 | Catalogue of the officers and students of the University of Virginia |  |
EXTRACTS FROM A REPORT
OF THE
COMMITTEE OF SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES,
TO THE LEGISLATURE, AGAINST THE EXPEDIENCY OF WITHDRAWING
THE ANNUITY FROM THE UNIVERSITY.
The committee of schools and colleges having as directed by a
resolution of the house of delegates, passed on the 22d day of December,
1844, carefully investigated the past history and present
condition and influences of the University of Virginia, with the
view of forming their opinion upon the question of "repealing the
act of assembly granting an annuity of 15,000 dollars" to that institution,
beg leave to report the following facts and considerations
as the result of their inquiries:
On reverting to the known intentions of the illustrious founder of
the university, and his distinguished co-labourers, and of the legislatures
by whose enlightened liberality it was set in operation, we
recognise as the leading object of its establishment, the institution
of a higher and more thorough system of intellectual training, than
had yet been attempted either in our own or any of the sister states,
and through this means, the introduction of a better intellectual
culture in our colleges, academies and elementary schools.
In the period of twenty years, which comprises the as yet brief
history of the university, it would be unreasonable to expect more
than a very partial attainment of all the salutary objects which
inspired the hopes of its founders. The great literary institutions
of the old world, which now exercise so benign an influence on the
progress of letters and of general education, have gathered their
strength to do good by the slow growth of successive ages; and
although in our own time and country more speedy effects are to
be anticipated, because wiser and more practical methods of culture
are adopted, the extensive diffusion of these good influences
through the public mind is necessarily a gradual, though a continually
progressive operation.
That the university has been successful in establishing within
our borders a higher and more thorough system of scientific and
literary training than had previously been accessible any where in
the United States, is, we think, admitted by all who are familiar
with its course of studies, and with the influences these have exerted
through its well trained alumni on the methods and aims of
academic teaching in many sections of the state. In proof of this,
in literature and science, whether professionally or with general
objects, we would call attention to the extent and thoroughness of
the instruction which it offers, and to the system of intellectual
culture it adopts.
SYSTEM OF INTELLECTUAL CULTURE.
On comparing the system of intellectual culture adopted in this
institution with that in use in the higher seminaries of learning in
other states, we remark two distinctive features, which, from their
influence upon the interests of education, may be deemed worthy
of especial note. The first is the privilege allowed to students of
selecting such studies as have a more immediate reference to the
pursuits in which they design afterwards to engage, and the second,
the practice of combining to an unusual extent oral instruction in
the form of lectures, with the use of text-books.
Election of Studies: The former of these peculiarities of system,
originating in a wise regard to the practical wants of society, has
been found well adapted to the genius of our country, and at the
same time eminently favourable to that thoroughness of knowledge
which in a just plan of education is even more important than variety
of attainment. In virtue of this system, the student preparing
for divinity, law, or medicine, is enabled to secure substantial
attainments in ethics, metaphysics, and political economy, or in
chemistry and general physics; the young engineer, in mathematics,
mechanics, and geology; and the incipient teacher, in the
languages, mathematics, belles lettres, and such other portions of
knowledge as will accomplish him for his intended pursuits; while
in neither case is he required to spend his resources and his time
in the acquirement of branches which are but slightly related to
the objects he has in view.
Nor does the privilege thus granted often lead, on the part of
those who aim at a general education, to a neglect of the more difficult
but yet indispensable branches of study, since custom has
established a particular order of studies to which, with some modifications,
the great majority conform. Besides, all are aware that,
although a separate diploma is conferred in each department,
nothing short of a full and thorough course in all the academic
schools can prepare the student for the highest honours to which
he may aspire.
It is not unworthy of remark, that the advantages of such an
election of studies, clearly evinced in the experience of the University,
have been substantially recognised of late by the adoption at
Harvard, and we believe other prominent institutions abroad, of a
similar feature, to replace the Procrustes system hitherto in general
use. But we may be allowed to add, that, while engrafting upon
their old established methods this liberal improvement, they have
allowed much latitude of election even to their candidates for the
University, have held out inducements to the student to choose his
studies rather in accordance with his fancy or love of ease, than
with the claims of a rigorous mental discipline and a more profound
and thorough scholarship.
Instruction by Lectures along with Text-Books: Adverting now
to the other distinctive feature in the system of the University, the
extensive use of lectures as a means of training and instruction, we
would call attention to the fact that distinguished scholars abroad
agree in regarding this mode of teaching as the most valuable improvement
in the plan of university instruction witnessed in modern
times, and that they ascribe to its inciting influences, both upon
teachers and their pupils, much of that marvellous advancement in
letters and science which has made so many of the seats of learning
of the old world the renowned centres of a knowledge no less
beneficent than bright.
The advantages of an extensive use of this method in association
with text-books, as compared with the old and still very usual practice
of exclusive text-book study and recitation, although as yet
but imperfectly recognised in many of the colleges in this country,
must, we think, become apparent from considering first, the greater
impressiveness of knowledge orally conveyed, and secondly, the
more wholesome discipline of the faculties which such a method
renders habitual.
