[Previous Day][Next Day][Back to Menu of Days]

NOTE: You may notice textual errors throughout this document, many of which have been left intact from the original text. Should you want to investigate the integrity of the original report, please refer to the original two printed volumes containing the official report of the proceedings and debates.

Roll call showed a quorum present. Prayer was offered by Delegate Maeser of Utah County.

Journal of the forty-seventh day's session was read.

The following petitions were presented asking that the question of prohibition be submitted as a separate article to a vote of the people:

File No. 372, from the presbytery of Utah, representing 28 ministers, 44 elders, 56 teachers and 1,000 church members, by Miller, of Sevier.

File No. 373, signed by John Tingey and 31 others, from Salt Lake, by Raleigh, of Salt Lake.

File No. 374, signed by W. Kellogg and 38 others, from Salt Lake, by Button, of Salt Lake.

File No. 375, signed by Wm. Sargeant, Sr., and 39 others, from Hoytsville, asking that an equal suffrage clause be placed in the Constitution, by Thurman, of Utah, Ordered filed.

The Convention then proceeded to the third reading of the article on water rights, which was read as follows:

Section 1. All existing rights to the use of any of the waters of this State for any useful purpose shall be recognized and confirmed.

Mr. L. LARSEN. Mr. President, I hope this motion will not prevail.

Mr. PIERCE. Mr. President, I arise to a point of order, that it is not in order to move to strike out on the passage of a bill.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there an article on forestry'?

Mr. PIERCE. They are different articles. They will be passed by separate votes.

The PRESIDENT. The point of order is well taken.

Mr. PIERCE. The question then is simply the passing or rejecting of section I as read.

Mr. MALONEY. Mr. President, this is a constitutional recognition of existing rights and I hope

every member on this floor will vote for it.

Mr. JOLLEY. Mr. President, that is all I had to say.

Mr. VARIAN. Mr. President, I move to fill the blank in the title by inserting the words “water rights.”

Mr. FARR. Mr. President, I hope that section will be voted down. As reasonable men and rational men_that has been presented in the article of the majority report_the very substance and in almost those very words, it has been voted down. Now, why should we sustain it without some reason for sustaining it?

Mr. THORESON. Mr. President, I do not know as these remarks are in order, but I believe with the gentleman from Weber that the irrigators throughout this Territory are asking that something be inserted in the Constitution acknowledging the rights that they paid so dearly for and which they prize so much, and being as we have put in several other clauses that have little weight that are favorable_for instance the labor article that was proposed was merely to satisfy the labor organizations. Now, this will satisfy the irrigators of this entire Territory, acknowledging their right.

Mr. THATCHER. Mr. President, I trust that the section will not be stricken out. It certainly can do no harm. I think it will do much good for the reason that it is a recognition by this honorable body of rights that already have been questioned. They were questioned in the bill which was voted down by this house yesterday. I am in favor of retaining that clause so that the farmers will know that this Convention wished them to retain acquired rights.

Mr. VARIAN. Mr. President, I want to call attention to the wording of that section in the second line. I think the word “of” in the second line, after the word “waters,” ought to be changed to “in;” of course there are no existing rights in anybody to the waters of the State_that is belonging to the State. The intention is “in” the State. I move to strike out the word “of,” and insert the word “in,” after the word “waters,” in the second line.

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. HART. Mr. President, after the sword “useful,” in the second line, I move to insert the words “or beneficial.”

The amendment was agreed to.

The PRESIDENT. The secretary will call the roll on the adoption of the article.

The roll was then called with the following result:

AYES_74.
Allen

NOES_6.
Green    
Pierce
Haynes    
Shurtliff
Murdock, Beaver
Van Horne.

ABSENT_26.
Adams
Brandley
Clark
Cunningham
Cushing
Driver

The president declared the article adopted, and referred to the committee on compilation and arrangement.

Mr. FARR. Mr. President, I wish to explain in making a motion to strike out and then voting aye_I vote aye for the reason that on organizing the State you must provide so many of these things to please people. I voted aye to please the children;

Mr. PIERCE. I would like to know what children he means.

Mr. FARR. I have said all I wished to say.

The article was declared adopted. The article entitled forestry was then read as follows:

The Legislature shall enact laws to prevent the destruction of and to preserve the forests on the lands of the State and upon any part of the public domain, the control of which may be conferred by Congress upon the State.

The roll being called on the passage of the article, the result was as follows:

AYES_73.
Allen
Anderson
Barnes
Bowdle

NOES_1.
Green.

ABSENT_32.
Adams
Brandley
Clark
Crane
Cunningham
Cushing
Driver
Eldredge
Emery
Goodwin
Halliday
Hyde
Johnson
Kiesel
Kearns

The president declared the article adopted and referred to the committee on compilation and arrangement.

The PRESIDENT. Motions and resolutions are in order.

Mr. EVANS (Utah). Mr. President, I desire to call up the motion that was made yesterday right after our recess, in regard to the reconsideration of the article taken upon the report of the committee on accounts and expenses. I desire to say in regard to that matter that I want to be fully understood by this Convention in my position on that question. In the first place, it does appear to be child's play the way this matter has been dealt with. I think the committee went beyond what they were asked to do in the resolution, and by reason of that they incorporated into their report what the Convention did not expect. It was passed without half of the members perhaps knowing what it contained_the latter part of it. My position upon this is that this matter shall come fairly and squarely before this Convention. They have decided that upon a vote of reconsideration once by more than three quarters majority vote, as I understand it, and if this Convention, after this matter shall be fully understood, desires that the vote that was passed yesterday is their will, I shall bow in submission to it, with the very best of feeling, but I individually am opposed to that question. It has been stated by gentlemen upon the floor that these officers are our servants. That is true, but I ask myself' the question whether the servant is greater than the master. It has been said that we hired these men and we ought to pay them. That also is true. My position upon this question is that when we shall be unable to pay them, they ought to be promptly notified that the funds from which there is any assurance that they may receive their pay have been exhausted, and if they shall feel then that they are willing to continue their labors in connection with us, taking their chances upon receiving a compensation, then we may retain them and do it with honor. I want to say to you, Mr. President, that it is not in this instance a question with me of a few dollars and cents, but it is the way in which that scheme was passed by this Convention, that as I said before, three-fourths, as I remember it, of this Convention, decided they did not want to pass

upon and rejected it. There were dozens of men in this Convention yesterday that did not understand that report. They did not hear it at all. They supposed they had confined themselves to the subject matter of the resolution that had been referred to them, and I want to say to you that after the money shall have been exhausted under that appropriation, I am here to stand with this Convention if it takes the whole of this summer, but I {1236} am not willing that men should receive their pay here that live in this city. Their expenses are nothing to what the country members in maintaining themselves here by way of living, and I am not willing that a portion of that appropriation should go to them and these men who have to pay their board be deprived of their part. I submit to you, sir, that there is just as much inconsistency in any gentleman upon this floor voting away the money that justly and rightly belongs to his colleague for the purpose of paying these officers as there is to ask the officers to accept in common with us their compensation and take their chances with us. Now, this is the way I view this matter. I think it is a question of fairness and that only. No more and no less. It is not a question of a few paltry dollars. and I am in favor that this matter shall be reconsidered. Then, if this Convention on calm deliberation shall say that they are willing that the appropriation should be applied for these specific purposes, and if anything shall remain that they will take that, then I have no more to say.

Mr. EICHNOR. Do you mean to say that the delegates that live in Salt Lake City draw pay when the outsiders draw no pay?

Mr. EVANS (Utah). No, sir.

Mr. HART. Mr. President, I am opposed to the reconsideration of this motion. I think we have already spent altogether too much time on this small matter. We have spent more time represented by value than this whole item of compensation amounts to for officers of this Convention, from now to the close of the Convention. I do not think, Mr. President, that there was any trick in that report of the committee on accounts and expenses. I do not think any trick was intended. If I remember correctly, the Convention listened to the reading of that report and there was certainly sufficient order maintained for every member present here to hear that report, and if there is any misunderstanding about it, it is entirely the fault of members in not paying attention to the reading of the report. It is a very small matter and I am in favor of paying the officers. The total amount for them from now on would not amount to one day's pay of the members.

Mr. JAMES. Mr. President, I support the remarks of the gentleman who has last spoken.

Mr. BARNES. Mr. President, I desire to offer a few remarks to the question at issue. So far as the committee being censurable for doing that which they were not required, I will say if that is the feelings of the gentlemen on this. floor, why, I for one bow in humble submission to their will, but, sir, we were required, as I understood it, to report upon a certain matter. That was as to whether the officers of this Convention were all needed at the present time or not. We did our best to find out as to whether they were needed or not and we made a report in accordance therewith. So far as there being any trick in it, I denounce that entirely. It is as far from the idea of the committee to interpose any trick in that regard as the light is from the darkness. There was

nothing of the kind; and if we exceeded our authority it was because we desired the matter to be properly understood. We desired the feelings of the committee to be properly understood and not misunderstood. I claim, gentlemen, that these individuals that we have employed are to all intents and purposes servants of this Convention. We have agreed with them to serve us for a stipulated per diem, and I for one cannot go back upon the agreement made with them. Upon investigation we found that possibly some of the employescould be dispensed with, the amount probably of five to ten dollars per day, and when we came to consider that in all probability this Convention will be through in about ten days or probably less_ten times ten, putting it in at the utmost {1237 - EDUCATION} figure, would only be a hundred dollars. What difference will it make to any member of this Convention, the paltry sum of one dollar per day? Gentlemen, it is too late to commence to study economy. We should have thought of that seven weeks ago when we engaged these men and these ladies that are employed, but having employed them, I say let us pay them honorably whether we get another cent or not. My feelings with regard to that are that it would be dishonorable to discharge them at this late hour of the day_at this late hour of the proceedings, and rather than east dishonor upon this Convention and upon the gentlemen who compose this Convention, for one, I would rather pay them myself. That is exactly where I stand. Let us pay them honorably and if there is anything left let us divide it. The recommendations of the committee were made in good faith. We believed that you asked something of us and that we were not mere figureheads, but that you desired information from us, and we gave it according to the best of our judgment and ability, and gentlemen, as I said before, if we have erred in our understanding of what was required of us we humbly bow to your will and submit to the censure, but I ask the gentlemen to express themselves plainly with regard to this matter. If we are in the right, say so, if we are in the wrong, say so.

