belongs, and until so replaced no subsequent appropriation shall be apportioned or paid to such State or Territory; and no portion of said moneys shall be applied, directly or indirectly, under any pretense whatever, to the purchase, erection, preservation, or repair of any building or buildings. An annual report by the president of each of said colleges shall be made to the Secretary of Agriculture, as well as to the Secretary of the Interior, regarding the condition and progress of each college, including statistical information in relation to its receipts and expenditures, its library, the number of its students and professors, and also as to any improvements and experiments made under the direction of any experiment stations attached to said colleges, with their costs and results, and such other industrial and economical statistics as may be regarded as useful, one copy of which shall be transmitted by mail free to all other colleges further endowed under this act.

SEC. 4. That on or before the first day of July in each year, after the passage of this act, the Secretary of the Interior shall ascertain and certify to the Secretary of the Treasury as to each State and Territory whether it is entitled to receive its share of the annual appropriation for colleges, or of institutions for colored students, under this act, and the amount which thereupon each is entitled, respectively, to receive. If the Secretary of the Interior shall withhold a certificate from any State or Territory of its appropriation the facts and reasons therefor shall be reported to the President, and the amount involved shall be kept separate in the Treasury until the close of the next Congress, in order that the State or Territory may, if it should so desire, appeal to Congress from the determination of the Secretary of the Interior. If the next Congress shall not direct such sum to be paid it shall be covered into the Treasury. And the Secretary of the Interior is hereby charged with the proper administration of this law.

SEC. 5. That the Secretary of the Interior shall annually report to Congress the disbursements which have been nade in all the States and Territories, and also whether the appropriation of any State or Territory has been withheld, and if so, the reasons therefor.

SEC. 6. Congress may at any time amend, suspend, or repeal any or all of the provisions of this act.

Approved, August 30, 1890.

INCREASE OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR COLLEGES OF AGRICULTURE AND THE MECHANIC ARTS.

[Extract from "An act making appropriations for the Department of Agriculture for the fiscal year ending June thirtieth, nineteen hundred and eight," approved March 4, 1907 (Public-No. 242).]

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

That there shall be, and hereby is, annually appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to be paid as hereinafter provided, "to each State and Territory for the more complete endowment and maintenance of agricultural colleges now established, or which may hereafter be established, in accordance with the act of Congress approved July second, eighteen hundred and sixty-two, and the act of Congress approved August thirtieth, eighteen hundred and ninety," the sum of five thousand dollars, in addition to the sums named in the said act, for the fiscal year ending June thirtieth, nineteen hundred and eight, and an annual increase of the amount of such appropriation thereafter for four years by an additional sum of five thousand dollars over the preceding year, and the annual sum to be paid thereafter to each State and Territory shall be fifty thousand dollars, to be applied only for the purposes of the agricultural colleges as defined and limited in the act of Congress approved July second, eighteen hundred and sixty-two, and the act of Congress approved August thirtieth, eighteen hundred and ninety.

That the sum hereby appropriated to the States and Territories for the further endowment and support of the colleges shall be paid by, to, and in the manner prescribed by the act of Congress approved August thirtieth, eighteen hundred and ninety, entitled "An act to apply a portion of the proceeds of the public lands to the more complete endowment and support of the colleges for

the benefit of agriculture and the mechanic arts established under the provisions of the act of Congress approved July second, eighteen hundred and sixty-two," and the expenditure of the said money shall be governed in all respects by the provisions of the said act of Congress approved July second, eighteen hundred and sixty-two, and the said act of Congress approved August thirtieth, eighteen hundred and ninety: Provided, That said colleges may use a portion of this money for providing courses for the special preparation of instructors for teaching the elements of agriculture and the mechanic arts.

FOURTH ANNUAL REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT AND OF THE TREASURER OF THE CARNEGIE FOUNDATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF TEACHING.

A second institution to retire from the list of accepted colleges and universities during the present fiscal year was the George Washington University. The circumstances of this action were as follows:

Under the rules of the foundation a college to be eligible must have a productive endowment of $200,000. In the case of the George Washington University the payment of current expenses has reduced the endowment far below this point.

The more serious question came, however, in the retirement, against their own wishes, of two professors, both men in active service and in the prime of life. These men were dismissed by the administration of the George Washington University on the ground that they could be pensioned by the Carnegie foundation and their places could be supplied by younger men at lower salaries, thereby effecting a saving at a time of financial stress.

This action seemed to the executive committee to involve two assumptions so at variance with the purposes for which the foundation was established as to call for protest. In the view of the executive committee, the arbitrary dismissal of a professor without charges was a violation of the principle of academic independence and freedom for which a college preeminently stands. In the second place, the executive committee felt obliged to protest against the assumption that the Carnegie foundation could be used as a solution of the administrative problems or the financial embarrassments which may arise in the administration of the accepted colleges. If a college may retire a professor upon the foundation because he differs with the policy of the administration or because the college can save money by employing a cheaper man in his place, the foundation would be a questionable aid to the American college professor. Such a treatment of the privileges of the foundation seemed to the committee an unjustifiable use of an endowment intended for a totally different purpose. The only effective protest against this action seemed to the committee to be the termination of the relation of the George Washingon University as an accepted institution until such time as the committee could feel convinced that the ideals of its administration were more nearly in accord with those for which the foundation stands. In accordance with the power given it under the bylaws, the committee, therefore, terminated this relation.