Respecting the former of these considerations, it may be enough
to add, that this greater force and permanency of the impressions
made upon the mind by the teachings of the lecturer, proceeding
from a very simple law of our mental organization, is exemplified
by the familiar experience of all, as well in the lessons imparted to
infancy by maternal lips as in the oral instructions descending from
the forum, the pulpit, and the bar. In proof of the prevailing conviction
on this subject in Europe as well as at home, reference might
be made to the eagerness with which crowds of all classes of society
gather around the desk of the distinguished expounder of philosophy,
science, or taste, and the earnest activity of thought with which
they analyze and assimilate the knowledge he imparts. Indeed, so
highly is this method of teaching valued at the present day, that
while it has been made a prominent feature in the system of all the
most active and successful institutions of learning in the old world,
and has been legitimately applied as a most efficient mean of popular
instruction by the learned and wise, it has not unfrequently been
spuriously employed to deceive the simple and to tax the purses and
the credulity of the uninformed.
In judging of its good influences we should bear in mind that
they show themselves as much in the increased vivacity, clearness
and originality of thought excited in the teacher, as in the
quickened apprehension and sharpened criticism of those whom he
instructs, and that thus by a reactive sympathy of thought the one
becomes better qualified to teach, and the other more ready fully
the systematic study of well-selected books, mere lectures alone
would prove but an ineffective means of thorough collegiate instruction.
But when united with the daily or occasional study of a
text-book, they conduce, as we think, to a more wholesome discipline
of the faculties than any other collegiate system could
secure.
Experience has amply shown that a large proportion of the students
at academies and higher institutions, where book-lessons are
confided in too much, fall into a mechanical routine of unreflecting
labour, and discovering that it is easier to remember words than to
analyze and compare ideas, cease to apply the higher faculties of
thought to the subject of their studies. And even where this worst
of all the abuses of scholastic training does not follow, we but too
generally find them resting with implicit confidence on the reasonings,
and resorting to the very language of their book, without so
much as daring to frame for themselves other arguments or illustrations,
or even imaging that such are to be discovered. Thus
habitually leaning upon the thoughts, and repeating the words of
others, accustomed to be satisfied with whatever stands in verba
magistri, their powers of thought are but imperfectly developed,
and whatever of invention they may have had is enfeebled or paralysed
by disuse. Inured to influences such as these, and scarcely
permitted to walk alone, how little is the mind prepared for that
vigorous and independent exercise of its powers demanded in the
pursuits of life, and how utterly unfit for the hardy achievements
of original and inventive genius?
Glancing now at the other, and, as we believe, far better method
of instruction, we discern a different order of effects. Here the
pupil, accustomed in the lectures of his teacher to hear doubtful
questions discussed, and to see new proofs and illustrations given
of established truths, catches the enthusiasm of critical or inventive
thought, and learns to reason and to demonstrate for himself.
Taught by his own efforts rightly to value the systems of philosophy
and science, and the productions of taste, which have been
wrought out by the master minds of our race, he acquires a deep
reverence for their authority, because it is the authority of truth.
But along with this modest deference to the oracles of knowledge,
he cherishes that manly self-dependence of thought which springs
from the conscious vigour due to the free training of his faculties;
and when he quits the hall of alma mater, he carriers with him the
spirit of an intellectual freeman beneath the bright insignia of his
first literary achievement.
HONORARY DEGREES NOT GRANTED AT THE UNIVERSITY.
While referring to those features in the organization of the University
which distinguish it from most of the leading institutions in
highest merits, it is appropriate to state, that by an express law its
authorities are forbidden to grant honourary degrees, and that accordingly
no diploma of compliment has ever yet received its imprimatur.
In most other colleges and universities, as is well known,
such honours are extended not only to those who have earned some
reputation in divinity, medicine, or law, or even in the uncongenial
pursuits of party politics, but are accorded as of course in the case
of master of arts, after the interval of a few years, to all who have
taken their first academical degree. Rejecting a system so little
friendly to true literary adancement, the legislators of the University
have, we think wisely, made their highest academic honour,
that of master of arts of the University of Virginia, the genuine
test of diligent and successful training, and disdaining such literary
almsgiving, have firmly barred the door against the demands of
spurious merit and noisy popularity.
INFLUENCE OF THE UNIVERSITY IN IMPROVING THE SYSTEM OF INSTRUCTION
AT ACADEMIES AND COMMON SCHOOLS.
Having thus shown satisfactorily, as we think, that the University
is in reality accomplishing the leading purpose for which it
was established, to wit, the institution of a high and thorough system
of literary and intellectual training worthy of our age and
state, let us briefly glance at the influences it has exerted upon the
methods and aims of academic and ordinary teaching in various
sections of the commonwealth. Bearing in mind the short period
to which its operations have been limited, and the unyielding hostility
with which new modes and objects of instruction are ever
greeted by the lovers of the old regime, we discover much matter
for rejoicing in the already signal advances which, through the
efforts of some of its alumni, it has effected in the system of academic
education in various quarters of the State. In the admirable
institutions which they have established, following the general
course of training by which their own powers were conducted to
honourable scholarship at the University, they have annually furnished
to their alma mater, in the pupils they have sent, the highest
evidence of the excellence of their instructions. Without intending
to draw invidious distinctions, where there is so much to commend
in all, we may be allowed to refer in proof of what we have said,
to the academies of Powers, Tutwiler, Maupin, Coleman, Harrison,
Davis, Bushnell, Barksdale, Galt, Slaughter, McKee, Turner,
Saunders, &c., as not only excelling in true scholarship any similar
institutions previously within the borders of Virginia, but as more
than vieing in extent and thoroughness of training, in the languages,
mathematics and general physics, with most of the highly reputed
colleges of the land.