Mr. SQUIRES. Mr. President, I do not care to take up the time of this Convention but simply to call attention to one thing, and that is that the committee who engaged our stenographer made, as I understand it, a written contract with him, and I do not see how we can possibly violate that contract. In any event a provision should be made to pay him for his services.

Mr. THURMAN. Will you please move the previous question while you are on the floor?

Mr. SQUIRES. While I am on the floor, I move the previous question.

The previous question was ordered. The motion to reconsider was rejected.

Mr. CHIDESTER. Mr. President, I now move that we resolve ourselves into committee of the whole.

The motion was agreed to and the Convention then resolved itself into committee of the whole with Mr. Ivins in the chair.

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE.

The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, you have before you for consideration the article on education, section 4.

Mr. HART. It was passed. We were to take up that after we finished the article.

The CHAIRMAN. There are no amendments here to section 2. Section 4 was under consideration when you adjourned. What is your pleasure, gentlemen?

Mr. PIERCE. Section 5.

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. Chairman, I move as an amendment to section 4, in line 2, after the word “Utah,” to insert the words, “and the agricultural college,” and then at the end of the section, after the word “university,” in line 5, add the words “and agricultural college.”

Mr. RICKS. Mr. Chairman, I moved an amendment exactly like that yesterday and it was voted down.

The CHAIRMAN. Section 2 is not what Mr. Ricks referred to.

Mr. KERR. Mr. Chairman, I made the amendment to section 2_a similar amendment, and it was passed together with that section, and it is still before this committee. It was not voted on.

Mr. RICKS. I also made this same amendment to section 4 that has been proposed and it was voted down.

Mr. KERR. It was not voted down.

The CHAIRMAN. The chair, from his recollection of the proceedings last night, thinks that the amendment of Mr. Ricks was not voted down. It was {1238} before the house, but no vote was taken on it. Mr. Roberts' amendment is in order, gentlemen.

The amendment of Mr. Roberts was agreed to.

Section 5 was read.

Mr. EVANS (Utah). Mr. Chairman, I move to amend section 5, in line 7, by filling the blank with the words, “one place.”

Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. Chairman, I move as an amendment to the amendment the striking out of the words “and agricultural college,” in line 4.

Mr. KERR. Mr. Chairman, I am opposed to the motion. The section provides for the union of the higher educational institutions of the public school system. If this amendment should prevail, the State normal school, State school of mines, and other departments of higher learning of the public school system will be connected with the university, while the agricultural college would remain a separate institution, and I desire before a vote is taken on this amendment to state

briefly my position on this subject, As is well known, I, for the last three years, have been in favor of a union of our higher educational institutions in Utah. During the last few years I have visited the leading colleges and universities of this country and Canada, and have studied the results of a union of the higher educational institutions in some states, and in others the results where the institutions have been maintained separately, and while upwards of a year ago, I was at that time connected with the university of Utah, I was in favor of the union of the agricultural college and the university_I am still in favor of the union of these institutions, though I have no direct personal interest in either of them, being connected with a private school. But the argument in favor of a concentration of our higher educational institutions, it seems to me, is incontrovertible, and in the interests of economy in the educational institutions of our State, I believe that our higher educational forces should be concentrated, that all the institutions of higher learning in the State should be under one management and be located upon the same site. I shall not take up much of the time of the committee in explanation of my position, but I desire to state briefly my reasons for advocating a union of these institutions. In the first place, I find that during the years 1890 to 1894 there was appropriated to the agricultural college, the university of Utah, the insane asylum. and the reform school, $1,061,602.

Mr. GOODWIN. May I ask you a question? Do you see any good reason for including the State normal school with the university? That is, in your judgment, if the State was rich and able to support outside a normal school for the fitting of teachers for the public schools of the Territory, wouldn't it be as well or better to have that normal school situated in some other place than where the university and agricultural college were?

Mr. KERR. If the State were rich, many of the objections to a separate maintenance of all of these institutions would be removed. I shall state my reasons for at present advocating the maintenance of the normal school as part of the university as I proceed. The territorial indebtedness at present, as I understand, is about eight hundred thousand dollars. The agricultural college and the reform school were established and all of the institutions which I have named have been maintained during the last four or five years mainly by increasing the State indebtedness, and I desire in this connection to call attention of the committee to the fact that under the State government it will be impossible to contract a debt in excess of two hundred thousand dollars_with the result that all the burden of maintaining the State government and the several public institutions will have to be borne by the {1239} people of the State; that these institutions and the several departments of the State government will be maintained only by the taxes of the people.

Mr. RICKS. You state that these institutions are to be maintained by taxes of the people?

Mr. KERR. If you will wait until I get through I think I shall answer your question. It is true there has been a land grant to a number of the departments of the university and also to the agricultural college. There has also been a large grant of land to the common schools, but at best it will require several years to dispose of the school lands and invest the money and realize any return. All the lands which have been granted to the several institutions of higher learning in the State will have first to be located, then they will have to be sold, the money will have to be invested, and this will require several years, during which, I say, these institutions, the common schools, as

well as the departments of the State government, will have to be maintained from the direct taxes of the people, a burden which, gentlemen of the committee, I believe the people are unwilling to bear. I believe furthermore they are unable to bear the burden which we will place upon them if we attempt to maintain all of these institutions of learning as separate institutions. From a financial point of view, these institutions should be united and placed upon the same site.

The question arises as to what will be saved by the maintenance of all these departments of higher learning upon one site. In the first place there must necessarily be in each institution departments of English, mathematics, modern languages, chemistry, physics, and so on, and in the university to-day the classes in the advanced subjects of English, mathematics, and these other departments, are very small, indeed many of the classes contain but from three to six students. In the agricultural college the same is true. If we were to unite these two institutions the two classes, numbering say five and three respectively in the two institutions, could be placed together, a single professor could do the work then which now requires the time of two, and the salary of one professor in one department would thereby be saved. This applies to nearly all the departments of general instruction in the two institutions. I estimated, a year ago, the saving that would result from a union in the department of mathematics alone. By uniting the two departments, there would be saved the salary of one professor, the difference between the salary of an assistant professor and a first grade instructor, the difference between the salary of a first and second grade instructor, which would aggregate in that department alone about twenty-eight hundred dollars a year. The same is largely true in the department of English, the department of physics, the department of chemistry, and in all the general departments of the two institutions, mathematics, English, and the general sciences, from the foundation work in all of these departments of higher learning.

On page 35 of the report of the board of regents of the university of Utah for 1894 to the governor, are the following statements:

The number of students in Anglo-Saxon history, three; Greek history, four; Roman history, five; third year Latins, three; advanced botany, four; biology one; Chaucer and middle English, one; advanced chemistry, two; civil government, six, and soon, bearing out the statement which I have just made with respect to the number of students in the different classes in the university, and the same is true also of the classes in the agricultural college. The main saving, however, would be in the cost of equipment. For example, the most expensive work in our higher educational institutions to-day is in {1240} science and engineering. Thousands and hundreds of thousands of dollars are expended in the great universities of our country in the equipment of laboratories, machine shops, and workshops. Now, there are not to exceed in Utah, I have estimated, about two hundred students who are prepared for college work. All the students of the Territory for years to come could use the same laboratories in physics, chemistry, mineralogy, geology, biology, and so on. Thousands of dollars have been expended in the university for apparatus in these laboratories; thousands of dollars have been expended in the agricultural college in the equipment of the same laboratories. In the department of mathematics two years ago, I expended about fifteen hundred dollars for mathematical models and instruments. In the agricultural college, for the same work, the same models and instruments would be required at another expense to the Territory of fifteen hundred dollars. And yet, gentlemen of the committee, the

students who are doing higher educational work in the Territory would only have fifteen hundred dollars' worth of apparatus to assist them in their work, whereas if the institutions were united and placed upon one site, by expending just one-half the means all the students doing this work would have the same facilities that they would have for double the expenditure where the institutions are maintained on separate sites.

