Texas A and M University - Aggieland Yearbook (College Station, TX)

Page 27 text:

Texas A. and M. THEN we think of our College we do not realize that it represents a comparatively recent experiment in education and that it is the result of only a few years of growth and de¬ velopment. We are prone to accept things as they are, benefit by them, and pass on and are too little concerned with the past as it bears on the present and future. Since the “Longhorn” is intended to be representative of A. and M., it can do no better than to give us all the best possible understanding of the problems and the achievements of the men who built this College. A deeper appreciation of their work and a greater love for our school should be the result. This history is written with the hope that a knowledge of the past will lead to a better grasp of the present and a greater interest in the future. Hon. Justin S. Murrell, an able Vermont Congressman, first conceived the system of land grant colleges, of which we are a part. In 1853 he introduced a congressional bill providing for the establishment of such a system upon a land grant basis. His plan involved the granting of 20,000 acres of public land to each member of Congress for the purpose of promoting technical education in this state. Evidently President Buchanan considered the step as too great a de¬ viation from the then accepted classical ideals of education, for he vetoed the bill after it had received congressional approval. The matter was not resumed under Buchanan’s administration. On July 2, 1862, however, Congress passed a very similar bill appropriating 30,000 acres of public land for each congress¬ man to apply in the interest of education in his state, a bill which Lincoln approved. The col¬ leges thus established were to be primarily for the benefit of the agricultural and mechanical sciences, as they were then known, though it was understood that the liberal arts were not to be totally excluded. In the beginning the greatest stress was laid on agriculture. After the Cen¬ tennial Exposition in Philadelphia, however, practical shop work gained increasing popularity because of a valuable exhibition of such work which Russia made at the Exposition. On November 1, 1866, the Texas Legislature formally approved the Congressional Bill and agreed to abide by its provisions. Shortly thereafter Congress issued land scrip for 180,000 acres to Texas. This was sold for 8174,000 and invested in Texas gold frontier bonds to form the fund whose interest is helping to maintain our College today. Little further action was taken until the spring of 1871. The Legislature then added 8187,000 to the congressional ap¬ propriation and named a commission which it entrusted with the task of locating the proposed Agricultural and Mechanical College of Texas. After a lengthy consideration of offers from various parts of the State, the commission decided on the divide between the Navasota and Brazos rivers as the best site for the new institution. The citizens of Brazos County had agreed to add 2,416 acres of land there located to the endowment of Congress and thus secured the location of the College. Five years later the Constitutional convention designated the College as a technical branch of Texas University, a measure which entitled it to share a land grant of one million acres with that institution. The body then vested in the Legislature the right to levy such taxes as might be necessary to fill the needs of the Institution, and everything was in readi¬ ness to make the Agricultural and Mechanical College of Texas a reality. On October 4, 1876, our College was formally opened. According to Professor R. P. W. Morris, the first commandant, six students reported on that memorable day and, as there were six professors, each student received all the personal attention that he needed. Difficult prob¬ lems were not long in presenting themselves. The Board of Directors, composed of Governor Coke, Lieutenant-Governor R. B. Hubbard, Guy M. Bryan, Speaker of the House, B. H. Davis, and C. S. West were inexperienced and had no precedents to govern them. They had found it Pane l 7

Page 26 text:

Chemistry Building

Page 28 text:

Texas A. and M.===Continned difficult to find instructors, and now they found it as difficult to fashion a college machine which differed radically in many respects from the systems they knew. With such details as this apparently settled the new college finally got under way. Soon, however, as a result of the inexperience of the founders, a greater trouble sprang up. The people of Texas assumed an antagonistic attitude toward A. and M. and turned the full force of public opinion against it. There were two reasons for this somewhat unreasonable opposition: It is not difficult to understand why the new college was at first considered a good reform school. The idea of a college of agricultural and mechanic arts with military science suggested, when compared with that of a classical college, the work and the discipline which uncontrollable youths required. It requires almost a stretch of the imagination to realize that this first opinion was modified in a very few years. A reorganization of the college brought about this change of opinion. After the old system had endured for three years it was superseded by the reorganized College. The first faculty was released in 1872 on the charge of inefficiency. In the report of the situation President John G. James, successor of Thos. L. Gatbright, the first president, ex¬ plained that the system under which the College had been operating did not elevate the studies in agriculture and mechanics to the place which was theirs under the law and consequently left the State liable to a loss of Federal assistance since it was a bound trustee. That would, of course, have meant the end of A. and M. The instructors were even accused of fostering antagonism toward the agricultural and mechanical arts and of attempting to make the institution a literary school with a prominent military organization. The College, as has been mentioned, had many opponents, some of whom disliked it because of the fact that it was a new experiment and others who were disappointed because it was only new in name. One of these groups should have been friendly to the institution but very unfortunate circumstances combined them against the Col¬ lege. The university plan of organization, that is, elective studies, in connection with the then prevailing sentiment for classical colleges, defeated the purpose of A. and M. in the beginning. President John G. James proposed a new system that would bring the proper subjects, agriculture and mechanics, to the place which the law provided for them. Under the new system more tech¬ nical subjects were taught and practice classes were made compulsory, an unheard-of rule before the former faculty had been dismissed. The arguments for compulsory attendance to practice classes were two in number. As seen by the President, castes would be broken down if students were compelled to attend practice classes. The second reason is obviously one of increased effi¬ ciency. On utilitarian grounds the students should be made to attend. In an attempt to dispel the fallacious idea prevalent that the school was a reformatory, it was made plain that the prac¬ tice classes came under the curriculum and that the students were not paid to attend them. Student labor was organized for those students who had the time and the skill required to work for the college. Here also we fiist hear of our now very popular fatigue uniform which was sug¬ gested for the purpose of reducing the expense of clothing. Another great change was the one made in the curriculum of the college. The first organiza¬ tion had made four divisions: a course in Agriculture, a course in Mechanics and Engineering, a course in Languages and Literature, and a course in Military Tactics. The course in Language and Literature included commercial subjects, ancient and modern languages and English, and Philosophy. The purpose of this course was to fit men to be editors, publishers and teachers in institutions of higher learning. The system allowed too great a freedom in the election of super¬ ficial subjects. By this system of election the number of classes taught and, consequently, the expenses incurred, were greatly increased. The reorganization left only a vestige of the old clas¬ sical type of education in the form of courses in English language; in history and literature; in German language and literature; in philosophy and political economy; in elocution, and in dec¬ lamation and composition. The time allotted made it evident that their purpose was simply that of supplementing technical training. Page 18