From such centres of sound instruction there cannot fail to be
diffused better systems of mental culture not only among the other
increase in number and influence, we may confidently anticipate a
general extension of these salutary effects.
Were special evidence required of the improvement thus effected
by the University in the education of the poorer class of our citizens,
numerous instances could be adduced, taken from various
quarters of the state, of teachers of the poor trained at the University
or in the schools of her alumni, carrying into their humbler
sphere all the precious benefits of the wisest methods of instruction.
We may thus regard each of the higher academies conducted by
the alumni as a normal school for an extensive neighbourhood,
destined by its example and by the teachers it sends forth, to
banish from the inferior schools the ignorant pretension which has
heretofore so generally occupied the chair of instruction, and to
supply its place by the clear and really profitable teachings of men
trained to accurate knowledge and enlightened methods.
Looking to those alumni who have attached themselves to the
learned professions, to agriculture or to public affairs, and many
of whom, though young, are already earning the substantial
honours due to genius disciplined and enriched by strenuous academic
toil, the friends of the university cannot doubt that they also,
shedding their useful light around, whether by quiet social influence,
or energetic efforts in the public councils, are giving their earnest
and efficient aid in the extension of sound education throughout
the commonwealth.
NUMERICAL SUCCESS OF THE UNIVERSITY.
But while as we have seen the great objects of the founders of
the University have been fulfilled so far as the method and extent
of its instructions are concerned, it cannot be disguised that in
another respect their hopes have been less fully realized. In the
number of the students annually frequenting its halls, their sanguine
calculations are found to have outstripped the progress of the institution.
Yet it should here be remarked "that the number of
individuals who receive at the University of Virginia the benefits
of a collegiate education, is far greater than could be inferred from
a comparison with the numbers of other similar institutions in
other parts of the Union, since in these, in consequence of that
gradation of classes through which every student is required to
pass, most students continue at college four years; whereas under
the system pursued here of allowing the student to attend such
schools only as he selects, and to give his undivided attention to
them, he obtains the honours of which he is most ambitious in a
much shorter time. It would seem from comparing the whole
number of students at the University in the last ten years, (1182,)
with the number of matriculations in the same time, 2058, that the
way the number educated here may be equal to the number educated
in colleges whose average annual number of students may
be twice as great. The number of new students annually received
at the University has in ten years averaged 118, and it is believed
that there are not two colleges or universities in the Union, which
have, on an average, received a greater number."
But while it would thus appear that the University even in this
point of view has been far more successful than is often imagined,
various influences have co-operated in debarring it from that great
numerical prosperity which seems to have warmed the anticipations
of its founders.
Injurious impressions as to the irreligious tendencies of the institution.—Among
the causes of this shortcoming, especially in the
earlier years of its history, we may in the first place mention the
opinion very prevalent at the time, that irreligious influences were
permitted and even exerted within its walls. An opinion which,
though we are happy to say now very generally abandoned, is
still found casting a shade of prejudice over the feelings of a few.
Without entering into any inquiry as to the foundation of this impression
as prevailing in former years, it is not inappropriate here
to state, that no shadow of a pretext now exists, or has for many
years existed, favourable to such a suspicion. We speak on the
authority of the numerous pious divines of our own state and from
abroad, who have either officiated as chaplains at the University, or
have otherwise become familiar with its internal influences and
usages, when we assert, that in no similar institution in this country,
is there a greater degree of respect voluntarily accorded to
the ministers and ordinances of Christianity, and in few are more
numerous instances to be found of devout piety as well among the
students as the professors and their families.
In further proof of the prevailing disposition on this subject at
the University, we may point to the fact that the chaplain, appointed
annually from among the leading denominations in our state,
is supported exclusively by the voluntary contributions of the professors
and other officers, and of the students, and that through the
same means a Bible Society and Sunday School have long been
in useful operation. It is but proper in this place to add, that while
enjoying these high religious opportunities, the University, by the
annual succession of chaplains of different denominations, is secured
from that sectarian influence which in any other arrangement could
not fail to impair its usefulness as a state institution.
Defective discipline in the early years of the University: Another
obstacle to the numerical success of the institution, perhaps more
influential even than that just stated, has arisen from the errors of
discipline committed in the early period of its history. In an enterprise
so novel in many of its features, it is not surprising that the
scheme of organization, however good throughout in theory should
During this experimental stage of its career, it is well known
that habits of dissipation and extravagance, with other offensive
irregularities, prevailed among the students to a lamentable extent.