As to the fifty thousand dollars for library in the university of Utah, you would have to expend another fifty thousand dollars for the same library in the agricultural college; thus requiring one hundred thousand dollars of the taxes of the people, in order to provide fifty thousand dollars' worth of library facilities. The students would have no greater advantages for the expenditure of a hundred thousand dollars, fifty thousand dollars to each of the two institutions on separate sites, than for the expenditure of just half that amount, fifty thousand dollars for a library in one institution, if the departments were all placed on the same site, Now, a museum, which is very essential in the work of higher education, is very expensive and costs hundreds of thousands of dollars. One museum would do all the departments of higher learning as well as any one, and thereby save again thousands and thousands of dollars to the State. Conservatories_we cannot do work in botany, arbor culture, and so on, without our conservatory. One conservatory would serve both institutions as well as to have one for each. In this connection, I desire to state that Congress, by the Enabling Act, grants a hundred thousand acres of land to the school of mines which shall be connected with the university. Now, in order that we may do the work in mining and in mining engineering in the university, or that it may be done, there must necessarily be a workshop. There must be a machine shop; there must be a blacksmith shop, the foundry, and all the facilities that are required for the engineering work in the agricultural college, in mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, and civil engineering, through a large part of the work of the process. In the Enabling Act it is provided that the mining school must be connected with the university. If we maintain these institutions as separate institutions, we shall have to spend in years to come hundreds of thousands of dollars of hard earned money of the people in equipping these workshops, machine shops, and laboratories, because the work of mining engineering cannot be done without the facilities that are required in the work of mechanical and electrical engineering, which, in accordance with the laws creating the agricultural college, must be maintained in that institution. Then, hence, in that one respect alone, there would result in {1241} years to come a saving of hundreds of thousands of dollars to the people of Utah. If we shall concentrate our higher educational process, then when the lands which have been granted to the several departments of higher learning in the State shall have been sold, the moneys invested, and the revenue used for the maintenance of the institutions all upon one site, when we expend fifteen thousand dollars for books, the students in all the departments of the university will have access to these books, instead of giving three thousand dollars to a normal school, in one part of the State, five thousand dollars to an agricultural college in another part of the State, three thousand dollars probably to a school of forestry, or some other institution of higher learning in another part of the State, the students in these several departments having access after all, notwithstanding the expenditure of fifteen thousand dollars of the people's money, to only two, three, four, or five thousand dollars' worth of books. As a result of the centralization to which I refer I need call attention only to North Dakota. In the Deseret News of Salt Lake City, April 12, 1895, is the following statement:

North Dakota is in rather a bad fix, for her chief educational institutions. It is stated that for the next two years the state university and two normal schools will have to remain closed, because of lack of funds. The state has expended so much in the past that either borrowing or raising sufficient money by taxes is out of the question, so the schools must close for the time stated.

In order to satisfy the clamor of the politicians of the several counties of North Dakota, an institution of some kind has been given to nearly every county. They have a university, they have two normal schools, in different counties, a school of forestry in another, an agricultural college in another county, a scientific school in another still, and a school of technology in another. Now, gentlemen, this is the result of attempting to maintain schools of higher learning in different parts of the state. As stated here, they are all closed. The schools exist only in name, and the state has, through decentralization, deprived its sons and daughters of the opportunities of higher education. Again, I take the following from the Salt Lake Tribune of April 5, 1895, in reference to Montana:

The state board of examiners has commenced the work of cutting down the allowance appropriated by the last legislature for state institutions. The legislature appropriated about one hundred thousand dollars more than the revenues of the state this year. This will necessitate a great reduction in the expenses of the state. The legislature appropriated fifteen thousand dollars for this year's work on the agricultural college and this was cut off entirely. The thirty thousand dollars appropriated for the eastern state prison was also cut off, and the board decided to discontinue work on this institution this year. The appropriation of fifteen thousand dollars for the state university was reduced to seventy-five hundred dollars. And the deaf and dumb school was cut from fifteen thousand to six thousand dollars, which it is thought is enough to pay operating expenses for the present year.

As an illustration of the results where the institutions are all united I need refer only to Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Nebraska, and in this connection, I desire to read a short extract from a statement made by President Jordan, of the Leland Stanford Junior university. He says:

The best results in any line of education cannot be reached without the association of all others. The training of the engineer will be more valuable from his association with the classical student. The literary man will gain much and lose nothing from his acquaintance with the practical work of the engineer. The separation of the schools, founded by the Morrill act, from the state university was a blunder which time will deepen into a crime. With the union of the two has come rapid growth of the universities of Wisconsin, Illinois, Minnesota and Nebraska, where the higher work of the state is all concentrated in

one place.

We had received the twenty-five thousand dollars which is made available by the last act of Congress, and it is divided equally between the colleges of agriculture and mechanical arts, and the fifteen thousand dollars for experimental purposes is also given us, and is under the management of the board of control, subject of course always to the approval of the executive committee.

It should also be noted that during the past year the passage of the agricultural experiment station bill by Congress has provided for giving to the state of New York fifteen thousand dollars a year for the conduct of agricultural experiments. The design of the bill was that this money should go to the institutions established under the Morrill act, in 1862. In accordance with this design the money has come to Cornell university. So that by a union of these institutions, we do not deprive ourselves of the grant which has been made to the agricultural colleges.

I might say that when I came to Cornell it was predicted by all the separate colleges of agriculture that I could not make the teaching of agriculture in the shadow of a great university successful, but after having studied the system practisedat the Iowa college, and after having taught there for nearly three years, thought I saw conclusively that if we had the college of agriculture in New York, it must be a part of the university.

It gives me great pleasure to report that the agricultural college is more prosperous at the present time than at any time since its establishment. The honors won by the present class and by the demand for our graduates of agriculture as managers of farms and teachers testify to the high character of the work done

by the students. So that the students in the department of agriculture are capable of contesting with the students of art, philosophy, law and so on.

Again, as to the attendance of students in the several departments, where they are all maintained on one site. In the register of Cornell university for 1893-4 page 247, I note the following: “Students in arts 136, letters 117, science 84, civil engineering 115, electrical engineering 322, mechanical engineering 234, students in agriculture 146;” and in the report of the director of the agricultural college to the president of the university and also in his personal letter to me it is stated that upwards of four hundred students of the two thousand students of Cornell have been doing work in agriculture during the past year, and here it is noted that the students in agriculture and engineering number 792, whereas the students of law, of medicine, of arts, philosophy, and letters number only 694. And that, notwithstanding the fact that the college of agriculture and mechanical arts is connected with the university in which, as I stated before, are maintained the departments of philosophy, law, letters, arts, and so on. While a student of Cornell university I observed the results of having these institutions all under one management on the same site. And I am firmly convinced that all the results are favorable and I do not know of any objection that can be raised to a maintenance of these institutions together. And as to the way in which the people of New York regard them, it has been stated that of course a president of the university would advocate that, and of course a director or president of an agricultural college would present as favorable a view as possible of the work that is being done; as to the way in which it is regarded by the people of New York, I desire to quote the following. I have received reports of these officers and this statement is correct. This is a statement of the president to the trustees.

It is also worthy of note that in the course of the year farmers' institutes held in different parts of the State have disclosed a very gratifying feeling of friendliness toward the university; the officers of the state agricultural society have frequently called upon professors of the university to address these institutes and there has been no lack of evidence of a friendly feeling toward the department of agriculture in every part of the state. The farmers are more and more coming to see that at the university there is given the kind of instruction that will be of great benefit {1244} to young men who are to devote themselves to agricultural pursuits. In Cornell university there are students who are doing post graduate work in agriculture, and in conversation with one of these graduate students with whom I am well acquainted, he stated to me that there were many advantages to the students in agriculture and mechanical arts by having all these departments

maintained on the same site. He says, as we all who are acquainted with educational work recognize, if the students of agriculture and mechanical arts are in an institution where nothing else is taught, there is a tendency for them to become more or less narrow. They consider everything from a certain point of view, and that is always true of students who are in the classical institution, an institution in which nothing but the classics and literature are taught; but where all of these departments are located together upon one site, the students of agriculture, the students who are making a specialty of chemistry, physics, mathematics, of modern languages_who are studying law, or medicine, all come in contact. While they are dining together they enter into conversation upon different subjects. In their societies, in their clubs, in their fraternities, they associate together, and one of one of the departments gets a great many ideas pertaining to the work which is going on in other departments of the institution, and the result is that when students graduate from any of the departments of an institution of this kind they are broader, they are men and women of greater culture, greater refinement, they have not only a knowledge of a particular subject, they are not only specialists in one particular line, but they are broad; they have a good general education, and after all we know that even though a man may be a specialist, if he is narrow, if he has not the general foundation, after all he is little more than a crank. So that educationally, there are many advantages which come from a union of all our higher educational institutions. Now, as to the question considered from a local point of view. What will be the result if we attempt to maintain our institutions in Utah on different sites, or if we unite them upon the same site? It is urged that the union cannot take place without a loss to the State, because if the institution is removed from Salt Lake City, there will result a certain loss; if It should be removed from Logan, there will also be a certain loss to the State. If removed from both of these cities and located at some other, the loss will be greater. To show the way in which this was regarded by others, I shall read a letter from the president of the Columbia College, New York:

One department inspires another and oftentimes the facilities of one enlarge and broaden those to be found in another. We have faced very much the same question at Columbia in determining whether we would try to keep the entire institution on one site in the city of New York or whether we would allow it to be broken up into fragments, each school finding a location in any part of the state that suited itself. Without a dissenting voice we have chosen the policy of concentration, although is has compelled us to buy a new site for the college at a cost of two million dollars for the land alone. I can make no stronger argument in favor of the policy I have urged above.

