in some countries, and the rather as forming them for initiation into the duties and practices of civil life." This idea of student self-govern ment, borrowed from academic centres in the old world, where college and university government has always been more democratic than in America, was successfully planted by Jefferson in Virginia, and it is destined to spread throughout the country. It has sprung up, apparently by spontaneous generation, in certain of our colleges, and it has long survived as a precious inheritance in certain of our public schools, based upon the best old English models.

SUMMARY OF JEFFERSON'S REPORT.

All of the foregoing special views upon the subject of education Jefferson contrived to introduce into the body of his report. Upon the five specific points actually referred to the commissioners for their opinion, the following summary statement may be made:

(1) Central College was recommended as the proper site of the university.

(2) The plan of building proposed was that of an academical village, with pavilions for the professors and ranges of dormitories for the students, the buildings to be arranged on the sides of "a lawn," and to be connected by "a passage of some kind, under cover from the weather." This Jeffersonian style of university construction has been described in connection with Albemarle Academy and Central College.

(3) The branches of learning to be taught were those heretofore recommended by Jefferson, but now arranged in ten homogeneous groups, to be assigned to ten different professorships, as follows:

(4) General legislative provisions were recommended for tuition of students, board, lodging, government, prizes, degrees, etc., details to be left to the board of visitors.

CHAPTER VII.

ESTABLISHMENT AND BUILDING OF THE UNIVERSITY.

Jefferson's report was transmitted to the speaker of the Senate through Cabell, who was the original mover of the Rockfish Gap commission. Early in December, as appears from Cabell's letter to his friend, "the report was read and received with great attention in both the houses. A resolution to print a number of copies passed each house. The ability and value of the report, I am informed, are universally admitted. It was referred in the lower house to a select committee, and the speaker is friendly to the measure. Present prospects are very favorable to a successful issue."

OPPOSITION TO THE UNIVERSITY IDEA.

But a strong opposition to Jefferson's project was speedily developed. A bill which he had prepared was reported by the House committee by a bare majority of one, "the casting vote of the chairman." Then began the fight. The western members from the Valley of Virginia and the friends of Staunton determined to defeat the university altogether. The Lexington party sought for delay, threw discredit upon Jefferson's calculations as to the centrality of his college, and sought to re enforce their own claims. Delay endangered the bill. Cabell wrote: "The hostile interests are daily acquiring new force by intrigue and management. The party opposed altogether to the university is growing so rapidly we have just grounds to fear a total failure of the measure. The friends of William and Mary demand $5,000 per annum as the price of their concurrence, and in the event of a refusal will carry off some votes. I have advised my friends not to enter into any compacts of the kind, and sooner will I lose the bill than I will give my assent to it." Members of the Legislature from the region of William and Mary became the most determined opponents of the bill. Cabell, said the better educated part of them, had studied at this institution, and quoted Adam Smith, the Edinburgh Review, and Dugald Stewart to prove that education should be left to individual enterprise. Others, more ignorant, maintained that the literary fund was about to be diverted from its original object, the education of the poor, and applied for the benefit of the rich. Some liberal and enlightened persons thought Charlottesville too small a place for a university. "They think a town of some size necessary to attract professors, to furnish polished society for the students, to supply accommodations, to resist the physical force, and present the means of governing a large number of young men."

SERVICES OF CABELL.

"a

Cabell determined to break down the general opposition. He went about from man to man, laboring to convert them to his views. He "passed the night in watchful reflection and the day in ceaseless activity." He published articles in the Richmond Enquirer calculated to influence public opinion. Jefferson's proofs of the central situation of the proposed university were published by Cabell and explained to everybody. He even wrote to liberally minded and influential men in the various localities whence the opposition proceeded, and persuaded them to write to their representatives in the Legislature urging a favorable vote. He actually districted the entire country east of the Blue Ridge, and moved the very ground from beneath the feet of the opposition by an appeal to local good sense. The chief trouble lay with the House of Delegates, which was made up of somewhat Philistine elements; but Cabell, by his skilful tactics, at last won over the majority to his opinion. On the 18th of January, 1819, a motion in the House to strike Central College from the bill was lost by a vote of 114 to 69, decisive victory," wrote Cabell. Mr. Baldwin, of Augusta, one of the leaders of the western opposition, then rose and made an eloquent plea for unanimity of action and for the suppression of local prejudice. He said he had supported Staunton as long as there was any hope of success, but now he implored the House "to sacrifice all sectional feeling."1 Democracy united in a sudden rush of good feeling, and Jefferson's cause was overwhelmingly won. Cabell was so excited that he had to leave the House before the final vote was taken. He had been suffering two days before from hemorrhage of the lungs, "brought on by exposure to bad weather and loss of sleep," but he was now victorious; he had fought a good fight and had kept his faith in the people. It was a foregone conclusion that Jefferson's bill would pass the Senate, where Cabell was a very influential member. On the 25th of January, 1819, the University of Virginia and Central College were legally united by a vote of twenty-two to one.

The seal of the University-"a Minerva enrobed in her peplum and characteristic habiliments as inventress and protectress of the arts"— bears the date of 1819, which should be reckoned as the year of origin, although the institution was not formally opened to students until 1825.

SERVICES OF OTHER MEN.

