seasonable to invite your attention to the advantages of superadding to the means of education provided by the several States, a seminary of learing instituted by the national legislature within the limits of their exclusive jurisdiction [District of Columbia], the expense of which might be defrayed or re-imbursed out of vacant grounds which have accrued to the nation within those limits."" The House committee, to whom this portion of the President's message was referred, reported, that the Constitution does not warrant the incorporation of such an institution by any express provision; but since Congress has exclusive jurisdiction over the District of Columbia, it cannot be doubted that Congress has the requisite power to legislate in the present case; however, serious doubts arise as to the right to appropriate public property for the support of such an institution. The practical conclusion of this report was to the effect that the erection of a university along the lines proposed was not within the powers of Congress confided by the Constitution, wherefore it was recommended that no measures be taken.12 President Madison recurs to the same subject in his seventh annual message of December 5, 1815, writing that "the present is a favorable season also for bringing again into view the establishment of a national seminary of learning within the District of Columbia, and with means drawn from the property therein, subject to the authority of the general government."'13 In his eighth annual message (December 3, 1816), President Madison renews his previous recommendation for the establishment of a national university to the favorable consideration of Congress." The House committee, to whom the latter message was referred, concluded their report with the words," under a conviction, therefore, that the means are ample, the end desirable, the object fairly within the legislative powers of Congress, and the time a favorable one, your committee recommend the establishment of a national university"; and a 11 Richardson, I, 485. 13 Richardson, I, 568. 12 Annals Congress, 11 C., 3 S., 976. bill and estimate for that purpose were submitted by the chairman, Mr. Wilde (Ga.). Later in the session the consideration of the bill was indefinitely postponed. While this bill was on the calendar, a resolution for an amendment to the Constitution, "That Congress shall have power to establish a national university," was presented, but by a vote of 86 to 54, it was decided not to consider it.16 President Monroe, in his first annual message (December 2, 1817), suggested that it be recommended to the States to include in an amendment to the Constitution "a right in Congress to institute likewise seminaries of learning, for the all-important purpose of diffusing knowledge among our fellow-citizens throughout the United States."" Two years later, December 23, 1819, Mr. Hill (Mass.) introduced a resolution in the House, that a committee be appointed to inquire into the expediency of establishing a national university within the District of Columbia.18 This resolution was not adopted. This same subject formed a considerable part of President J. Q. Adams's first annual message" (December 6, 1825); and a Senate committee was appointed to report upon the expediency of establishing such an institution.20 A partial revival of this question in 1836 is to be found among the debates relative to the disposal of the James Smithson legacy. While various committee reports were concerned with the question of the propriety and expediency of establishing at Washington, under the name of "The Smithsonian Institution," for the increase and diffusion of knowledge among men, an institution on the basis of the Smithson endowment, various members of either branch of Congress thought that they foresaw in these reports plans for establishing a national university, and were, therefore, opposed to such an institution either on principle or on prejudice." 15 Annals Congress, 14 C., 2 S., 234, 257, 1064. 17 Richardson, II, 18. 19 Richardson, II, 311. 21 See Rhees, "The Smithsonian bates, 24 C., I S., 63, 1374. 16 Ibid., 268. 18 Annals Congress, 16 C., 1 S., 781. Institution," etc., 1879, 135-158; also, De For over thirty years the congressional records are silent concerning any legislation relative to the establishment of a national university at the seat of the General Government. From 1867 up to the present time Congress has been concerned with various species of legislation seeking to establish Government endowment and control of various sorts of higher institutions. On February 22, 1867, a resolution was agreed to, directing the Committee on Ways and Means to inquire into the expediency of bringing in a bill to establish a National School of Science. During the following Congress, Mr. Stewart (Nev.) introduced a bill to establish a National School of Mines.23 Similar legislation is recorded to have occurred during the years immediately following. Not until 1872, however, was Congress again concerned with the question of establishing a national university. In this year both Mr. Howe (Wis.) and Mr. Sawyer (S. C.) introduced bills in the Senate, providing for the establishment of such an institution," while a similar bill was introduced in the House by Mr. Perce (Miss.).25 The House Committee on Education and Labor favorably reported a bill, the endowment feature of which provided that the General Government should bind itself to pay such "national university in perpetuity 5 per cent. interest on a registered unassignable certificate of $20,000,000." 28 President Grant in his message of December 1, 1873, suggested to Congress the propriety of establishing, in the District of Columbia, "an institution of learning or university of the highest class, by donation of lands."" A bill was, accordingly, introduced in the Senate by Mr. Pratt (Ind.); but no further action appears to have been taken. The annual message of President Hayes of December 3, 23 Globe, 40 C., 2 S., 10, 553, 554, 556. 22 Globe, 39 C., 2 S., 1478. 24 Globe, 42 C., 2 S., 1938, 3637. 26 Hoyt, National University, 70. 27 Ibid., 73. 23 Ibid., 198. 28 Record, 43 C., I S., 77. 28 1877, treats of this subject partly as follows: "I here add that I believe it desirable, not so much with reference to the local wants of the District [of Columbia], but to the great and lasting benefit of the entire country, that this system should be crowned with a university."" A bill to this effect was introduced in the House during the same session.30 Similar measures have been introduced in Congress during the last twenty years, none of which have, as yet, met with any measure of success. Senator Ingalls (Kansas) introduced a national university measure in 1885. During each succeeding Congress, and including the 55th Congress, this project has received more or less, usually less, attention in either house. Its advocates believe such legislation by Congress to be constitutional, expedient, and necessary. They point to the many scientific bureaus already in existence, for the organization of which there can be found no expressed constitutional warrant, but for the establishment of which Congress was believed to possess ample implied powers, the resultant powers accruing from expressed powers. It is but a step, they say, to the co-ordination of these scientific agencies of the Government into an administrative whole which will constitute a true university; and this step would be but a resultant of the expressed powers already possessed by Congress. Furthermore, this step is expedient and necessary in our present stage of civilization and culture. On the other hand, the opponents of the national university idea deny these contentions in toto, regarding national legislation concerning this measure to be unconstitutional, inexpedient and unnecessary. 29 Ibid., 45 C., 2 S., 7. 81 Ibid., 49 C., I S., 402. 30 Ibid., 3835. CHAPTER III THE LANDLESS STATES STRIVE FOR RECOGNITION AT various periods in our history the sixteen States of the Union (comprising the original thirteen, and Vermont, Kentucky and Maine), which contained no public lands within their borders, and which, therefore, received no government endowment for education such as has been granted to the States formed out of the public domain, have striven to secure what they have deemed a just and equitable distribution of either public lands or the proceeds of the sales of such lands, for educational purposes. This movement is apparently an offshoot of the old States'-rights conflict over the public lands which kept the old Congress under the Confederation in such a turmoil during the early days of national beginnings. The debates of both advocates of and opponents to measures of equitable distribution of the public lands for education, concentrate about the intent and purport of the deeds of cession of the original land-owning States; much weight is also placed upon the varying notions regarding the constitutionality of such a distribution; and, finally the legislative mind has never lost sight of the conditions of justice, expediency, and necessity entering into the problem. Finding its first recorded expression in a congressional debate in 1803, this measure has appeared more or less frequently in Congress during every decade to the present. Furthermore, the movement functions as a constituent factor, in company with other powerful conditions, in bringing to pass the Surplus Revenue Distribution of 1836, and the Distribution Act of 1841. Nor can the feeling for just and equitable participation in the benefits of Government |