A man would not to-day give to either institution a ten thousand dollar library, neither would he erect for either institution a twenty-five or fifty thousand dollar laboratory, for the very reason that should he do so, probably the Legislature two years hence would move the institution and thereby waste the money that had been contributed by the party who was interested in the work, so that until this question is settled, gentlemen, we can expect no assistance from the wealthy men of our State; and I am pleased to state that it seems that it has become fairly the fashion {1246} of the rich men of our day to found and endow educational institutions of higher learning. And what a magnificent fashion it is. It is as if, gentlemen of the committee, the commercial age has become vividly aware of the terrible extent to which we are sacrificing our sons to the Moloch of wealth, as if it were turning even now eagerly to the more beautiful worship of the Apollo of science and education as a means of uplifting men and making life really worth living. Gentlemen of the committee, there is not a population in Utah which warrants an attempt to maintain several institutions of higher learning. There is not the wealth in Utah which will enable us to maintain even one institution of higher learning, without the aid of the wealthy of our State,

and we cannot hope that the wealthy men of Utah will put their money into starving institutions; but should we concentrate our efforts, should we place these institutions on one site, then, whatever available means there is in the State can be used to the greatest possible advantage and the wealthy men of the State can be induced to put their money into the institution, to endow chairs, to purchase libraries, to erect laboratories, and to assist the institution in various ways for higher educational work. Gentlemen of the committee, the question confronting us in this, are we willing now to take hold of this question and settle it, or do we want to perpetuate the wrong that has been done the people of Utah by leaving it to the Legislature, year after year, to fight the old battle over and over again, while the people are being drained in an effort to maintain the institution? Do we want an institution of higher learning in Utah? I believe the history of the people of Utah bears me out in the claim that we do. If we do, there is but one honorable course before us and that is to take hold of this question, unite these institutions, place them upon one site, and thereby lay the foundation for an institution in Utah, which will be the pride of the people and to which our sons and daughters will go for the purpose of preparing themselves for the battle of life. Are we not adequate, are we not capable of grappling with these problems, as well as will be the Legislature? Settle it in the Constitution, and it is settled for all time, and remember, gentlemen of the committee, that this is a question which not only nterestsus to-day, not only is of interest to the people for the next year or two, but which is of interest to the people and of concern to them throughout all time. Let us take hold of the question and settle it, and instead of dissipating our energies by attempting to maintain schools of higher learning in different parts of the State, thereby depriving the State of any institution of really higher education, let us concentrate our efforts, let us unite our educational institutions. Let us place them upon one site, and fix them there so that future legislation may not interfere with the foundation work upon which we may build and which will enable us to develop and build up in Utah a system of education that will be a credit to the State.

I have forgotten to answer the question that was propounded by the gentleman from Salt Lake. In a few words I will state in answer to that, this, if the State were wealthy and had plenty of means, one or two normal schools could be maintained in different parts of the State, but by having a normal school connected with the university, all the students of the normal school, first, have access to the library of the university_the great university library, whereas, if the schools should be on separate sites at best we could hope to have but very few books of reference, at least for years and years to come, because the State could not provide the means with which to procure the books. Second, the students of the normal schools do all their work in general science, {1247} mineralogy, geology, biology, physics, chemistry, etc., in the laboratories of the university, thereby having the benefit of all the equipment in these different lines in the State university. If the schools were located upon separate sites for years to come there would be practically no facilities for the work in general sciences because the State has not the means and we cannot hope that they will have for years and years to come.

Again, they, too, have the opportunity of associating with the college students, students in the college departments, in letters, arts, and science, and if the institutions are combined in the different engineering courses and also in the course of agriculture, and this tends to broaden their views, because we believe the teacher should be the most learned and the broadest in his or her views, and not be narrowed down to a view of subjects which must be taught in the common

school. We could not hope, if we had a normal school separate from the university, or a public institution of higher learning, to have the facilities for the work which would be required. And there are many arguments in favor of keeping the normal school with the university even if we had plenty of money, but especially as we have not the means, and cannot hope to have, at least for the next generation or two. I do not see that there is any argument in favor of separating the normal school, but there is a very great argument in favor of keeping it with the State institution of higher learning. [Applause.]

Mr. GOODWIN. I would like to ask the gentleman a question or two. Is it not a fact that teachers in the normal schools are not there simply to take an academic or a collegiate course, but rather that they are sent there simply to be drilled in a way to communicate what they already have learned, is not that the real object?

Mr. KERR. To a great extent that is true. The work, however, extends over some of the college courses and although this work is elementary in a great many sciences, they require laboratories for the work.

Mr. GOODWIN. If the State should become rich, as possibly it will be rich at some time, and the State might then want to change and make an outside State normal school, why include it in this constitutional provision at all to prevent that?

Mr. KERR. I personally should not object at all to an amendment which would make that possible. I think for years to come probably the next twenty years, the normal school will be sufficient. It is possible that at the expiration of that time a school would be established separate from the institution. I would not object to an amendment to make that possible.

Mr. GOODWIN. Until otherwise provided by law.

Mr. KERR. I would not want that to apply to the normal school now.

Mr. GOODWIN. No. In the present normal school is there anything but very simple apparatus?

Mr. KERR. No, sir; not that I know of; nothing but cabinets and libraries. In a high school of course they have to have facilities for scientific work_laboratories.

Mr. ROBERTS. I would like to ask Mr. Kerr a question. I did not catch from the first part of your remarks whether you were in favor of locating these institutions at Salt Lake or not.

Mr. KERR. Well, I said nothing about their location.

Mr. ROBERTS. You spoke merely then to the question of union somewhere?

Mr. KERR. Yes, sir; I did not discuss the question of location at all.

Mr. ROBERTS. The reason why I am obliged to ask the question is that I missed the first part of

your remarks and I did not know whether you favored the location at Salt Lake.

Mr. KERR. Personally, I am in favor {1248} of considering this question of union by itself, on its merits, and then let the question of location come afterwards. That is why I did not refer to the question of location at all in my remarks.

Mr. THURMAN. Do I understand you that if a state were rich and able to bear it, you would favor a separation of these institutions?

Mr. KERR. No, sir; under no circumstances would I favor a separation of these institutions. Every argument from an educational point of view is in favor of a union of all these institutions and there can be so far as I know no argument against it. I stated that there would not be so great an objection to attempting to maintain these institutions as separate institutions if the State were wealthy and able. In other words, instead of considering from the point of view of finance and education, we would consider it only from an educational point of view.

Mr. GIBBS. Can you give us in round numbers the savings that would be obtained each year?

Mr. K ERR. That depends entirely upon the amount of appropriation, in other words, upon the amount of means the institution has. If the two institutions should have one hundred and twenty- five thousand dollars a year, I have estimated that (of course this is only an approximation) there would be at least thirty thousand dollars a year saved.

Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. Chairman, I hope this motion will prevail to strike out the words, “the agricultural college.” The agricultural college is already established at Logan and I think that it should remain there. I do not think that the difference in the expense of running the institutions if they are separated will be as great as indicated. After our State becomes populous an agricultural college will be filled with students, and I think that it would cost nearly as much to run them if they were united as it will separately. I think that the line of education is altogether different_that is, the line of education taught in the agricultural college is somewhat different to what it is in the university, and I think that the farmers of our country do not want it united.

I think that if it is united that the university will have a tendency to overshadow and make it of secondary importance, and I think that when the government made the appropriation and authorized these colleges to be instituted throughout the different states, I think that it intended that they should be separated. I would not be in favor of going to the extreme as Dakota has done and divide all of these institutions of learning, but I would be in favor of uniting the university and all of the other institutions of learning, except the agricultural college, and have them located at Salt Lake City, but I am in favor of the agricultural college remaining as it is now located in Logan.

Mr. MAESER. Mr. Chairman, I am opposed to Mr. Anderson's amendment. I think there are two sides to this great question. There is an exclusively professional and an exclusively financial side to this. If we would consider only one at a time, we may arrive at a different conclusion, as for instance in Europe, in the old established governments and states, they keep separate institutions

for forestry, for surgery, and other institutions, separate entirely from the university. I call the attention of the committee for instance to the polytechnic school of Paris, and the great clinic in Vienna, and the normal schools of Berlin and Dresden, all of which are of world renowned fame, entirely separate from the universities. But we are not in such conditions. That is the only point wherein I would differ from Professor Kerr. When he says in answer to my friend from Utah County, Mr. Thurman, that under all circumstances he would be voting for a union, I disagree with him.
{1249}
If we were so constituted in our Territory that we would not need to be under the necessity at all to take financial consideration, I would then say let the agricultural college be separate, as for instance the celebrated school of forestry in Saxony. It is attended by students all the way from Lisbon to St. Petersburg, from South America and Australia. They gather from all parts of the world to that institution, entirely separate from the university, but the government never considered the expenses that it took. It simply established them. It could not have attained to that distinction if it had been united with some university; but we are not under that condition. We have to consider the financial conditions of our people, and I am a strong advocate of a union of the university with all these institutions. I sustain the position of Professor Kerr entirely.

Mr. EICHNOR. May I ask Mr. Evans, of Utah County, a question?

Mr. EVANS (Utah). Yes, sir.

Mr. EICHNOR. Where is the university to be located when the two institutions are to be united?

Mr. EVANS (Utah). Wherever this Convention decides. If they decide they shall be united first, then they shall determine the place afterwards.

Mr. LUND. Mr. Chairman, I sincerely hope that the amendment striking out the words “agricultural college” will prevail. They are separate institutions. They are under separate boards and they have separate objects and ends and aims in their instruction. The agricultural college in its instruction is preparing its students for industrial professions_for trades. A few years ago, in this country, it was seen by those who were educating the youth of our land that there was a great wrong in the idea of education and it was this, that all who had a chance for any higher education or other education than the common schools aimed at professions. They desired to be lawyers or doctors, or professors of some kind, and they thought it eminently necessary to establish these schools throughout our land, where the trades would be made a little more popular than they are at present or than they were at that time. And if you will notice all of our tradesmen nearly that we find, the tailors, the blacksmiths, etc., are men that come to us from Germany, from England, and from places where these trades are more popular than they are in the United States. When the Legislature established the agricultural college, it did not see fit to place it alongside of the university, and the reason beyond a doubt was that if it was placed near the university, and especially placed under the same board, under the same supervision, the object of the agricultural college would be thwarted. Students would not be prepared for their trades, but they would be prepared for the university. I do not think that we need any more broadening influences to be brought to bear upon these students who are in that education than those that are taught at the

agricultural college. If you will understand it, German, music, and languages of different kinds and a great many branches of higher instruction are given already at the agricultural college. I believe that by the union of the two we will thwart the object for which the agricultural college was established, and consequently, Mr. Chairman, I am very much opposed to their union.