The unfavourable impression thus occasioned in the public mind,
far outlasting any reasonable cause in the government of the university,
has continued, though with greatly diminished force, to
obstruct its advancement even to the present day. The tragical
occurrence which several years ago deprived the institution of one
of its noblest ornaments, in the person of the learned and pious Professor
Davis, though solely chargeable to the unprovoked and
reckless passions of a single youth, and entirely unconnected with
considerations bearing upon the general discipline, was but too
well calculated to extend the yet remaining prejudices caused by
its earlier career. Yet it is pleasing to reflect that in spite of this
terrible blow, from which not a few predicted that it would never
be able to recover, and notwithstanding the depressing effects of
the times, felt in our literary institutions as well as elsewhere, its
career has since been marked by a steady increase in the number
of its students. About 200 youths are now prosecuting their studies
in the University, comprising in the academic courses, we believe,
about one half of the entire number of young Virginians at present
occupied in such pursuits, so that, should no untoward interference
cripple its powers, we are justified in expecting within the next few
years a larger class than has ever yet been gathered in its halls.
As respects the efficient character of its discipline, as now enforced,
and the general absence of college vices and irregularities,
we are fully authorized in saying that the University is most favourably
distinguished in comparison with similar institutions abroad;
while we may add, that the general excellence of its regulations is
in nothing more strongly marked, than in the earnest activity of a
large portion of the students in their literary tasks.
Inadequate preparatory training: Along with the adverse influences
above referred to, we should not neglect another whose
effects in a great degree beyond the control of the institution,
though gradually diminishing, must continue for some time to restrain
its numbers and its usefulness. We allude to the defective
preparatory training of by far the greater number of the youth
educated at the ordinary academies and schools in Virginia and
the more southern states. This lamentable defect, operating as a
check upon the laudable aspirations of many who under other circumstances
would be eager to profit by the higher teachings of the
university, turns them away from her halls to stifle their cravings
at home, or to seek in some other scene more easy access to literary
honour, or should they venture into her precincts, without
great energy of purpose, sometimes so fills them with discouragement
as to divert their ambition to unworthy or pernicious aims.
OBJECTIONS TO THE CONTINUANCE OF THE ANNUITY CONSIDERED—
GENERAL AND ECONOMICAL EXPEDIENCY OF SUSTAINING THE INSTITUTION
BY THE CUSTOMARY APPROPRIATION.
We have now presented a brief but we trust sufficiently extended
view of the intellectual plan of the University, the practical workings
of its peculiar methods, and the general influence exerted by
it on the public mind. Other and less welcome topics now claim
our consideration.
We have already alluded to the rather imperfect numerical success
which has thus far rewarded its efforts, and indicated several
of the causes to which this result is to be ascribed. These injurious
influences springing from a misapprehension of the tendencies and
an ignorance of the aims of the university, have not been confined
in their effects to a mere withholding of students from its halls.
Perhaps no literary institution ever established in this country has
in the community to which it belongs been so little encouraged
amid the difficulties of its earlier career by a just appreciation of
its peculiar literary merits, and certainly none has ever been called
upon to contend against a stronger array of prejudice and misconception.
This fact, seemingly so inconsistent with the sympathy
and liberal intelligence characterizing the people of this commonwealth,
can only be explained by the extraordinary absence throughout
the state of correct information respecting the objects and
operations of the institution. Indeed it would seem that its remoteness
from the large towns, and the imperfect facilities of intercourse
which we as yet possess, as well as the domestic habits incident to
the prevailing pursuit of our citizens, have been in no small degree
instrumental in perpetuating the misconceptions which have obstructed
its progress. Its officers and friends too, from whose
stated or occasional publications such needful information was to
have been expected, confiding perhaps too implicitly in the sure
dissemination of truth, and fastidiously averse to the display of
pretensions justly measureable only by their effects, have we think
unwisely omitted the appropriate means of correcting the prevailing
misconceptions so unfavourable to a just appreciation of the
University. Without intending therefore to ascribe to indifference
or neglect of duty a silence which has been suggested by the modest
dignity of true scholarship, we cannot but believe that had due care
been used to disseminate from time to time interesting details relating
to the instruction and discipline of the university, prejudice and
misconception would long since have vanished, and the pre-eminent
merits of the institution would now every where throughout
the state be the subject of a patriotic congratulation.
So little however is the true character of the University understood
in many quarters of the commonwealth, that we hear annually
from patriotic and otherwise enlightened persons measures of hostility
sustained by an appeal to the strangest errors and misconceptions,
measures which we are sure could never have been suggested
and report of becoming personally informed concerning its plan
and operations.
As these unfriendly indications in the form in which they have
been recently displayed are in the opinion of many the token of
possible dangers threatened to the university, and as they must in
any event have the effect of confirming distrust and hostility in
minds not properly informed, we propose briefly to review the
several topics which make up the usual burden of complaint.
Of the alleged great expensiveness of Education at the University:
One of the objections most commonly urged against the
University is the great and unnecessary expense to which its students
are subjected. It is true that the cost of an academic education
is somewhat larger at this institution than at a number of the
colleges, especially in the northwestern and eastern states. But it
is surely no necessary inference from this that such an education
is purchased at a dearer rate, unless at the same time it can be
shown that the extent and thoroughness of the intellectual training
at the University does not keep pace with the increased expense.
Now among those who are most familiar with the plan and literary
administration of these institutions in other states, and who have
had opportunities of comparing their course of instruction, as
actually conducted, and not as set forth in print, with the extensive
system of the University, there is and can be no hesitation in affirming
that measured by the just standard of the intrinsic value as well
as the cost of education, the University is in reality a cheaper institution
than a majority of the colleges in the United States.