The committee wishes to make clear the fact that this action was not intended as a blow to the institution, but as an act in the interest of all teachers and all institutions, including the George Washington University itself. The committee would welcome the upbuilding of a strong institution of higher learning in Washington, and would gladly see men of means contribute generously to it. The committee believes, however, that the way to the development of such an institution is not to be found by expanding a college into a university framework in the expectation that the means will somehow be found to make the framework real. Such a process leads almost inevitably not only to low standards, but to financial embarrassment. The committee believes that its action will, in the long run, be recognized as taken in the interest of higher education in the District of Columbia, not to its disadvantage; and it desires to urge upon those who wish to aid education at the nation's capital a thorough

MADC 31735-10-5

going study of the sort of institution which is needed there and the financial help which ought to be given to it.

The

Washington has been for years a ground of exploitation for educational rivalries. Besides the George Washington University there is the Georgetown University of the Jesuits (an old institution), the new Catholic University of America, and the abortive attempt of the Methodists. In addition, Washington is filled with paper colleges which deal in short cuts to degrees, notwithstanding that their lists of trustees carry the names of men high in public life. George Washington University has sought sincerely and honorably to unite, as far as this is possible, all those who believe in strong and useful educational work in the District of Columbia. The old Columbian University was a good college. Whether the effort to expand into a university without the necessary income was a wise policy is questionable. Without passing any opinion on the long-discussed plan for a national university, it is worth while to ask what sort of institution of higher learning in Washington would best serve the needs and aspirations of its youth in the matter of higher education.

This question can not be answered out of hand. Washington has a population which is unique in its attitude toward education, arising out of the presence of two groups of citizens in proportions far beyond those to be found in most cities.

The first group consists of the families of army and navy officers, scientific workers, officers, and employees of the civil service, and the like. These families, composing as they do so large a proportion of the population, belong to the very class which is most intent on an education for their children and which can least afford to send their boys and girls away to college, except at great sacrifice. I have in mind families of officers in the scientific departments who, on the meager income at their disposal, found the opportunity offered in the George Washington University invaluable. It is true this same situation presents itself in every town and city, and it would be fatal to go about establishing colleges in the effort to meet the needs of individual families. Such cases can be met only by sacrifice on the part of parents and children. The question is, however, whether there is so large a group of such families in Washington as to justify the maintenance of a college.

The second group consists of young men serving for a longer or shorter time as secretaries of Senators or Representatives, clerks in the departments and in similar places. Many of these are alert, ambitious, and energetic, ready to devote afternoon and evening hours to hard work in order to get an education. The presence of these two groups-families on modest means, but with educational ambitions, and young men on salaries with spare time for improvement-makes Washington an unusual educational field. The situation, while lending itself to a vigorous educational activity, carries with it peculiar temptations to superficiality in methods. Both these classes of people, particularly the latter, are looking for short cuts in education. It is this demand, together with the loose educational laws of the District, which enables the paper colleges of Washington-those which sell degrees on easy terms-to exist. The young man in the departments who seeks an education desires the shortest, easiest, and most direct path to a degree in engineering or education or medicine or law, so that he may earn money. Very rarely is he concerned for the breadth and liberality of training which prepares the way for the true teacher, or lawyer, or physician. However desirable it may be to furnish educational opportunities to these and other students, there can be no reason for affording these facilities on lower terms than other good colleges offer.

It is further to be noted that the desirability of maintaining a good college and engineering school in Washington is a very different thing from the question of maintaining a university with its law school and its medical school. In the professions, especially in medicine, there is no excuse, at this day of oversupply, for the maintenance of professional schools which rest on low standards or which do not provide the facilities for professional teaching on the basis of the modern practice.

The real questions which face the George Washington University seem to me be these: What sort of institution of higher learning is suited to the needs and population of the District of Columbia? How much of the work of such an institution can the George Washington University undertake with its present resources? Can a board of trustees be secured in Washington which will give time and thought to the work of an institution of higher learning?

Such a study of an educational field and its needs is most necessary in the present state of American education. Heretofore there has been little wellconsidered effort to ascertain what sort of institution might best serve the needs of a given community. The great brood of colleges which have sprung up in the last thirty or forty years have generally been imitations of the older colleges. They have been organized on the principle of starting the college first and getting the students into it afterwards. Even such a study of Washington as that to which I have alluded leaves out of consideration the fact that Washington has to-day the largest urban negro population in the world. It may well be that some form of industrial school in Washington is more important to civilization than to add one more agency for training engineers, doctors, and lawyers. The whole matter is one to be approached from the standpoint of a thorough study of educational needs and educational means.

О