Mr. RICKS. Mr. Chairman, this question. seems to be of very great importance and one that we ought to consider very fully before voting upon. The question of union was fully discussed in the Legislature last winter, and after it had been discussed and investigated from every point of view the Legislature decided that it would be unwise to unite the institutions. I will read an extract from the report of the board of directors of the agricultural college that was made at that time. (Reads.)
{1250}
Now, Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that much of the arguments of the gentleman from Cache would have no weight with this assembly. There is one point that he refers to in connection with the Cornell university that seemed to me to be the strongest argument that he made in favor of the union of these institutions that I think should be ventilated a little farther. He conveyed the idea that the agricultural college of New York was similar to the agricultural college of Utah and was attached to and became a part of the Cornell university. Now, Mr. Chairman, that is not true. The agricultural college of New York is a part of the university at Ithica, but it is not an agricultural college in the sense that the agricultural college of Utah is an agricultural college. The college department at Ithica only relates to agricultural training, and the other training such as is taught in the agricultural college at Logan is taught in the other departments of the university at Ithica, so that really the whole institution at Ithica is just exactly in the same ratio and in the same line that we desire the agricultural college of Utah to become when the finances of this State will justify a college of that kind. So, Mr. Chairman, the associations and the benefits of associations with other students and the broadening of the minds of the agricultural students and the other students in Cornell university can be accomplished at the entire university at Ithica, New York, to-day. There is another point that seems to me ought to have greater weight with this assembly than any other. As has been stated by the gentleman from Sanpete, in the agricultural college industrial classes or studies predominate. It was the hope when the Legislature created that institution to make it a school for the industrial education of the masses of the people of this Territory. They believed that in locating it in an agricultural district it would be better adapted to the accomplishment of the desires which they wished to accomplish, and I believe, sir, that every gentleman upon this floor, especially those from the country districts to- day, if he had a son to put into a college he would put him into a college, not only where he could learn English, literature, science, and the other branches of what may be called a classical education, but where he could also acquire an industrial education, so that when he went out again into the world, he would be able, if he failed in one branch to succeed probably in another. Suppose, sir, that if a hundred graduates from the university of Utah as it is to-day, were to be turned loose upon this community and another hundred graduates of the agricultural college, where they had received an industrial education, they understood mechanism, they understood agriculture, they understood blacksmithing, shoemaking, and carpentering, and all the various branches of an industrial education, which one of those two hundred students would be of the greatest value to this commonwealth? Would it be those that had received no training except a classic education, or would it be those who had gone through all the departments of an industrial

education? I say, fir, that the value of the industrial education would be incomparable in comparison with the other, to a community like this is at the present time. It has been stated that to-day we are educating none in the industrial sciences, but on the contrary, every man that we want to fill a position as a machinist, as a carpenter, as a shoemaker, is brought here from some other place_probably some of the old countries. In twenty years or fifty years from now, if this condition is to continue, we will find in Utah a dearth of that kind of material in our commonwealth. They are the wealth producers of the country, and unless we do something to encourage them and to maintain them in our community, I will tell you, gentlemen, {1251} that we will become poor indeed. Now, as regards the financial standing, I believe myself that in our present state of finances that we ought to be economical in every department, as economical as we possibly can be and not destroy the efficiency of our schools, but I believe, sir, that with the advent of statehood, we will be made able to maintain and build up the institutions, so that they will be of great value to this State from the funds that will be made available to the new State. The agricultural college will receive two hundred thousand acres of land. A movement is on foot now to have Congress allow that land to be sold or reserved to the State out of the Uintah and Uncompahgre reservations, when they are thrown open to settlement. If that is so, we would be able to receive from them two hundred thousand acres of land, of at least five dollars per acre in value. It will at least be able to sell for that amount. That would bring a fund of one million dollars which, invested at the rate of five per cent., would bring a fund or an interest of fifty thousand dollars a year to the State institutions. The agricultural college received from Congress twenty thousand or twenty-one thousand dollars this year, and in two or three years it will have reached twenty-five thousand dollars a year, They received from other sources several thousand dollars a year which would aggregate altogether at least seventy-three thousand dollars a year. a fund entirely adequate to pay all the expenses of that institution and make it self supporting and put it upon a level and in fact somewhat in excess of any of the institutions of this entire intermountain country. I believe, sir, that the fund that the university of Utah will receive from the sale of its lands, which undoubtedly will be reserved, that a fund will be produced or obtainable, which will be able to maintain that institution_that is, especially the university part of it, which I understand at the present time has only thirty-one students, and at least the fund of fifty thousand dollars a year ought to go to maintain the thirty-one students of the higher education, that has been spoken about by the gentleman from Cache, for many years to tome. The State normal school and the school of mines have each an endowment of their own, which will maintain them without any help from the territorial treasury, and I believe, sir, that it will be good policy on the part of this Convention to locate permanently_I do believe, sir, that they. ought to be located permanently, so that this fight and this uncertainty may be settled, but I believe, sir, they ought to be located permanently and maintained separately, and I believe that this growing State will yet be able to maintain two institutions, one of the higher learning, where our sons and our daughters can receive a classic education, if they desire, and one independent and separate, where they can receive a collegiate education and an industrial education also.

Mr. KERR. I understood you to state that the statement I made with respect to the agricultural college in New York was not true.

Mr. RICKS. No, sir. I did not make that statement. I said that the impression that had got out here was not correct, from your statement. Your statement would convey the idea, sir, that the

agricultural college of New York was similar to our agricultural college and had been united to the university at Ithica, but the agricultural college at New York does not comprise the departments that our agricultural college does.

Mr. KERR. Pardon me, perhaps I misunderstood. The fact is that the agricultural college of Cornell university is the one founded by the Morrill bill, just as ours is, and the studies are agriculture, mechanical arts, and so on, just as they are here. They are identically the same.
{1252}
Mr. RICKS. That is correct, but we have added to our agricultural college departments not embraced in any other agricultural college.

Mr. KERR. I have only one object in this and that is to be absolutely fair. I do not think that we should have a wrong impression get out. Did you state that there were only thirty-three students in the college?

Mr. RICKS. No, sir; in their collegiate work_the educational work. I think it was thirty-three last winter. What it is now I am not able to say, but somewhere near thirty.

Mr. KERR. Do you mean by university work, work which is a post graduate work?

Mr. RICKS. I mean the higher education.

Mr. KERR. That then includes all students in the college?

Mr. RICKS. No, sir. I understood there was a difference between the higher education and the college education.

Mr. KERR. By using the word higher education, I had reference to all collegiate education. We have elementary education, including kindergarten, primary, and grammar grades. Then we have high school and academic education, including the next four grades, and then a collegiate education. A university is an assembly of colleges. That is the way in which use those terms. That is why I asked the question so that I may not be misunderstood.

Mr. CANNON. I desire to ask Mr. Ricks a question. I understood, Mr. Ricks, that you stated the number of students doing university work was thirty-one, at the university. I call your attention to the fact that the students of the university number 119. I desire to know how you classify them and why you should make the distinction you do_upon what ground do you make such a distinction?

Mr. RICKS. I hold in my hand the classification made last winter in the report of the regents of the university: Juniors, 24; sophomores, 14; mining students, 9; normal students, 217; preparatory students, 49.

Mr. CANNON. I call the gentleman's attention to the fact that there is nothing there that states that these normal students or others would take a collegiate course. As a matter of fact, I was

informed myself the other day that 75 of the normals were taking college or unisity course.

Mr. RICKS. I understand that the normal department is entirely a separate and distinct institution, and while they are taking college courses, I understand that the university students, before taking the higher department, which I understand would be above the normal grades, would only be about thirty-two or three students. I am not posted enough to know anything about that.

Mr. CANNON. I do not wish an erroneous impression to get out concerning that, because it is not true.

Mr. GOODWIN. Mr. Chairman, I thought when Professor Kerr finished his argument that that settled the question. I did not think any gentleman here would have the hardihood to get up and propose anything different in the matter of connecting these two institutions. The truth is this, there is a great staff of professors at the university; there is another great staff at the agricultural college, and they are teaching precisely the same science almost. That is, through nearly the whole course of education, it is exactly the same. Why they should be in two separate institutions in as economical a State as this is going to be under the guidance of this Convention I cannot understand. I see a little cropping out of old fashioned prejudices here. For instance, the higher education that is referred to as the university course in contradistinction to the course in the agricultural college. In point of fact the agricultural college ought to be the higher institution. That is the institution that comes nearer imitating the Creator than {1253} any other; if we believe the good book the Creator has been engaged in making worlds for years. There is no record that he ever studied Latin or Greek. There is no sense in the world in separating these institutions in our country. There is every argument to show that they ought to be together. A great many boys go to school intending to take a scientific course, others go intending to take a classical course. When they get there, they find that they have not the aptitude to follow out what their mothers or their fathers or some other relation intended they should follow.

It is perfectly natural for a pious old lady who has a son to think first that her son is the smartest boy in the world. Second, that if the right thing is done, he will be made a clergyman, and preach salvation to a sinful world all his life. He gets to the school, they give him the classics to study, and he sits and feels like a fool, looks like a fool, and wishes he was dead for four years. He finally works through because the old lady saves her means and pays his way and then he is afflicted on some community to preach. The result is that that community grows wickeder every day [laughter], while he wades through a couple of hours from first to sixteenthly. I do not believe there has been a greater mistake in handling of this university than in religion of that kind, and if paradise is to be an eternal continuation of that, they had better take the other chute. But that same boy can take a shingle and a jack knife and in half an hour can have a water wheel running in the ditch and enjoy it, and all the boys gather around, and all the girls, and they admire it, and the notice was given right there that that boy was intended to be an engineer, that instead of trying to save souls that are not worth saving, he ought to be handling nature's great forces. Now, you group these boys in a college or university where all these things are taught, and the boy will get the right place before he has been there a year. Then the only real difference in the education is to direct the brains of boys in the channels where they can be of use to this world. Again, the expense is the thing we have got to consider now. We cannot increase the

indebtedness of this State more than two hundred thousand dollars. I expect my friend from Utah will still ring in a little proposition to reduce that seventy-five per cent. There is no sense under those circumstances to keep employed three or four staffs of learned professors. There is still another reason. A man is nothing after he loses his self respect. A school is nothing unless it can command the respect of the people about it, and of the State around it, and the parents of children; and the children themselves. We are told that the boys and girls in this Territory are going east and west to obtain education. That is true. I know some gentlemen that would gladly educate their children here, but they have the impression that the education is slipshod; that it is not on high ground, that it is not the higher education, and that all comes through poverty. You know, Mr. Chairman, that if you were the brightest man in the world and were to make a business suggestion and the gentleman beside you had ten millions of dollars and was to make a business suggestion, the rule of the world is to put such men as you aside and to believe the man beside you because he has a metallic backing. It is just so with schools. I think there are some people that always will be sending their children away, but I would like to have established in Utah an institution that the people of the east would send their children here to be educated, considering the climate, considering the capacity to study in this air, considering the reduction in the risk of disease, and it {1254} is that kind of an institution I want to see builded up, and I want all departments in it to be complete.