Looking to the ample and costly apparatus of instruction in
operation at the University, through its numerous corps of professors,
its extensive library, as well as to the high system of teaching
it pursues, and contrasting these with the opportunities of knowledge
which are held out by the so-called cheap colleges of the
country, it seems to us to be strangely unreasonable to make a
small difference of expense in the two cases, the basis of prejudice
and complaint. But comparing in this respect our University with
Harvard, the only institution in this country with which we think it
can in fairness be compared, we find this pretext for objection entirely
removed. By an estimate of the usual average of the year's
expenses of each student at that distinguished University, it will be
seen that the amount is about the same, and probably a little greater
there than with us. Besides it should be remembered that collegiate
education is necessarily in general more expensive in the
southern than the eastern and western states, so that while its cost
at the University does not largely exceed that at William and Mary,
it is even less than the expense at some of the better institutions in
the south and southwest.
Of the alleged Aristocratic character of the Institution.—But this
objection of expensiveness to the student is urged sometimes in a
different and still more hostile form, tending to foster very injurious
According to this view, the University, though established and now
partly supported by the contributions of all, is essentially an aristocratic
institution, beneficial exclusively to the comparatively rich,
and a tax without an equivalent to the poor. It is indeed true, that
as a general rule, those only can avail themselves of its opportunities,
whose means enable them to defray the necessary expenses;
but it is far from being correct that a large majority of the students
are the children of wealthy and so called aristocratic families.
Much the greater number are derived from the middle ranks of
life, where a moderate competency, husbanded with care, affords
the means of completing their education at the University; and not
a few belong to that noble class of poor young men who bring with
them their well saved earnings as teachers, or in other walks, to
exchange for the literary distinction after which they aspire. Instances
also occur of indigent students of superior merit receiving
gratuitous instruction from the professors, and by a regulation of
the faculty, all students preparing for the ministry, are exempted
from the usual fees. In view of an extended philanthropy, it would
doubtless be desirable that all the youths of the country, competent
to profit by the higher kinds of instruction should enjoy the precious
advantages of a university education. But it must be remembered that
the opportunities of such instruction must from their very nature be
expensive, and there is no legerdemain either of individual schemers
or legislative bodies by which they can be secured to the poor without
being paid for either by a class or by the entire community.
While we admit, in common with the friends of liberal knowledge
at the University, as well as throughout the state, that important
public benefit would arise from any measure, which, without
impairing the general usefulness of the institution, would open its
halls to a deserving class of students, whom poverty now detains
at home, we feel it due to patriotism and truth, strongly to repel
the unjust and pernicious sentiment that the humbler portion of our
fellow-citizens, though contributors to its support, receive no benefits
in return.
He must indeed have observed to but little purpose who could
deliberately adopt an impression so entirely inconsistent with the
obvious workings of the social system of our state and country.
Who of experience has not marked the diffusive benefits with which
one well trained mind can brighten and bless an extensive neighbourhood?
Who has not seen its beneficent activity in promoting
the education of the poor by the fostering of good schools—increasing
their comfort and prosperity by agricultural improvements, or
protecting their rights and soothing their physical sufferings by the
skill and learning of the professions; and who does not feel that the
best interests of the poor no less than of the rich, resting on the
wisdom of the public councils, are therefore dependent upon the
large and accurate knowledge of the framers of our laws.
As further proof that the poor enjoy an important share in the
previously given of the valuable labours of the alumni, and their
well trained pupils, in advancing the education of this portion of
the intellect of the commonwealth.
PLANS FOR RENDERING THE UNIVERSITY EXTENSIVELY ACCESSIBLE TO
THE POOR.
In estimating the expenses of a session at the University, it seems
to be very commonly imagined that the cost of tuition is a chief
item in the account, and that a reduction in the fees paid to the
professors would so diminish the amount as to throw wide the doors
of the institution to large numbers now unable to attend. The unreasonableness
of this view is apparent from the fact that while
with the greatest economy the whole expenses of the student could
not be brought below three hundred dollars, the cost of tuition
would be only seventy-five dollars. Granting, therefore, that there
should be an entire omission instead of a reduction of the fees, there
would still remain for board, lodging, fuel, books, and other incidental
expenses, a sum nearly, if not quite as likely as the entire
amount, to exclude the needy student from the halls of the University.
But it may be urged that the whole or a part of the annuity paid
the University might be diverted from its present objects to the support
of such a class of students, and that the institution might still
be continued in its wonted activity by the income derived from
those who pay. Were such a result likely to ensue, it would doubtless
be both wise and patriotic to make so benevolent an appropriation
of the public funds. But those who are acquainted with this
or any of the higher institutions of learning do not require to be
told that far different consequences would follow any important
reduction of the resources on which it has been accustomed to
depend. It might and probably would be continued for a time, but
so crippled in its means and degraded in its organization as to be
no longer worthy of the high purposes of its founders. Sinking to
the level of the inferior institutions of the land, the University would
cease to attract the ambitious students of other States, and vainly
pointing to her once gushing fountains of knowledge, now dwindled,
and perhaps impure, she would in sadness see the choicest intellects
of Virginia seeking in distant haunts those living waters of
science which she could no longer proffer to their minds.
