and with no probable hope for future usefulness or popularity; and inasmuch as large sums have been spent upon this institution without an adequate return, therefore, we would further suggest that you recommend the Legislature to substitute some better managed or more popular institution as the recipient of this land-grant fund, by endowing a professorship of agricultural and mechanical arts, or in such manner as the Legislature may deem best. All of which we respectfully submit. JNO. I. CARTER, JOHN C. F. HICKMAN, recalled and examined: Q. You have heard the charges of immoral influences surrounding the Pennsylvania State College here this morning; what do you know about the conduct of the students while you were there-first tell us when you were there? A. I was there from the fall term of 1875-August, 1875—until the 1st of July, 180, and as a regular student. I went back in November, 1880, as a post-graduate, and remained there until the 1st of April, 1881. Q. Did that embrace part of the time that Mr. Shortlidge was there? A. That embraced about six months of the time that Mr. Shortlidge and Miss Belle were there. Of the morals of the institution, or of the students rather connected with it, I have only this to say, that so far as the use of intoxicating drinks was concerned among the students that were there during the whole time I was there, either as a special or regular student, I never saw on the ground of the college a single man or student under the influence, or boy either. I have seen students under the influence of liquor perhaps at Bellefonte, but not to say a majority of them, but a limited number. As to the use of tobacco at colleges, it is almost a universal thing that all students who go to our best colleges and universities use it, and I am safe in saying that there may have been a majority of students at the State College who used it, but if there was a majority of them who used it, it was very little over the half, and I doubt very much whether any other college in the State can show as few students who use tobacco, or as small percentage of them who used it as the Pennsylvania State College can. Q. Was there any effort made on the part of the officers of the State. College to restrict the use of tobacco? A. The use of tobacco was, at one time, forbidden there on the campus. and the students were not allowed to use any tobacco on the campus ground of the college, and this order was strictly carried out, too. They were never allowed to use tobacco in the halls of the building nor during drill hours nor detail service. Q. What were your means of observations whether intoxicating drinks were used by the students? A. My means, I think, were equally as good as the college authorities, if not better than the members of the faculty, because I was one of the students myself, and mingled among them more than the members of the faculty, and, if they did use intoxicating drinks, they would do it with less restraint in my presence than they would in the presence of any member of the faculty. I was among the students all the time. I roonied the greater part of the time right in the college building, among a majority of the students, and had a very good chance of knowing, at all times, what the conduct of the students was. Q. Your opportunities were equally as good as any of the teachers, at least ? A. Yes, sir; they were equally as good, if not better, from the simple fact that if a student, when he was under the influence of liquor, he would not try as hard to keep it from me, who was only a student, as he would from those in authority at the college. Q. Did Mr. Shortlidge and Miss Belle live in the college building? A. No, sir; they lived in the president's house-the president's mansion. So far as the students' rebellion of 1880 was concerned, which you have heard so much about this morning, I think that the right history of that was not given at all. I think I had at that time a better chance of knowing the true inwardness of that than Professor Shortlidge could have had, for I was there as a special student, and was not under the authority of the officers, as the regular students were. Q. That was the time you were there as a post-graduate, was it? A. Yes, sir. I was not there during the time of the rebellion; but from what I learned after I went there, and I had a good chance of hearing it, for it was the talk of the college boys some time after it happened-I heard it repeatedly stated that Professor Shortlidge caused all of the trouble by his ill-temper and ill-judged treatment of the students. Professor McKee was, in particular, working with Mr. Shortlidge in the matter, and I would hear say that Professor McKee never took the part of the students at any time, nor did he on this occasion; he always advised them to calm down and return to their duties, and it is utterly false that he gave the students any encouragement in anything further than to say, "Boys, this thing will all quiet down in a few days," and the best thing to do was to get to work. He never mentioned Mr. Shortlidge's name in reference to him personally at all, to any of the students, further than to say that Mr. Shortlidge was president of the college, and he must be of age. Q. What was the feeling amongst the students in regard to Professor Shortlidge from the time he came there up to the time he left the college? A. I could not name one student who I ever heard speak favorably of Mr. Shortlidge. The senior class was soon left to believe him unqualified for the position, and lost more or less of the respect for him of which they had very little at first. That was very much against him as an instructor in the higher branches. He was considered cranky, and was regarded as a very unsatisfactory and incompetent instructor. Dr. Calder, the preceding president, was a very efficient teacher, and