I know several gentlemen who I believe are going to die one of these days, although they have given no signs of it yet. I believe some of them have no children and that there is growing up in their hearts a belief that the possession and accumulation of money amounts to but very little after all, unless it can be put to some use. I believe they will begin to endow the university of Utah after awhile. We want to only get it off its wheels and get it on a firm foundation. I have in my mind's eye one now that I know is hesitating where he will put his money and it is a very large amount. It is enough to build a great university, and I believe if this thing could be settled and the right idea could be put before him, that inasmuch as he made his money in Utah he ought to build for himself a monument here; we would hear from him, if not in this life, after he has left it_one of those post mortem communications which are pleasant to receive from these crusty old fellows, who are not much good in this world, but prove after awhile that their work is not in vain. If I had my way, I would put an inheritance tax in this Constitution, so that when that sort of men die in this country and left no families the State would stretch out its hand and say, “we protected you while you were making your fortune. We have been charging you up what is due on your insurance, and we want such a per cent. as will educate our boys and our girls, and for the current expenses of this State, where we can make no indebtedness.” So my judgment is that if any gentleman here undertakes to dispute the ground that Professor Kerr laid down so strongly, the sergeant-at-arms ought to be instructed to take him out [laughter], with the single exception of this normal school. That is not in its true sense a higher education. That simply is utilizing the education already obtained, and hence when it comes, I propose to strike out the State normal school, in line 5, and add it to line 8. It will cover every present emergency and give the Legislatures of the future a little chance to act. I do it for the purpose of giving the Legislature by and by a little something to do, because I am satisfied that when we get through here, for the next eight or ten years all that the Legislature of this State will be able to do will be to pass an appropriation bill. I hope this amendment of any friend from Utah will not be entertained. I have been watching him, Mr. Chairman, and I do not wish to be personal, but of late I have taken him

as my guide on most measures, to find out how he stands, and then, in the language of a certain class of gentry who follow a profession of which I know nothing, “I copper it.” I am going to copper the amendment of my friend from Weber and then I am going to urge mine.

Mr. CREER. Mr. Chairman, perhaps the gentleman may call upon the sergeant-at-arms to put me out, but for all that, I desire to say just a few words on this proposition. The gentleman stated that he did not see how any person could propose anything different. Now, I do not know whether the gentleman was a resident of Salt Lake City at the time the agricultural college was located at Logan or not, but I do know this, that there was not a sentiment, there was not a single word from any member of the Legislature that proposed at that time to have them united_the university and the agricultural college together. Nothing that came from the professors of the university. There was nothing that came from any gentleman of Salt Lake City or elsewhere as to the locating of these educational institutions separately. And it seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that it is a great reflection against the intelligence and judgment of not only that Legislature, but subsequent Legislatures who {1255} have voted a great amount of money that the gentleman has indicated here in his speech to-day for the establishment of these institutions. I do know distinctly one thing, the father of the gentleman, Mr. Lund, from Sanpete County, was the chairman of that committee, and he distinctly portrayed to the Legislature the object of the agricultural college, which was to introduce and to cultivate industrial and mechanical arts distinct from the higher branches of education. If that has been a failure why then has the Legislature from time to time appropriated so much money for the establishment of that grand college at Logan? While I listened very attentively to the intellectual speech_but it is on just such speeches as this that we have appropriated hundreds of thousands of dollars in this Territory, until to-day we are involved by these useless appropriations, and I would be pleased if I could conform my judgment to the sentiments of the gentleman from Cache, but I cannot in view of past experience, because it does seem to me that it would cost a great amount of money to unite those branches of education together It is simply following up in the same line which you have been going right along_simply make experiments. Perhaps after they had been united for some time then they probably would not work satisfactorily and from a financial standpoint_I have seen some of the results from the agricultural college. We have had citizens go to that from our town, who have returned greatly benefitted. I am satisfied, so far as I can see from results of the labors and the management of that agricultural college, but I do not propose to cast my vote in favor of uniting them and expending a great amount of money, it seems to me, for a useless purpose. I believe that they should remain as they are to-day, and it seems to me that going back less than a decade_only 1888, there are two members on this floor that were in the Legislature at that time, and not a single sentence or voice was raised against establishing that independent from the university. The same reasons then it seems to me would appear as do now. Therefore, I shall sustain the amendment.

Mr. PETERS. I would like to ask the chairman of the committee on education a question. It is in connection with the Enabling Act, section 8. The idea with me was whether this grant would follow, providing that the union of the schools was made and it was known as a university?

Mr. PIERCE. I do not think there is any trouble there. The idea of a university is that it is composed of the various departments. The university itself is the combination of colleges. The agricultural college is one department; the school of mines is another department; normal school

is another department; the psychical and scientific school is another department and, whatever they are. The fund derived from the sale of the land appropriated for the agricultural college would be devoted especially for the building up of that department, and all united on the same site so that, as Professor Kerr said, it will enjoy the benefit of the library and course of instruction.

The committee then took a recess until 2 o'clock.

AFTERNOON SESSION.

The committee met pursuant to adjournment at 2 o'clock.

Mr. SQUIRES. Mr. Chairman, I listened with a great deal of pleasure this morning to the eloquent speech of the gentleman from Cache. I was charmed by the graces of oratory and delighted with the argument presented, but not convinced. I am not as well assured as the gentleman is that we should do wisely disturbing the present condition of the university and agricultural college. There are many questions that go to make up this case, {1256} as I understand it. I believe with him in a higher education. I come from a state which I believe is one of the best examples that can be furnished by any state in the Union of the advantage of education to its people. The state of Massachusetts has a system of education which I believe is unparalleled in all the states of this Union. We have an agricultural college and we have a college of higher learning, but the two are kept separate and distinct and my own belief is that it never was intended when agricultural colleges were first established that they should be attached to universities or to colleges where the classics are taught. I believe that the intention of those colleges was to have a school for the common people, a school where education, as indicated by the title, could be acquired, without the time of the student being taken up in the study of what is known as the higher education. I still believe that that is a fact. I believe with the gentleman, however, to this extent, that if we were just about starting, if no provisions had been made for an elaborate site and an elaborate plant for an agricultural college, in one section of the State, and a long tried university in another section of the State, that it might be wise to so consolidate these institutions as that if they were not to be upon the same site they might be in the same community, and under the same general guidance and direction.

There is one reason which has come under my observation and especially in connection with the schools the gentleman spoke of so eloquently this morning, the agricultural college at Cornell university, at Ithica, New York, and that is that the students at that university, who go there to take the agricultural course, are looked down upon with a sort of scorn and contempt by those who are there for another purpose, in the pursuit of higher studies, and there is not that unity of feeling between the agricultural students and the other students of the university, which the gentleman would lead us to believe. I do not think that the association of these students with their fellows would broaden them in that social sense of perfect community and harmony of feeling. I know that when that college was first started that was one of the great objections had against
a young man going there to acquire an education, that it required a great deal of moral courage to go there and face the contumely and contempt which was showered upon those students by their associates in other branches. However, if we were about starting_if we had no college and no

university, I might favor the location of these institutions, as I say, in the same community; even then I should want them separated, and only placed under the general control. As we are now situated, however, we have, at a considerable expense, established a magnificent institution in Cache County. The gentlemen of this Convention who visited the institution the other day must have been impressed with the fact that with no niggard hand has the foundation of that college been laid. There is no parsimony in the manner in which it has been prepared for the work of usefulness which is before it. Something like one hundred and fifty thousand dollars, so I was told by the president of the board of trustees, has already been expended there upon the main building, and the other necessary buildings upon the grounds. I am not prepared, Mr. Chairman, as the gentleman from Cache indicated this morning, that he was, to pass upon the question first of union without considering what that union might entail upon this State in the way of cost. A union of these two institutions in Salt Lake City would simply necessitate the giving up of the great plant which has been prepared at Logan. I am informed that the title to that plant is in the city of Logan. The ground upon which the buildings have been placed is in the {1257} city of Logan and the county of Cache, and a serious question might arise if any attempt was made to use those public buildings for any other purpose than for the purpose of an agricultural college and an experiment station. I believe it would be a practical loss to the Territory or the State, that there would be no power in the Legislature to sell these buildings, to convert them into cash, for the purpose of removing the college to another section of the State. On the other hand, we have a building here in Salt Lake City, which probably will answer for all the purposes of the university for some years to come, or until a proper plant can be placed upon the sixty acres on the eastern edge of our city.