And granting that surviving this shock, in a long course of years,
aided by the returning liberality of the state, she should partially
recover from its paralysing effects, the arduous task would recur
of moulding her discipline and instructions to new and loftier views
before she could resume the station of dignity and usefulness from
which she had been cast down, and thus again she would be called
to meet the difficulties that attended her early organization.
And may we not ask what adequate compensation would the
which led to her establishment and endowment by the state?
The whole of the present annuity of fifteen thousand dollars would
not cover the expense of educating and maintaining at the University
more than fifty gratuitous students, and this too, supposing that
the professors and officers received no salaries, and that the sum
was appropriated exclusively to this charitable purpose. But enfeebled
and humbled as she would be by the withdrawal of this
fund, if indeed she were not wholly prostrated, it cannot be doubted
that her numbers would be greatly reduced, her teachings made.
meagre and superficial, and that therefore the experiment would
result in a serious loss instead of a gain to the education of the state.
In this view of the consequences of such an attempt at opening
the University to the poor, we would have no hesitation in strongly
condemning the experiment as at once destructive of whatever is
really valuable in the institution, and injurious to the commonwealth
at large. Besides, other and truly effective means for securing this
desirable end are, we think, entirely within our reach.
Of the various schemes which might be devised, there is one,
which, preserving unimpaired the general usefulness and the dignity
of the University by leaving the annuity untouched, and requiring
no appropriation from the treasury of the state, has been in part
suggested by views long entertained by the Faculty of the University.
This we may be allowed briefly to indicate as follows:
Limiting the operation of the plan, in the beginning at least, to
one student from each senatorial district, we would propose that
the indigent youth having been prepared for university instruction
by the training of the grammar-school and the academy, and having
evinced throughout that marked intelligence and industry which
would qualify as well as entitle him to a superior education, should
be subjected to a preliminary examination by the judges, or such
other competent board residing in the district, as the Legislature
might authorise. Having thus satisfactorily shown his capacity to
profit by the higher teachings of the University, he should then be
sent thither and there maintained for a period not longer than two
years, at the cost of the district, the fund for this purpose being
raised by a levy or such other means as the Legislature might
ordain. It should moreover be made the condition on which this
precious opportunity was afforded, that each of these beneficiaries
of the public be required, after completing his course at the University,
to devote himself for a specified time to the business of instruction.
Aided by the liberality of the Faculty, who, we are
authorised to say, have expressed their willingness to promote such
a scheme of benevolence by their gratuitous instruction, the entire
charge of maintenance and education, including books, stationery,
and clothing, would not much exceed two hundred dollars—a sum
too small to be felt as a tax in any district of the state, and utterly
insignificant when weighed against that active and in some cases
splendid usefulness to which it would raise a large and precious
of the effect of such a plan, that while from the members of a
normal school thus organised and taught, extensive benefits could
not fail to accrue to the public generally, the University itself
would be rewarded by the earnest sympathy and good will of that
numerous class of our citizens who, from causes beyond its control,
are now debarred from its instructions.
As a summary of our views on the important subject of affording
to the poor opportunities of education at the University, we would
then say:
First. That the University was founded for the express object,
not of educating any particular class, but of furnishing the means
of high and thorough intellectual training, and by example and influence
of raising the general standard of education through the
state; and that while it has most completely attained the former
of these ends, it has in spite of obstacles made important steps
towards the latter.
Secondly. That these ends, deemed by the founders of the institution
of the highest interest to the state, are still no less than then,
just objects of patriotic solicitude.
Thirdly. That these objects must inevitably be defeated by withdrawing
from the institution the annuity it has heretofore received,
and that the heavy injury thus inflicted upon the interests of education,
would not be attended by a gain to the poorer classes in
any degree commensurate with the general loss.
Fourthly and lastly. That therefore the only effective method of
securing to the indigent a large share of the direct advantages of
university instruction is, either by an appropriation from the Literary
fund for that purpose, or as just described, by district contributions,
aided, if desired, by the liberality of the Faculty.
In what we have now said, the supposition is implied, that in
withholding from the University a part or all of its customary annuity,
the object in view was the diversion of the fund to a kindred
benevolent and patriotic purpose. To those, if such there be, who
would seriously give countenance to this measure on other grounds,
who would degrade our University from its honourable pre-eminence,
and tear from the escutcheon of the state its brightest literary
star, to bestow a few thousand dollars on objects foreign to
the sacred uses of education, or to scatter them in pittances to the
public schools, we have no argument to present. Let them listen
to the pleadings of the aspiring young students around them, who
ask that the springs of knowledge for which they thirst, shall be
rather widened and deepened than closed up for ever. Let them
ponder the motives of the republican sage and patriot, whose wisdom
taught him, that in giving to his beloved Virginia the high
instructions of the University, he was conferring a benefit in which
by diffusive influence every citizen of the commonwealth must share.
And finally, let them remember that the glory of the state and her
noblest influences abroad must largely depend on the literary
to be withheld, even were this the chief benefit it conferred, would,
in the view of the liberal and wise, be but a small price for that
honourable distinction in letters which it has already enabled her
to achieve.
ALLEGED EXTRAVAGANT INCOMES OF THE PROFESSORS.
