Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1920-03-06
NOT FISH, FLESH, FOWL
NOR GOOD RED HERRING
The University Of Pennsylvania Suffers
Because Of Its lndeternninate Rela-
tons to Public and Private
Beneficence

tions to Public and Private
Beneficence
A TEMPT has been made to create the
impression that Provost Smith re-
signed because the constitutional revi-
sion commission, of which he is a men,
| ber, rejected on the advice Of two trus-
tees Of the University of Pennsylvania,
his proposal to have the constitution di-
rect that a minimum of $S,000,000 should
be appropriated biennially for the sup
port of institutions of higher learning"
Doctor Smith, in explaining his propo-
! sition, indicated that this sum should be
set apart for the University of Penn
| sylvania, the University of Pittsburgh
| and the State College.
A careful reading of the debate in the
commission leads to the conclusion that
the proposition was rejected not because
the commission was opposed to the ap-
preparation, but because it was opposed
to naming any specific sum in the consti-
tuition. An amendment, offered by an
other member of the commission, naming
the three institutions which Doctor Smith
had in mind, was also rejected because
the commission decided that it was just
as inexpedient to name any institutions
as to fix any specific sum to be appro-
priated.
All those who are opposed to lumber
ing up a constitution with specific legis-
lative provisions will conclude that the
commission acted wisely. The amend
ment which the commission finally
adopted provides that the state shall
maintain by sufficient appropriations an
educational system from the primary
school to the university. This leaves to
the Legislature decision as to the amount
to be appropriated and as to the institu-
tions of higher education to receive the
money. 1t is incredible that Doctor Smith
resigned because the commission differed
with him.
But the future of the University of
Pennsylvania remains as uncertain as
ever. Nothing has been done in Harris
burg this winter toward deciding whether
it, with the University of Pittsburgh and
the State College, shall become the edu-
cational wards of the state or not.
We are told that these three institu-
tions arc private corporations rather
than exclusively state educational agen-
cies. Yet each looks to the state for aid.
As matter of fact, they arc neither
privatd>nor public institutions, whatever
they may be in theory. And they suffer
from this indeterminate position.
When private benefactons arc sought
the solicitors are reminded of the state
appropriations and are asked why the
General Assembly does not take care of
them. And when the General Assembly
is asked for an adequate sum for their
maintenance the petitioners are reminded
that the trustees ought to secure larger
endowments from private sources.
Whatever may be the problems of the
other two institutions, the local Univer-
sity feels itself handicapped by the in
adequacy Of its private endowment and
by the failure of the General Assembly
to assume full responsibility for its main
tenanCc.
AS a result there are Friends Of the in
stitutiQn who are urging it to cut its
garment to fit the cloth. They wish it to
restrict its activities, to abandon all
projects for expansion and to limit the
number of students by the various de-
vices to which. institutions short of money
have been compelled to resort.
Members of the faculty, however, per-
suaded that any such course would be dis
astrous, arc doing what they can to
create sentiment in favor of closer rela-
tions between the state treasury and the
University.
Tho whole problem i, in its funda-
mentals financial. If thc University had
an adequate income, no matter from