Now, Mr. Chairman, I believe that an agricultural college should be located in an agricultural community. I believe that if we should place this college now upon the grounds indicated in the eastern portion of this city, during the next ten years the city would so grow up around that college that we should have that anomalous condition of an agricultural college situated in the heart of the most populous city in our State. I do not believe it would be wisdom to do any such thing as that. On the contrary, I am not in favor of sending the university, which is now located in Salt Lake City, so far away from the center of population. I believe that the university, as it is now situated, is properly located. I believe that it belongs right where it is in Salt Lake City, and therefore, I am in favor of having it remain there. The original purpose, as I believe, of the agricultural college, was to educate the sons of the common people in the mechanical arts, in a knowledge of farming, and of irrigation, and of all those things which go up to make the successful agriculturalist. If we have strayed away from that first principle, if we have undertaken in our college in Utah to combine that course with a classical course, then I believe we are doing what was not authorized or intended when the college was established. We have furnished or do furnish in this article a system of common schools in this Territory, up to the grade of a high school, which will furnish the ordinary young man or young woman with all the education that they will need in any walk of life which they may be called upon to fill. In addition to that education, which comes through the common school and the high school, the son of the farmer, the son of the mechanic, may go to the agricultural college and acquire a still further practical knowledge of the affairs of life. It will take the place to them of the old system of apprenticeship, that used to be in existence in this country, but which, I believe, under the prevailing influence of the knights of labor and other laber organizations, has been practically blotted out, and in these

days it is very difficult for a young man to go and get through the ordinary avenues of trade and practical knowledge in any mechanical pursuit. I believe that that is the intention and purpose of the agricultural college, and I do not consider it is necessary to attach an institution of that sort to the university. The university will be complete without it. We have a number of institutions of learning in these United States, whose fame is world wide, whose influence for good, and for the educational interests of this country is well established and well understood, and they do not seem to need any agricultural colleges connected with them to make their course of higher education complete. I do not understand that it is necessary or essential that we should add the course of agriculture or mechanical school to our university course here.

Let me ask, gentlemen of the committee, what is going to be the expense of building upon the sixty acres suggested for this combined plant in Salt Lake City of an agricultural college and {1258} university, with all the different schools that would in that plant be provided for? We are limited, as has been said this morning, by articles of the Constitution already adopted, to two hundred thousand dollars additional indebtedness for any purpose. Does any one think that we could go to work and build a suitable building for this combined purpose for any such sum as that? I doubt whether it could be accomplished, and until I can see a way wherein that appropriation can be made or those buildings put up, I should be very averse to any change whatever.

A great deal was said this morning about the cost of maintaining these institutions separately, and I understood the gentleman from Cache to make the statement that at least thirty thousand dollars a year would be saved to the Territory or to the State in case a consolidation could be effected. I cannot quite see where he gets his figures for a saving of thirty thousand dollars a year. I hold in my hand, Mr. Chairman, the report of the board of trustees of the agricultural college for 1894, in which, upon page 8, an estimate is made for the expenses of the college for the biennial period ending December 31, 1895.

Mr. KERR. If the gentleman will permit me, I would like to state that in answer to a question by the gentleman from Salt Lake, Mr. Goodwin, this morning, I said the amount that would be saved each year would depend entirely upon the amount appropriated to these different institutions. If the institutions received a small appropriation, the saving would be small; if a large appropriation, the saving would be correspondingly large, and I stated that if the institutions had one hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars, the approximate saving would be about thirty thousand dollars, but it was based upon the amount that the institutions would receive.

Mr. SQUIRES. Based on an appropriation for the two institutions of one hundred and twenty- five thousand dollars a year?

Mr. KERR. Yes, sir; if the institutions were united, they could do as much on twenty-five thousand dollars appropriation as they now do. By uniting them, we could do practically the same work for ninety-five thousand dollars, that is the estimate.

Mr. SQUIRES. I want to get at the actual cost of running this agricultural college. I want to understand, if I can, how heavy a burden it has been or is likely to be upon the coming State. This

estimate which I hold in my hand calls for two years' expenses, amounting to 6,448, that would be $23,224 a year; but I notice, Mr. Chairman, that in this amount a great portion of it is for the purpose of supplying apparatus, furniture, building of a propagating house, for testing machine, for machinery, and supplies, for mechanical engineering, for the museum, for the library and reading room, for cases for the museum, for bath rooms, for students, for miscellaneous funds, for painting, and sundries, stand pipe and hose, electric lights and telephones, so that less than half this amount is really appropriated for the regular expenses of such an institution. The salaries of teachers, only twelve thousand dollars. Expense of the board of trustees, three thousand dollars, including the clerk, foreman, janitor_thirty-five hundred dollars; and for printing catalogues, reports, and stationery, one thousand dollars. I venture to say that every other item in that report is something which is not an annual expense. I understand also that in spite of the estimate made by the board of trustees, the appropriation was made fifteen thousand dollars for the two years or seventy-five hundred dollars a year, Now, I do not consider that that was a very great burden upon the State. I do not consider that that would be any great {1259} hardship upon this people. I do not see where the argument for economy is going to come in provided we hold this institution to the purpose for which it was created, and any attempt to establish a classical school there, as well as at the university, which may be located somewhere else. I am not in favor of wiping out one hundred and fifty thousand dollars' worth of property in order that my friend from Cache and other advocates of a higher education may have their particular fad introduced into this Constitution and perpetuated upon the new State.

Mr. THORESON. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I am opposed to the union of the two institutions. I favor the motion to strike out the agricultural college in the section now under consideration. I always have been told from childhood up_in the first place by my parents and later by a great many good and wise men, to always let good enough alone, to leave that which is prospering to leave it prosper and not disturb it. We have an institution in the county from which I come and represent in part, that is a flourishing institution, that is a credit to our Territory, and will be to our State if it is let alone, an institution_the agricultural college_that in its growth is superior to any agricultural college in these United States, that is popular_not only in the State of Utah or the Territory of Utah, but in all the surrounding states and territories. The information and the knowledge that has been obtained through its experiments and through its advancement has reached thousands upon thousands of the households of the farmers of this intermountain region, and even gone back into our eastern agricultural states, for their benefit.

In what few remarks I make I want to come down to the practical workings of this institution. I have held a position in that county of surveyor during a period of two years. During that time, students from that college time and again would say, “Can't we go with you out into the field and work?” They are not of the kid glove fraternity, but they wanted to go right down and learn the practical workings of their education, and they were willing to go with me out in the field and drag chain or do any other work. I have watched the mechanics in their labor upon buildings, I have seen them enter shops and have carefully watched the mechanic in his handling of tools and in producing the results of his avocation. I tell you, that it is an institution that nine-tenths of the people of this Territory and the surrounding territories demand and want. At the time that this institution was located, it was not then considered of very great value. The people then of Salt Lake, and the people of this entire Territory looked upon it as an inferior institution, and almost

any county in this Territory could have had it.

Mr. EICHNOR. May I ask the gentleman a question? Is Salt Lake County trying to take the college away from Cache County?

Mr. THORESON. Yes, sir. I will answer you plainly, that I have heard many men state that if it is a union, it means a union in Salt Lake. I am talking against that proposition. It means taking away from that county or the disturbing of that institution, which has been located there by the unanimous consent of the people of this Territory. I talked to the governor in this Territory at the time that bill was passed, I have talked with several members of the Legislature, at the time it wag located and established. There was not an educator in the Territory, or legislator, or a statesman, but what said it ought to be separate and apart from the university of the State, and I tell you now, gentlemen, and I think that the facts will bear me out that there is not a farmer in the Territory of Utah that would send his sons and his daughters {1260} to this city or to any other great city for the purpose of learning them agriculture or giving them an industrial education. At least, it proves to the contrary, they do not do it, and I want to tell you, furthermore, the results of the union of the two institutions would be putting the agricultural and industrial departments in the shade, because they would look up to those that were further advanced in the classics_in the higher education, and when they come into cities of this kind, they will look to the seniors in the institutions of learning and they will follow them in the fashion, and they will follow them in all their advancement and they will forget from whence they came, and when they return to the old homestead, they will be worthless to their fathers, that expect them to go out into the field and earn their living. They would be spending the money to the disadvantage of the aged father that expected support in his old age. I tell you, that institution up there is making men, not dudes, and I tell you it ought to be left just where it is, and it ought to receive the small pittance and the continuance of it that it has for the last few years. We do not ask for the university; we do not ask for any advancement; we are perfectly willing to take the natural advancement that we have had for the last few years.

We will promise you, gentlemen, if you let us alone and continue appropriating the small pittance, or a little advancement, if you can afford to do it, we will make an institution there of which every member on this floor will be proud, inside of five years, and I tell you that the entire State and surrounding states will be proud of that institution. I believe that the gentlemen in visiting that institution_every one that I talked with, were surprised to see the results, and I tell you that they only made a beginning, but the roots of that institution have been planted and it has gathered in it the right kind of material and is giving them the instruction they need and that the people demand. I notice on the other hand, when I meet my friends that come down to your university here_meet them upon the street, that they do not look upon labor with that respect that I desire that they should do, and am sorry to say I see them led astray under many circumstances, and I know when they return that they are not what their parents expected them to be, and I tell you, gentlemen, that we can afford to back up that which has been demonstrated by the course of the institution that I refer to for the last few years; we can afford to leave good enough alone; we can afford to continue that institution, and I tell you that the saving to this Territory, the saving of the morals, of the manhood of our youth, should be more than a few dollars' consideration, and the making of practical men that are interested in the mechanical pursuits and in the industrial

pursuits, in the improvement of the farm, of the home, and the building up of our new State and industries thereof, are the kind of men that we want to make, and we do not need so many with a classical education, and in fact we do not have them. I am informed here that a student will be taught in the institution of high learning in this Territory_students are being taught Greek by a professor receiving twelve dollars per day. do not know whether that is backed up by facts or not, but I am informed so. Gentlemen that are taking the other side can perhaps prove to the contrary. I met a gentleman on the street during the noon recess, and ascertaining that I was a member of this Constitutional Convention and that this subject was before us, he said, “Our state, the state of Ohio, had such an experience. We once had an agricultural college of which we were proud, but we amalgamated with the university and our farmers now send their sons away to get an agricultural or industrial {1261} education. They come back and say that there is no such thing connected with that university. It is entirely gone.”