Among the complaints made against the University, we sometimes
hear it urged that the incomes of the professors are extravagantly
large, and that a regard to republican moderation, as well
as a cheapening of the expenses of instruction, require them to be
reduced. In the last four sessions, including the one now in progress,
the average income of all the professors has been very nearly
as follows:
| In the session of 1841-42, | $2,300 |
| In the session of 1842-43, | 2,250 |
| In the session of 1843-44, | 2,150 |
| In the session of 1844-45, | 2,350 |
It thus appears that the average for the whole period of four
sessions, may be set down at twenty-three hundred dollars for each
professor. That this sum exceeds the income of the professors in
a number of our literary institutions, is undoubtedly true. But it
is equally certain that it does not surpass, and in many instances
falls short of that of the teachers generally in seminaries of distinguished
literary rank. Thus the receipts of those professors who
are steadily employed in a full course of duty in Cambridge, in
Columbia College, New York, at West Point, in the collegiate department
of the University of Pennsylvania, of several of those in
Princeton, in the University of South Carolina, and several other
institutions in the Southern States, are as great, and in many instances
greater, than are received by the professors of our University.
And it should be borne in mind, that the comparative cheapness
of the means of living, and of the prevailing habits of society,
has the effect of bringing the smaller emoluments of the teachers
in many of the New England and Western colleges more nearly
to an equality with the receipts of those elsewhere who are more
liberally paid.
It should also be remarked that in many of our institutions the
numerous tutors who share the inferior duties of the professors, and
thus greatly lighten their toils, divide the emoluments of the department,
and thus very properly reduce the incomes of the principal
instructors in a ratio somewhat corresponding to the diminution of
their labours. At our University, on the contrary, the tasks of
tutor and professor fall upon the same individual, and those who
are familiar with the daily routine of instruction, especially in some
of its schools, well know the unceasing drudgery it involves. Comparing
the emoluments at Cambridge and most other prominent
leading department or school, it will be found that, for the amount
of laborious teaching they perform, the professors at the University
are less liberally rewarded than their brethren at any of the institutions
in view. In a word, the full circle of instruction in any one
school or department, is really obtained at much less cost at the
University than by their complex system it can be with them.
But we turn to another view of the question, comporting, we
think, better with right conceptions of the high interest it involves.
The qualifications which fit a professor for the duties of any chair
at a distinguished seat of science and letters are such as are won
only by long years of studious labour, and of abstinence from the
pleasing relaxations of society. They are the mingled fruits of
genius and perseverance, matured often at the cost of health, and
generally by the sacrifice of many a plan of easy self-advancement.
They are the gathered treasures wrought with anxious toil from
amid the deep labyrinths of thought, to be sent abroad with the
impress of truth, as a precious part of the intellectual currency of
the world.
Are qualifications thus rare, difficult of attainment, and valuable
in application, to be estimated as but of little price? Compared
with the easy training which prepares men for the ordinary vocations
of life, they are surely worthy of at least an equal remuneration.
Besides, we should remember the toil and confinement of the
professor, as well in his closet as in the presence of his class, in
forming our estimate of the value of his services. Yet, with all
his hard-earned acquirements in science and letters, and his daily
exhausting labours of instruction and discipline, his emoluments at
the University, thus alleged to be extravagant, will scarcely vie
with those of the middle class of lawyers, physicians, and merchants
in any of the thriving communities of our country.
The cultivators of letters and science, eminently social in their
activity, and especially so in modern times, naturally seek the incentives
and rewards of their efforts in the wide circle of emulous
spirits gathered in the larger cities. Nor can we expect that small
pecuniary inducements will suffice to tempt the really worthy of
their number to exchange such congenial scenes for the isolation
of a professor's chair, even though it be one in our honoured University.
Even the more liberal compensation formerly given has
proved, as is well known, insufficient in some instances to secure
the services of distinguished scholars invited to its halls, and has
not prevented the resignation of many professors who had for a
time filled its stations with undenied success. To stint their emoluments
then would be at once to exclude from its chairs the commanding
abilities and attainments necessary to accomplish the
high ends for which it was established, to paralyze the living spirit
of its organization, and to degrade this noble institution into a
cumbrous machine for class-book recitations and superficial, though
it might be plausible, academic routine.
ENDOWMENT OF THE UNIVERSITY AS COMPARED WITH OTHER INSTITUTIONS
OF LIKE RANK.
In claiming from the commonwealth a continuance of the pecuniary
help heretofore accorded to her, the University only asks, in
behalf of the great interests of education, for that just and reasonable
support which is essential to the discharge of her peculiar
functions in the intellectual training of the youth of the state. If this
higher and more thorough training be really as important to the
welfare and honour of the community, as the wise and patriotic of
our own and other countries have uniformly maintained, then Virginia
cannot without grave injury to her interests and her reputation,
dispense with such an institution as her university. It only
remains to be considered at what rate, compared with other communities,
she purchases these precious advantages. On this point
we do not hesitate to say, that adverting to the great comprehensiveness
of the scheme of actual instruction in the University, and
comparing her income with that of other prominent institutions
sustained either by public liberality or private munificence, her
annuity of 15,000 dollars cannot be regarded as more than a merely
moderate endowment.
