go into the class rooms and look into the faces of those young men. I will put them up against Harvard or Yale or any university in this country. There is no better class of students to be found. The gentleman who was called to teach economics in our institution this year came from Cornell. I said to him the other day, "How do you find your classes?" He said, "The best classes I have ever had in my life; the most enthusiastic, most serious-minded men I have ever had anywhere." He taught in Cornell and in the University of Chicago. That has been the testimony of men who have come to us from other institutions. Our students are serious-minded, earnest men, desiring to get their education, and working hard for it. If they get it at all, they have got to get it here. They can not go out from the District of Columbia to get it. The question is, Shall we give them a good education or shall we give them simply a superficial education? What will you do for these young men, these 3,000 young men of the District of Columbia, who are here and can not get away? What will you do for the 11,000 children of these citizens who are here and can not get away? Will you give them a good education and fit them for a good life in the industrial and commercial world and in the professional world? If so, then we must have the aid which we ask.

When I came to the university there were engaged there, giving their full time, 11 professors. To-day we have over 40 giving their entire time as trained teachers to the education of these men. We come here to you, it is the only place we can come, to get this aid. Two gentlemen have, at different times during the last year, one definitely and the other in a conditional way, offered to give us buildings if we had a site. We can get a building for the mechanic arts within a year, but these men will not do this until they know that that work is to be sustained, until they know it will be sustained. If you give us the benefit of this, it will be known this work is to be sustained. It would just about pay for the technical work, but it will not pay for all the cultural work which is carried on in the college of liberal arts. That will not be paid for and can not be paid for out of this fund. We have to maintain that ourselves. This appropriation will just about pay for the technical courses and for the courses in the sciences which are provided for in the act expressly. If these gentlemen can know that this work is to be provided for and that it will not go down, we can easily get a building for this work. We are now carrying it on in rented houses.

So I come here and ask that you pass this bill and that this university may be designated to receive the fund. We are the only university doing this work in the city for white students. Howard University is carrying on work of this character for colored students, and Congress appropriates not only all the money necessary for that work, but all the money necessary for the entire work of Howard University. I may say also that you are appropriating all the funds necessary to carry on the work for the deaf and dumb in this District, a splendid work. I only ask that the normal white people in the District of Columbia shall have the same consideration from Congress that these others have-not the same, either, Mr. Chairman, because in their cases you are providing all the expenses, as you ought to do. We ask simply that you give us the benefit of the Morrill Act and provide for the engineering and mechanic arts courses.

One other question has arisen with reference to the agricultural subjects. We are teaching a great many subjects included in the agricultural colleges. You will see the act itself says "relating to." Doctor Harlan will refer more particularly to this, but I want to say we are carrying on very much of the work that is included in the curriculum of every agricultural college; that is, a college giving itself wholly to agriculture. It has been suggested to me by the Department of Agriculture that if this money is given to us we should put in a general course in agronomy and one in horticulture for students of the District. Of course we do not intend to carry on experimental work. That is already being done by the Agricultural Department in this District upon a farm near by. But with the courses we are already carrying on if we had a course in agronomy, the science of agriculture, and a course in horticulture we could give our students here in the District of Columbia who may desire to pursue that work all they would require up to the last year in agriculture, and in the last year they would have the choice either to go into the agricultural experimental work that is being carried on here or to go to adjoining States, where there are agricultural colleges which do experimental work.

It has been the policy since this act was passed, in 1862, to use the facilities existing in every State and Territory to carry on this work. At one time Brown University and Yale University received the benefits under the direction of the State. Where the States have established agricultural colleges or mechanic arts colleges they have taken it from the others and given it to these state-maintained institutions, and very properly, of course. If this District should maintain a state university of its own, carrying on this work, it will then be perfectly proper for Congress to take it from us and give it to such an institution. But I really hope that the time will never come that any other institution than this one shall stand for the District. There has been much said about a national university doing work of a post-graduate character only; for the higher degrees, master of arts and doctor of philosophy, such a university should exist. Bills are pending in Congress for such a university. We have no aspiration to become such a university. Our mission is to the District of Columbia, to carry out the intent and desire of President Washington, that the District of Columbia should for itself have an institution serving it. That is our ambition and our only ambition. If the time shall ever come when the Congress of the United States shall establish a post-graduate university of the United States, to carry on the higher work, the graduate work only, then George Washington will stand with Harvard and Yale and the University of Illinois and the University of Michigan and the University of Kansas and all the great state universities, under that post-graduate university, we standing for the District of Columbia."

