Virginia.
They say. ana the alumni say. that, IL
the coordinate college he established
with the result which is considered by
them inevitable. there viii bc great
fallinE-o in the attendance of male
students. both from Virginia and from
other states. and there is every reason
TO believe that they are right. Their.
- no one to make these students at
tend. Many of them are at the Uni
NtfSitS or Virginia Tor purely Srntl-
mental reasons. Probably 30 per cent
OF them arc there because Of the devo-
ton OF certain alumni. has been
found to he the case in another college
where "a poll was taken. Destroy the
sentimental attachment which advo-
Gates OF tho coordinate college have
attempted to ridicule. and these stu
dents will go elsewhere. Especially is
this true Of students from other States.
These students and those from Nir-
Sini:t in the professional departments
save no money by attending the Uni
vcrsity of Virginia rather than some
other college. and why should they do
30 except for the influence Of that
peculiar attachment. the sentiment.
which some one has toward the place,
and which are told is not worthy
Of consideration?
Other institutions have far better
educational plants than the University
OF Virginia. For instance, consider
Princeton. with an academic faculty of
202 men in 1914. and Yale. which that
same year had an academic faculty of
56l men and Il professional faculty of
ninety-SiX. with an endowment Of more
than S15.000000. or take Harvard,
with an endowment of over S2I 900, 900.
which that year had a college or
academic faculty of 2S5 and IL profess
Sional faculty of 237: or Columbia, with
an endowment OF over SEQ, 900. 900. a col
lege faculty of 2SG men and a profess
sional faculty OF e2S. Then look at
the University of Virginia.. which that
year had u college faculty of forty
seven and a professional faculty of
twenty-ciEht, professors. assistants and
all. whose present faculty contains
only tiftynine professors of all grades.
and which has an endowment Of slight
y over S2,200,0Oo.
How can the University or Virginia
hope to compete with the colleges
named. If the sentimental attachment
OF students and alumni be lost? When
II comes to purely educational plant,
the University OF Virginia cannot hope
to equal these colleges. The one fea-
ture which lifts IL out of the class of
ordinary State universities and draws
men to it rather than to larger. more
prosperous and better-eQuippcd col
leGes is it's peculiar college life, which
the students alumni and even the presi-
dent OF the university hold would he
destroyed by coeducation. a prominent
alumnuS in n distant State, after read
ing a copy OF the bill introduced in
the Senate, said that II was evident
that the people behind this measure
Of Virginia would draw only from the
boundaries OF it's own State. and he
echoed the view Of alumni far and near
when he added the significant state
ment that he hoped the plan would
not succeed before his boys were old
enough to go to college.
MURRAY NJ. MCGUIRE
Richmond February 10.