We find them in Idaho similar. The two institutions have united. What is the result? Why, they have neither, and to support the higher education of that state it is rumored that they have to take the money appropriated by the general government for agricultural pursuits and for the agricultural college of that state, and that they are now liable to lose the support the general government would have continued to give them, had they kept the institutions separate and apart.

We find in Wyoming, where the union has taken place, what has been the result. In the last Legislature a bill was introduced to separate them, that the one might not overshadow the other and ruin it. These are the conditions of things. Go to the great institutions of the world or even of this country, outside of Cornell, what do you find? Do you find an agricultural college attached to any of the great universities? I say no, you do not find them encumbered with it, and they did not want it a few years ago. It seems to me, gentlemen, the growth of this institution is the enemy of some certain agitators in this Territory_the growth of the agricultural college, and they think that by its growth added to the university in this city that they could compete with the great institutions of learning in the world, but I am afraid, gentlemen, that we cannot carry the burden. I am afraid that we cannot undertake the job, and I do not believe that for the next twenty, thirty, forty or fifty years, we can either united Dr separated compete with the great institutions of learning in the east, and I say if we encumber the university_the educational institute with agricultural colleges and with all these other things, we will get an animal upon our hands that we cannot handle at all. I say, gentlemen, let us consider the things in which we find ourselves. Let us look at this from a practical standpoint. We have an institution that is progressing gradually, that is growing in influence and popularity, and that is doing a good work, and at a limited expense, and now let us leave that alone, let us continue its good work, as it is, and we will all be satisfied.

Mr. KERR. I would like to ask the gentleman who has just been speaking, if it is not true that the agricultural colleges of the states of Illinois, Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Minnesota, are connected with the universities? I understood him to state that in no institution in the United States, except Cornell was such the case.

Mr. THORESON. I made the statement of the prominent universities of this country and also the old countries, that such was not the case, that they were not united except Cornell.

Mr. THORESON. No.

Mr. KERR. It spends two hundred thousand dollars a year for its work. The university of Wisconsin at Madison is one of the leading universities of the United States. The universities of Illinois and Minnesota are also among the leading institutions.

Mr. THORESON. Will the gentleman allow me to answer him? I will name some of the institutions that do not nave agricultural colleges connected with them: Oxford, Cambridge of England, Edinburgh, Leipsic, Berlin, and Paris, and American institutions of Harvard and Yale.

Mr. THATCHER. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I have no notion of attempting to discuss this question at length for I neither have the strength nor have I devoted the time necessary to a lengthy discussion, but I shall vote for the amendment to strike out the words, “agricultural college.”

What I desire to say more specifically {1262} upon this point is that I do not think my friend from Cache Valley represents the feeling of the northern delegation. As I understand matters, when the agricultural college was first established, it was accomplished by the generous vote of the majority of the delegates from Salt Lake County. I may be mistaken in that, but I do not think I am, and in giving the location of that college to the north we had also the generous vote of delegates from the south and from the west, and while I do not believe that my colleague from Cache County intended to throw reflection upon those who have thus treated us generously, unfortunately, his language would be subject to that interpretation, I desire to say to this honorable body and to you, sir, Mr. Chairman, that I do not endorse sentiments of that kind. Indeed the people of northern Utah have very greatly appreciated what was done by the action of that Legislature, and I have never discovered the sentiments to which he made allusion. I find the same generous and broad sentiment among the delegates of Salt Lake on this floor that was discovered in the Legislature at that time. I have found the same generous feeling upon the part of the delegates from the south, the west, and the east, and I desire to say, gentlemen, that if it shall prove to be the wish and the will of this honorable body to permanently locate the agricultural college separate from the university, we shall appreciate that act, as we have other generous acts of the same nature. If, on the other hand, in the interests of economy, it is thought to the best interests of the people of Utah that they should be united, we shall bow to the majority on that question. I was an advocate of union, but I must confess that the speech this morning of my friend from Cache weakened me slightly in his reference to the connection of the agricultural college with the university of Cornell. I apprehend now, after these references have been reviewed, that the dangers pointed out by the delegate from Salt Lake (Mr. Squires) are very grave. I have known men who would face danger and death in every form without a blanch upon their cheeks, or without a quake in their knees, that would go like whipped curs under the infliction of a sneer, and I now have grave doubts as to whether the farmer boy whose face is blacked with the smut of the forge would feel very much to associate with a son of a rich man, who, as my friend on the left referred to, has the cut and fashion of the dude_whether that would encourage that which we want in this Territory, industrial, agricultural education. This,

gentlemen, is all that I feel that I should say upon this matter. I am connected with the university of Utah and my sympathies are with it. Much means have been expended upon it since the year 1850, and I have expressed on several public occasions that which was expressed by the honorable delegate from Salt Lake (Mr. Goodwin), this morning, that I hoped to live to see the time when we should have educational institutions in the new State that would draw from the east and the west, that our lovely climate and health giving location would draw that class of students and make Utah foremost as an educational centre. First then, after all the arguments that I have heard I am in favor of the agricultural college where it is, and I am in favor of building up the university of Utah in this city, if this body so desires, and so expresses it by their vote, until we shall make it worthy of the name of university.

Mr. RICHARDS. Mr. Chairman, I have not had the advantage of hearing all that has been said on this question, but while the speeches that have listened to have been very interesting and instructive, it seems to me that we are spending time in discussing a question that ought not to be before this {1263} Convention. I do not understand that a motion to strike out would now be in order. If it were, I should move to strike out section five, because, as I understand the duties that devolve upon us in the forming of this Constitution, this is a matter that ought not to be incorporated in the Constitution, and whether the majority of the members of this Convention believe in union of these institutions or believe in the separation of the institutions, it matters not to me. I do not know what the consensus of opinion of the Convention is in relation to the matter, but I think I do know that it does not belong in this Constitution. It is unusual. I have looked in vain in other constitutions for this kind of legislative matters. It is usual and proper that such institutions as these should be provided for and that the maintenance of them should be arranged for, but to determine whether they shall exist as one institution or more, where they shall be located and things of that sort, they belong pre-eminently to the legislative body, and I think, gentlemen, if you will examine the constitutions of other states, as I have done, you will find that those constitutions are silent upon these questions. The delegate from Cache, who recently spoke, called attention to the fact that the union of the university and agricultural college of Wyoming was not working satisfactorily, and that a proposition was before the legislature to have them separated. Now, this is a question that ought to be left to the Legislature. If it is desirable to unite these institutions, let the Legislature unite them, and then if it should become desirable at any time for them to be separated, they can be separated without going through the long, tedious form and expense of procuring an amendment to the Constitution. I say, gentlemen, that this matter has no place in the Constitution of this State. I say it ought not to be there. I say that if we put it there, we hamper the Legislature, we undertake to look forward ten, fifteen, twenty, or fifty years, and determine what the good of this State may be. How do we know but what in the next ten years our population may increase ten-fold and the conditions existing then may require an entirely different management and arrangement from that which would seem wise and proper to us to-day? And so, without entering into the question as to whether these institutions would be better united or separated, I say that that section ought not to be there, and at the proper time I shall move to have it stricken out.

It does seem to me that if you gentlemen concur with me in this view that this time, however pleasant it may be and however instructive it may be on general principles to listen to the arguments and speeches which the gentlemen are making, and which are very interesting and

instructing, still, it seems to me that it is not proper at this late period of the existence of this Convention to indulge in such discussion, if indeed we do not want that matter in the Constitution. And I say we do not. No matter what the opinion of this Convention may be on that subject, whether it be for union or division, it ought not to be there, but it ought to be left to the Legislature to determine this question from time to time as the benefit of the State at that particular time may require. If it comes to a vote on the question now before the Convention, I shall vote for striking out the words “the agricultural college.” Because I am not prepared to say at this time, it is best that these two institutions should be united. I doubt very much if the majority of this Convention will say that, but I say we ought to be silent upon the subject and say nothing, and therefore, this provision ought to come out eventually.

Mr. RALEIGH. Mr. Chairman, the institutions, as I understand it, that {1264} have been established in this country have been located by men of judgment, intelligence, and understanding. My policy is to accord to men that have done these things all that is due to them for establishing these institutions, and while it is understood most distinctly by almost everybody I suppose that if a person has a patch of potatoes in Logan and another patch in Salt Lake, and the patch is only so large as will require one man's labor, that they can cultivate it at half the price by having the two together that they could if they were separated, That is easy enough to be understood. There is where comes in this thirty thousand dollars a year that my friend has spoken of. Now, I did not have to go to Logan to understand why that agricultural college was established there and to reason in my mind why it ought to stay there. The same principle and the same hopes, gentlemen, that placed these streets in Salt Lake City eight rods wide, that everybody admire now_if they had not seen forty years ahead_if they had been here forty years ago, would have said they were altogether too wide, and they were altogether too long, the city was too large, it only required a small commercial center to start on, and then we could follow out by the cow paths and establish these things after awhile; but the same intelligence that did this one thing that I have alluded to for illustration, has done these other things that are away ahead of the times, and all the trouble is in the matter now at present, the financial condition of our people in this country, which is universal all over the United States. The trouble is we have built ahead of the times and we only need to let our buildings stand, except so far as to protect them and carry on what they will admit of_what business they will admit of, and I not only speak of colleges, the places of learning, and so on, but many other things, and wait until our financial condition becomes changed. It will change. It is only a question of time when these lines come into market, or the results of them that we can manage, then the time will have changed so far as the