PRO AND CON. 339 



upon this matter was not in answer to any demand from 

 the people. The men who represented the colleges at 

 Washington last winter were not farmers, and were never 

 connected with or interested in their caucuses. At the last 

 meeting of the Congress an attempt had been made to 

 commit the meeting to the same resolutions at the last hour 

 of the session. Discussion was staved off on this report last 

 year, and the Congress refused to pass the resolutions, 

 thanks to the noble efforts of Dr. J. A. Warder, of Ohio. 

 Will the gentlemen who preceded me tell me where are the 

 fruits of this tree, which has cost the people ten million 

 dollars worth of public lands. Are they in the State of 

 Missouri ? Are they in the State of Ohio, where Senator 

 Patterson was chosen President of an Agricultural College ? 

 The gentleman wanted the Congress to consider this ques 

 tion seriously. The Agricultural Colleges in this country 

 have not been a success. The professors in them all, with 

 one exception, have dinned in our ears that classical educa 

 tion is the intent of the act upon this subject. Mr. Davis, 

 in his seat in Congress, charged Mr. Morrill with fraud in 

 this matter, and that under the name of Agricultural Col 

 leges, another attempt is being made to rob us of our lands. 

 These gentlemen claim that it is a generous paternal move 

 ment on the part of the government to educate poor agri 

 culturists sons. It was to so educate all sons that they 

 may become agriculturists. The intention was that these 

 colleges should be to agriculture what the theological semi 

 nary is to the pulpit; what the medical college is to the 

 medical profession, and what the blacksmith shop is to the 

 apprentice. Have we any such Agricultural Colleges ? 



Dr. Eeid rejoined that he was utterly amazed at the 

 statements he had heard made. Does the gentleman know 

 that these colleges are the growth of years ? Does he ex- 