Cabell wrote in triumph to Jefferson, December 4, 1819: "We have got possession of the ground, and it will never be taken from us." He said the enlightened part of the people everywhere were in favor of the university establishment. Such a complete conquest of public opinion was very remarkable, and it could have been gained only by the hearty cooperation of intelligent men in many local centres of influence. In the The western delegation was subsequently held together in the interest of the university by Judge Baldwin, General Breckenridge, and Mr. Johuson.

above letter Cabell pays an honest tribute of gratitude to the gentlemen in the various counties who had aided him in the Legislature and among the people. For example, he says: "We are very much indebted to Mr. Taliaferro and Colonel Green for the favorable change in the delegation north of the James River and below tide-water. At Christmas, every member from Richmond to Hamptou, except one, was opposed to us. On the vote, all went with us, except one." Cabell acknowledges also the efficient services of Captain Slaughter, of Culpeper; Judge Brooke, Judge Brockenbrough, Mr. Stanard, Mr. Ritchie, Mr. Hoomes, of King and Queen; Dr. Nicholson, of Middlesex; Mr. Scott, of the Council; Mr. Minor, of Spottsylvania; Judge Roane, Colonel Nicholas, William Cabell (the brother of Joseph), Chancellor Taylor, Mr. Pannill, and others. Mr. Francis W. Gilmer did valuable work for Central College through the press. The Rev. John H. Rice, a Presbyterian clergyman in Richmond, also lent important literary aid. He was the author of an article signed "Crito," the following passage of which is thought to have exercised great influence upon the public mind, through Cabell's frequent use of the facts stated:

"Ten years ago," said Mr. Rice, "I made extensive inquiries on the subject, and ascertained to my conviction that the amount of money annually carried from Virginia, for purposes of education alone, exceeded $250,000. Since that period it has been greater. Take a quarter of a million as the average of the last eight-and-twenty years, and the amount is the enormous sum of $7,000,000. But had our schools been such as the resources of Virginia would have well allowed, and her honor and interest demanded, it is by no means extravagant to suppose that the five States which bind on ours would have sent as many students to us, as under the present wretched system, we have sent to them. This, then, makes another amount of seven millions. Let our economists look to that-fourteen millions of good dollars lost to us by our parsimony! Let our wise men calculate the annual interest of our losses, and add it to this principal! They will then see what are the fruits of this precious speculation."

Such arguments, no doubt extravagant, had their weight in favora bly balancing the university question in the scales of public opinion. Although Thomas Jefferson is undoubtedly "the founder of the University of Virginia," we should not forget that there were a thousand historic forces without which his ideas would have failed of realization.1

At the Boston meeting of the American Historical Association in May, 1887, Mr. James Schouler, author of a remarkable History of the United States, read a paper upon the subject of "Historical Grouping," in which he advised a study of the minor forces and subordinate characters which enter into great events and the work of great

men.

Individuals are, indeed, the highest expression of human thought and social action; but there is always a background of support without which the deeds of a Washington are incomprehensible, and thus it was with Jefferson's university creation. Without the aid of Cabell, it is perfectly clear that Jefferson would have been helpless, and back of Cabell were the Virginia Legislature and the common people.

SUMMARY OF JEFFERSON'S BILL, 1819.

The act establishing the University of Virginia in definite form provided for the acceptance by the State of the property of Central College, conveyed to the president and directors of the literary fund, which was really a board of public instruction. Seven visitors were to be ap pointed forthwith by the Governor of the State, and they were to have authority to choose a rector from their own number, and to control the general interests of the University. The provisions for instruction were much the same as in Jefferson's report. The various branches of science were to be distributed among ten professorships. Each profes sor should have apartments free, and those first appointed, such salary as the visitors might determine; their successors, however, a standing salary not exceeding $1,000 a year; but all professors should have such fees from students as the visitors might allow. The visitors were to hold two stated meetings each year, in April and in October; to visit the University once a year, and to report annually to the president and directors of the literary fund. Such, in general, was the legal basis of the University of Virginia. It was generally understood that the report of the Rockfish Gap commission was to be the accepted platform of the university party. That "plan," said Jefferson in 1821, "was exactly that now carried into execution.". The significance of previous inquiries into the details of that report is now, therefore, clearly appar. ent, for we have already seen on paper the whole substructure and the detailed plans of the University of Virginia.

JEFFERSON THE FIRST RECTOR.

The visitors appointed for the University of Virginia comprised four members of the old board representing Central College, namely: Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Joseph C. Cabell, and John H. Cocke. The new appointees were James Breckenridge, Chapman Johnson, and Robert Taylor. They met March 29, 1819, and chose Thomas Jefferson to be their rector, as he had been of the former board. Henceforth, until his death in 1826, Jefferson was the directing and shaping power in the upbuilding of the University of Virginia. From his original and sovereign interest in university education, and from his residence in immediate proximity to the University, the other visitors were well content to leave to him practically the entire management of affairs. Never was an institution more completely the materialization of one man's thought than is the University of Virginia. Not only did he evolve the entire system of education there introduced, but he actually devised every feature of construction and administration. He drew plaus, made estimates and contracts, busied himself about bricks and mortar, and superintended the whole process of building.

BUILDING POLICY.

The gradual rise of the University of Virginia can be best reviewed in the proceedings and annual reports of the board of visitors, and in