Mr. BOUTELL. Mr. Chairman, although Doctor Needham and Mr. Justice Harlan are both connected in their respective capacities with the George Washington University, I want to call special attention to the fact that as this hearing proceeds there is something a great deal wider in the scope and principle involved in this measure than the mere assistance of this institution.

I wish to express my appreciation and my gratitude, which I think all the members of the committee share, to Mr. Justice Harlan for

coming here and calling attention, as he so ably did, to the wide national scope of this measure, affecting, as I tried to point out, not only the local interests here, but all the States and the generations yet unborn, whose people are to come here.

I verily believe, on this auspicious anniversary, Mr. Justice Harlan, it is eminently fitting and proper to say that you probably never performed a more commendable act than you have performed here to-day. in advocating this meaure. I hope that thirty-two years hence you will come back and see 2,000 young men and women enjoying the benefits that this appropriation will bring to this institution.

STATEMENT OF DR. RICHARD D. HARLAN, ON BEHALF OF THE GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY.

Mr. BOUTELL. Mr. Chairman, Dr. Richard Harlan, the special representative of the university that is named as the beneficiary under this act, is present this morning. There are some features not yet touched upon which we would like to have him discuss at this time.

Doctor HARLAN. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, there are two questions involved in this bill. They might have been put into two separate, bills, the first bill containing what is now the first section of the pending bill, admitting the District, as such, to participation in this fund. If that bill were passed, then a second bill might have been introduced dealing with the question of how that money should be used. I think it is vital to a fair decision of these questions that a clear line of demarcation be made between these two questions.

In deciding the first question, you gentlemen of the committee represent the Congress of the United States; and it is for the Congress of the United States to determine whether it shall grant to the District of Columbia, as such, the same appropriation which it gives to the States and the regular Territories and to Hawaii and Porto Rico. But when it comes to the second question, namely, as to how the District should use this money if you give it to the District, then I submit, gentlemen, that you are here not so much as a committee representing the Congress of the United States as a committee representing the legislature of the District of Columbia, and that, in deciding that second question, as to how that fund should be used, the only consideration should be, What is best and most feasible for the District of Columbia?

With reference to the first question, namely, the right of the District to this annual appropriation, let me remind you of the fact that when the first Morrill Act was passed the main idea discussed was the colleges of agriculture, and, as no one thought and no one now supposes that the District needed or needs a college of agriculture, in the technical sense of the word, there was no one to suggest, when the bill was drawn donating lands to the several States and Territories, that the District of Columbia should be included.

Mr. Chairman, let me remind you of the fact that in all the legislation for federal aid to education the District of Columbia has been left out entirely. Congress first gave, in round numbers, for the public schools of the country nearly 100,000,000 acres of the public lands that belonged to the whole people of this nation. The District of Columbia was not included. We are now paying the penalty.

We have no school fund growing out of these lands to lessen our taxes. We claim no lands at this late date: but remember that Congress did not give us any land for that purpose--the common schools. Later on Congress gave to a great many States-I have not been able to find out whether you gave it to all-from 40,000 to 90,000 acres of land for state universities, but you never gave an acre of land to create a university for the District of Columbia. We make no claim for that, but we want you to remember that we were left out in that second land grant for educational purposes.

Then in 1862 you divided 10,000,000 acres of land among these colleges for agricultural and mechanic arts, and again the District of Columbia was not included. We make no claim for that land for that purpose, but we do not want you to forget that we were left out in that third great grant of land.

That omission in three critical instances only strengthens tenfold our moral claim to our share of this annual appropriation of money, especially since it comes out of the general taxes, of which we pay our quota.