one that gave us a great deal of assistance and instruction. But Dr. Calder was unpopular with the students on account of his system of government. All of the students liked Professor McKee, who was also a very efficient instructor, and was different from Dr. Calder in that he was very popular with the students, consequently he had a great deal of influence among them. He did more in quieting the rebellion that Professor Shortlidge speaks of, and in bringing the students under the control of Professor Shortlidge, than he (Professor Shortlidge) could ever have done himcelf. He was very unpopular among the students. We did not consider his methods of government adapted to the college at all; it was better suited for the needs of an academy. He would have the same rules to govern young men, who had been their own masters for a number of years, as he would for a small boy ten or twelve years old. By Mr. Hall: Q. There was too much of the paternal authority with him, was there? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you go through the preparatory department? A. I was in the preparatory department for one year. Q. Did you ever go through the preparatory department of any other institution? A. No, sir; I never did. I came from the public schools when I entered the "A" preparatory department of the college, sir. Q. Since you have gone through the preparatory department, and the college course proper, and have been there one year as a post-graduate, as a matter of course you know something about the methods pursued in the preparatory department; we should like to have your opinion on the subject. A. If there is one thing that I would offer as a criticism on the institution it is that there is too much preparatory department connected with the college by one half, at least. ALLISON O. SMITH, affirmed and examined: Q. When did you become connected with the Pennsylvania State College? A. I entered that institution in January, 1876. Q. Did you enter the preparatory department? A. No, sir; I entered the freshman class the second term, and remained there until June, 1879, till I graduated. I am constrained to take the stand mainly in defense of the moral character of the institution, because I heard it assailed very unjustly here this morning by Miss Belle Shortlidge. She assailed it in a manner which I think did great injustice to the institution. The moral character of the institution in 1876, when I went there first, was, without exception, as good as any institution in this country, I would venture to say. I do not think a more sanctimonious set of students could be found anywhere than what was at the State College at that time. The Y. M. C. A. had a good representation there then. I suppose I am safe in saying that one half of the boys at college were members of it, and, perhaps, two thirds of them. There was some of them, of course, whose characters were not of the best, but you are bound to find them in all kind of these institutions and in all places; and then the institution, I think, is not to blame for that, because a bad student happens to attend it; but this I say, I doubt whether there is another institution that has a greater influence-Christian influenceupon the character and morals of the boys who attended it than Pennsylvania State College during the time I was student there. The majority of college students, as I have always observed, are not very much inclined to Christian influences, and from what I know of the students of this college, they were very much above the average of college students in that respect. I know something about other institutions in that respect: I attended the State Normal School at Bloomsburg. Immediately before going there, and on a comparison of the morals of the two institutions, I would have to decide in favor of the State College. The use of intoxicating drinks was not indulged in at all on the college ground, that I ever knew of. Nowhere about there could you obtain liquor of any kind. It was prevented by an act of the Legislature, which provided that no liquor could be sold within two or three miles of the college, and the courts of 1 Centre county never granted license for the sale of liquor, to my knowledge, within five or six miles of the college. You can readily see, therefore, they would not have that particular bad influence to contend with. The boys were like all other college students, and whenever they would get to Bellefonte some of them would take on a load; but there are students in all colleges who will do that. But I have this to say, I never saw any of them under the influence of liquor on the college ground; it had generally all passed off before they returned to the college; and during the years that I was there I could not name one of the boys I ever observed drunk. I have seen some under the influence in Bellefonte, but I do not think they were half a dozen all put together, but I never saw anyone drinking any ways near the college grounds. Q. When you say any ways near the college, do you mean two miles? No, sir; further than that. I never saw any of them use liquor nearer than Bellefonte or Pleasant Gap. Bellefonte is twelve miles, and Pleasant Gap is eight miles from the college. When I went there I think there was liquor sold at Pine Grove, which was four miles from the college, but I do not know of any of the students ever getting any there. The use of tobacco was also a feature in this morning's testimony. I, of course, could not say from my personal knowledge of other places, but generally, young men that I know, who attended other colleges used tobacco, and used it more generally than what the boys at the State college did. I do not think there was one half of the boys used tobacco at the State college while I was there. I used it myself the first summer as a smoker; I know there was not many