91 
ture and mechanic arts; fifth, it would interfere with existing colleges in the several 
States, on the ground that sciences and classical studies would not be excluded; 
sixth, he argued against the constitutionality of the measure. 
Immediately after the veto of this measure Mr. Morrill attempted to have it 
passed over the President's veto but failed, the vote being 105 in the affirmative and 
96 in the negative. In the remarks submitted at that time Mr. MorriU very briefly 
but clearly denied the partisan character of the measure; submitted that it had the 
support of the agricultural interests throughout the whole country; corrected some 
errors of the President concerning the revenues from the public lands; denied the 
intermingling of the State governments and the General Government, the injuries to 
the new States; and, in fact, met every objection, as it now seems, fairly and squarely 
that the President had submitted in his veto message. 
This, however, closed the history of this remarkable measure. It is introduced 
here in this paper simply to recall to mind that nearly every important considera- 
tion for or against the bill was presented at that time. Doubtless Mr. Morrill 
secured the material for his argument from the advocates of the bill the country 
over, but it is interesting to observe that in his first speech in favor of the bill, after 
its introduction in the House of Representatives, he covered every essential point 
and made the argument so complete that subsequent debates seemed only an echo of 
what he had already given to the country. 
THE SECOND BILL. 
The death of the first bill by veto did not defeat the cause. On December 16, 
1861, Mr. Morrill reintroduced the measure which again was reported back unfavor- 
ably. In the following June, 1862, Mr. Morrill attempted to offer a substitute for 
this bill and asked leave to have it printed, but objection being offered the matter 
went over. Meantime, on May 5, 1862, Senator Wade, of Ohio, introduced the same 
measure into the Senate. On May 16 the bill was reported back with amendments 
from the Committee on Public Lands by Mr. Harland, of Iowa. In the Senate the 
bill passed through a series of debates. It is interesting to note that from the State 
of Kansas we hear the argument that the disposition of public lands as proposed 
would ruin that State. The argument is given presentation also from the State of 
Minnesota. The amendments and debates at this time were chiefly upon the details 
with reference to the locating of the lands. Mr. Lane, of Kansas, however, did come 
forward and object to the passage of the bill "as an old-line Democrat." This was 
the only appearance of party feeling revealed in the debate. Finally, on June 10, 
the bill passed the Senate by a vote of 32 to 7. A week later, on June 17, the bill 
was taken up in the House by Mr. Morrill and pushed to an issue and on that day, 
by a vote of 90 to 25, was passed. The bill was signed by President Lincoln, July 1, 
and reported to the House on July 2, 1862, and thus became a law. 
The purpose of this measure is set forth in section 4 and found in the familiar 
words: " College where the leading object shall be, without excluding other scien- 
tific and classical studies, and including military tactics, to teach such branches of 
learning as are related to agriculture and the mechanic arts, in such manner as the 
legislatures of the States may respectively prescribe, in order to promote the liberal 
and practical education of the industrial classes in the several pursuits and pro- 
fessions in life." 
I presume it would be fair to interpret this statute in the light of the debate which 
led to its enactment. I submit the following observations: 
First. Evidently there was no design to cast any reflection upon education as it 
was then encouraged. There was an evident feeling, however, that the so-called 
classical or literary education did not meet the demand; indeed, the approval of that 
kind and type of education is legitimately in the statute. Any fair interpretation of 
the expression "without excluding other scientific and classical studies' ' will recognize 
general approval of the then existing methods in education. 
Second. This statute was intended to introduce new lines of education. It was 
intended to provide what was not already provided. It was to meet the need that 
had existed but hitherto had been unrecognized. This statute recognizes the 
industrial classes in the field of agriculture and mechanic arts as substantially 
unprovided for beyond the opportunities in the public schools. It is worthy of note, 
however, that at the date of this statute the public school system w r as a long way 
from its present efficiency. It was generally conceded that the wealthy classes and 
the favored classes were able to take care of themselves. The older institutions 
were somewhat aristocratic in their original conception. They appealed largely to 
the favored classes and by easy processes neglected the large masses of the people. 
This statute was a distinct effort to extend a form of higher education to a class of 
people hitherto unreached. 