If I may be permitted in this presence to bring the argument home, very much home to this committee, the citizens of the District are to-day helping to support the following institutions and you will see why I mention these:

The Vermont University and State College; Cornell University, in New York; the Pennsylvania State College; Virginia Agricultural and Mechanic College; Clemsen Agricultural College of South Carolina; Georgia College of Agriculture: Ohio Agricultural College; Illinois University; Missouri University; Iowa Agricultural and Mechanic College: Kansas Agricultural College; North Dakota Agricultural College; Utah Agricultural College: Oregon Agricultural College: Texas Agricultural and Mechanic College; and the New Mexico College of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts. These are the institutions represented by the 18 members of this committee.

I appeal to your sense of fair play. When I bought this suit of clothes, I paid more than if it had been made of domestic cloth; and I helped thereby to support every institution that is represented here under these Morrill acts. It is time, it seems to me, that some of your money should go to the support of a college of the mechanic arts for the District of Columbia.

A gentleman from one of the Western States, in response to a letter I had the privilege of writing on this subject, when I spoke of the great boon which this act would be to the young men of the District, wrote back and said:

Yes; of course it will be a good thing for the young men of Washington City, but it would be a very good thing for the young men of Detroit and Seattle and Jersey City if they had a college of mechanic arts.

He seemed to think that answered my argument. If Detroit was not able to induce the State of Michigan to locate its college at Detroit instead of Lansing, that is too bad for Detroit. So with Seattle. So with Jersey City. Jersey City should not complain because New Jersey saw fit to locate its college at New Brunswick.

But the point is that the District of Columbia has a moral right or, if you will pardon the pun, we are morally and Morrilly entitled to this appropriation, because the evident intent of the Morrill Act was to distribute this money to each separate political community.

Detroit, Seattle, and Jersey City are each one of many cities in their respective States; but the District of Columbia is a part of no one State, but is a separate political community. Size makes no difference. You give as much to Delaware as to Texas. When you come to size, we measure up pretty well. If you will look at the figures given in my brief, you will see that we had more people here in 1900 than in six or seven of the States and Territories, and nearly as many as in three or four others. Although some States are growing faster than we are, we are still by no means at the bottom of the list. Size has nothing to do with it. We are a separate political entity.

There is one feature of this argument which I should like to emphasize before I leave this first point, namely, the right of the District, as such, to this appropriation.

If I were still a resident of—I was going to say my native State of Kentucky, but I was not born in my native State. I have always quarreled with my dear mother because she found it more convenient for me to be born across the river. But I always speak of it as my native State, and I got back to it in three weeks' time. I did the best I could, I assure you.

If I were living to-day in my native State of Kentucky, I would rejoice as an American citizen at the prosperity of the University of Cincinnati; but if I saw things clearly and thought straight on the subject, I would rejoice for an additional reason at the prosperity of a strong university in the District of Columbia. Why? I am interested, as an American citizen, in every State having a good university, but I am especially interested in making it possible to find every needful form of education at the national capital. Why? Because even if I still lived in Kentucky and had never gone out of Kentucky, yet, if I thought clearly and thought straight on this subject, I would realize that for the benefit of the nation it was of supreme importance to the whole country that the city of Washington have every needful educational advantage. Our public servants are here doing the work of government, and if we can give them everything they need for the education of their children it only makes it that much easier to get and keep the services of the very best class of men. I venture the assertion that, taken in proportion to the population here, there are more bright young men, less business opportunities, and fewer collegiate advantages of a practical character than in any large city in the Union. I say it is a bad thing for us as Americans that our capital should not be fully equipped in these regards.

The second point is, How shall this District's share be used? The Morrill Act provided this fund should go to the endowment, support, and maintenance of at least one college that would teach these subjects. The actual administration of the acts bears out the liberal construction. It was left with the separate States to settle that matter as a local and practical question. In Kentucky, a private institution was utilized for this purpose until 1878, when the Kentucky Agricultural and Mechanical College was organized, and I believe the Kentucky University, as it was then called, then became incorporated as the Kentucky State University. Until 1892 Rhode Island utilized the services of Brown University, while Connecticut utilized the services of Yale until 1893, when the State established a state college of agriculture and the mechanic arts.