The most richly endowed universities of this country cannot be
compared in their resources with the long established institutions of
Europe. Cambridge and Oxford in England, and the University of
Edinburgh in Scotland, are possessed of incomes the accumulated
growth of ages, which vie with the revenues of some of the most
opulent states of the Union, and which far exceed the aggregate
income of all the universities and colleges in our land. Many of
the German universities have resources almost equally extensive,
and there is probably not one of them of reputation, whose means
do not exceed that of any university or college in the United States.
In most of them the professors and other officers, forming a very
numerous corps, receive their salaries directly from government,
and are regarded as a part of the official organization of the state.
Referring to the institutions of our own state, we find Willam
and Mary and Washington colleges, each provided with a permanent
fund, yielding an income which, considering the scale of operations
in the two cases, is as large if not larger than that of the
University. The University of South Carolina, endowed by the
state, and formerly entitled to an annuity of about 12,000 dollars,
is, we believe, at present receiving the same or a greater sum from
the public treasury. Two of the collegiate institutions in Louisiana
have been sustained by an annuity of 15,000 dollars each, and the
University of Alabama is supported we believe by a still ampler
contribution—while several of the institutions of the northwestern
states, richly provided for by grants of lands, are beginning to receive
or already enjoying valuable and daily augmenting resources.
The permanent income of Columbia College, New York, is, we understand,
but little if at all inferior to that of our university, while
ours, is not much short of 60,000 dollars.
With these facts in view, the annuity of 15,000 dollars, instead
of appearing wastefully large, cannot fail to be regarded as but a
very moderate contribution in behalf of the high literary interests
deveolved upon the University. Indeed, considering the expansive
scheme of its instructions, and the substantial literary merits which
have given it so distinguished a place among the higher seminaries
of our country, this annual provision might justly be viewed as a
comparatively meagre endowment, which, though large enough
perhaps for the present literary wants of our community, may hereafter
be augmented with great benefit to the commonwealth.
It may perhaps be objected, that as the fixed revenue of Harvard,
and some other institutions above mentioned, is derived from the
munificence of individual benefactors, and therefore makes no call
upon the treasury of the state, it is unfair to adduce the example of
these seats of learning in support of the claims of the University.
But our argument of course supposes that an institution such as the
University is demanded by the highest interests as well as the reputation
of the commonwealth, and we have referred to these other
distinguished seminaries only for the purpose of showing at what
general cost such an institution can be maintained.
At the establishment of the University, the hope was no doubt
indulged, that sooner or later it also would become an object of
private benefaction; but we have not the slightest ground for supposing
that in the patriotic aspirations of its founders, these private
endowments, should they accrue, were ever looked to as a means
of withdrawing the university from legislative control, by dispensing
with the annual bounty of the state. It would on some accounts
certainly be desirable, were our University like Harvard and several
others, sustained entirely or in great part by funds derived from
the munificence of individuals. But it should not be forgotten, that
while by this means the public would be relieved from the annual
contribution now required, the general interests of the community
as affected by the operations of the institution would be either
wholly neglected or but partially secured The entire government
and organization devolving upon self-elective boards of trustees,
irresponsible to the state, would of necessity be exposed to the narrowing
influences springing from the predilections and prejudices
of religious sects and classes of society; and the University, by an
easy transition, losing the liberal features of a school suited equally
to all, would become the property and the spoiled favourite of a
particular denomination or rank.
PURELY ECONOMICAL CONSIDERATIONS.
Viewed in a purely economical aspect, the consequences of withholding
the annuity must suggest considerations strongly adverse
is certain, as before remarked, that it would cease to draw students
from abroad, while it would drive to the seminaries of other states
a large number of those who now seek their education at home.
Estimating these effects, on the smallest scale consistent with probability,
we should thus lose the pecuniary benefit of some fifty students
from other states, and seventy-five of our own, who would be
sent abroad, making an aggregate of money withdrawn from the
circulation of the state of about 50 or 60,000 dollars; while assuming
the entire prostration of the university, a result not unlikely
to follow, the sum thus virtually withdrawn could not fall short of
100,000 dollars.
Another and weighty consideration of the same class must at
once suggest itself, on reverting to the large amount of capital
which in the form of buildings and other necessary means has been
provided by the state and by the institution itself, and which would
be rendered in great part if not entirely useless. This sum enbracing
the successive additions and improvements made to the buildings
and grounds of the university, since the first year of its operation,
as well as the original outlay of the state, may be estimated at
upwards of 300,000 dollars.
But important as these economical effects would unquestionably
be, they are of a nature to awaken in the minds of those who duly
appreciate the value of the University as a public institution, but
little interest compared with the momentous evils, moral as well as
intellectual, of such a measure. Among the high incentives which
animated the zeal of its founders in laying their plan of the institution,
there was none more marked by genuine wisdom, than the
desire of cherishing in our youth, a lofty patriotism and state pride,
by providing a means for their highest intellectual training within
the commonwealth itself. The daily associations of home and country
blending happily with the lessons of literature and science, and
kindling in the student's mind, a warm, but enlightened devotion to
his state, were in the view of these great public benefactors, an object
worthy of being fostered even with expensive care. We need
not trace the reverse of the pleasing picture, since all can feel how
patriotism must dwindle beneath the uncongenial influences of an
education obtained abroad, and few we think would be inclined
lightly to regard results fraught with so grave an injury to the
political and intellectual character of the commonwealth.
| Catalogue of the officers and students of the University of Virginia | |