of the students that chewed, but there was a number of them that smoked; but, taking everything into consideration, there was no more tobacco used at that college than at any other. Q. You say you never saw any of the boys intoxicated around the buildings? A. No, sir; I do not now recollect of a single instance; and as for boys as young as ten and twelve years old smoking and drinking around the building, I think must be magnified, for there never was any students attended there at that age, except the children of the professors, and they were always instructed in a special class. As to the government of the college, I would like to give you a short history of that: When I first went there, Professor Grawbowski had charge of the military department, and while in such charge introduced some very obnoxious rules. While there was no determined opposition to them by the students, it was still a matter that kept things from moving on in as harmonious a manner as might be. When I first went there, the students in the preparatory department were not separated from those in the college proper, consequently, the college students had to come under the same government that the "preps were under. Well, now, there were some students at the college who were young men, and it was asking rather much of them to come under the same discipline that would be required for a boy from fourteen or fifteen years of age. There were some young men there from twenty to twenty-five, and some that were well on to thirty years of age, and from twenty down to fourteen and fifteen, the government was alike for all. One of the obnoxious rules that Grabowski introduced was to have the professor who had charge of the various floors of the college to walk through the halls and be constantly watching the boys. The boys were required to keep certain hours, from eight to eleven ; during that time they had to be in their rooms, and if they left at any time without permission they were reported to the professor and put on detail, which consisted of such work as hauling ashes, and other disagreeable work like it. That was my first experience of detail work. We had to do this work, and were liable to be expelled from the institution if we neglected or refused to do it. This was in 1876, when Dr. Calder and Grabowski were there. There was a great deal of a rebellious spirit manifested during that year. There was students there that were young men who came there for the purpose of improving their time in the way of obtaining an education, and who would not submit to that kind of subjection. Now this was very objectional, and there were loud cries against it on the part of the students, and it gradually led to a falling off of the students. And then the faculty at the same time did not work harmoniously together; but I never knew much about the quarrels and bickerings in the faculty. This state of affairs would naturally, and did to a very large extent, create a great objection on the part of the students to Dr. Calder and Professor Grawbowski. During the first two years of my stay there, there was a great deal of dissatisfaction among the students; that kind of discipline was very much against the success of the college. As to Professor Smith, who has been so severely assailed here this morning, I can say this in his defense, that when I became a student at the State College the laboratories were very poorly supplied, and a great many of the changes and improvements that had been made in the scientific departments are due, to a very large degree, to the untiring efforts of Professor Smith. About the time Smith came there, you could notice a more lenient measure in the government of the institution. A government that was more acceptable to the students of the State College. You saw soon a decided improvement in the management of the College. The college department was separated from the preparatory department, and the students belonging to it roomed in one part of the building by themselves, while the "preps were put by themselves, and things began to improve in every respect. The government of the college was raised to a higher standard, and they kept on doing so until Professor Shortlidge came there, when he appeared to reduce it to what it had been when I first entered there. It seemed to me he tried to bring the government of the college down to what I considered would be a proper government for an academy or an institution of learning for small children. He had a certain discipline that was adapted to children, and he tried to bring young men who were twenty-five and thirty years of age under the same discipline that he had introduced to a boy from twelve to fifteen years of age, and instead of raising the standard of discipline and government of the college, it seemed to be getting lower and lower. Q. Do you consider the college a success as an institution of learning? A. I went through college there, and took a classical course, and I believe I have received as thorough an education as many a student does at the higher colleges in the country, such as Yale, Princeton, Cornell. &c. While the facilities were not as good at the State College as they are at the colleges I have named, still a young man who desires to obtain a good education can do so at the Pennsylvania State College. I think it depends a great deal on the student himself whether he will receive a thorough education by going through college, and that the name of the institution has very little to do with it. As a matter of course, at some of the institutions an education can be obtained with less labor on the part of the student, because of the better facilities. But as an institution of learning I would have to say that the Pennsylvania State College, I think, is a failure. not because of the mismanagement of it, but because there never has been |