Resolved, That the Secretary cause a copy of the preceding resolution, together with a printed copy of the forms of reports which are to be used hereafter, to be transmitted to the several Academies in the State."

On the 10th of March, 1818, a committee composed of Mr. Van Buren, Mr. Young and Mr. Cochran, was appointed to consider and revise the former rule, and on the 24th of that month, Mr. Cochran, from this committee, reported:

"That they have had the same under consideration, and that in their opinion, the rule now in force as a general rule, distributing among the several Academies of the State the funds appropriated for that purpose according to the number of students studying classics, is more safe and salutary than any which can be devised. Inasmuch, however, as the particular situation and circumstances of some Academies may require some additional appropriation beyond the sum limited by the existing rule:

Your committee recommend the adoption of a rule which shall leave one-fifth of the whole sum annually given to the Academies, to be given to those under such particular circumstances, in such proportions as the Regents may see fit and proper.

Resolved, therefore, That the rule of distribution for the future be, that four-fifths of the sum annually distributed among the Academies of the State, be distributed in proportion to the number of students studying in the classics, in the respective Academies, and that the residue be distributed in proportion as the Regents may deem proper, among such of the Academies whose particular situation or wants may entitle them to any part of such residue.”

This rule was adopted, but as might be foreseen, it gave opportunities for urgent solicitation, and as a necessary result for dissatisfaction, in cases where the petitions were not allowed. The Academies of low grade were the first to complain, while the change was regarded with approbation by others that found their revenues increased, and a strong motive presented for raising them still more.

As academic students in the lower English branches got no benefit from the Literature Fund, and lost what they might have got by attending the Common Schools, this measure had a tendency to turn back to the latter, a certain class of pupils, to the manifest advantage of both systems.

Still, the dissatisfied class found a way for a hearing of their complaints in the Legislature, and by concurrent resolutions, passed in March, 1819, the Regents were called upon to report annually the

state of their funds, the mode of investment, the revenue derived and the mode of distribution for the preceding year.

The Regents, in a reply dated March 2, 1819, in speaking of the apportionment of moneys among the Academies, said:

"The rule formerly practiced by the Regents in the distribution of their revenue was, to apportion the same according to the total number of pupils instructed in the several Academies, agreeable to the returns made by their respective Trustees. The course of instruction pursued by many of the teachers, consisting chiefly of the first rudiments of an English education, gave a character to their institution more consonant to that of a Common School than of an Academy, where more advanced studies should be attended to. The liberal endowments which the Legislature have wisely bestowed upon Common Schools are calculated to afford to every section of the State, an opportunity of instructing youth in those branches of an English education which it is essential should be attainable by all. The fund placed at the disposal of the Regents, is destined to support a course of instruction in the higher branches of learning than those taught in Common Schools, and with a view of preserving this distinctive characteristic, a rule has recently been adopted by the Regents,' for distributing their revenue in proportion to the number of scholars in the several Academies, who, during the preceding year, have received a course of classical instruction, usually pursued as preparatory to admission to a collegiate course. The adoption of this rule, the Regents conceive, was essentially necessary, to raise the reputation of the Academies, several of which, in their system of instruction, had sunk to the level of Common Schools. But the operation of the rule has been, to lessen the amount formerly distributed to some of the Academies and to augment it to the others. The Regents have great pleasure in stating, that from the reports of the present year, it appears that the system of instruction is rapidly improving in many of the Academies, and they entertain a well-founded expectation of continued advances in perfecting the academical instruction, to the attainment whereof it is essential that the present mode of distribution be rigidly adhered to."

This remained as a rule of the Regents, and upon their authority only, until April 13, 1827, when the Legislature defined by law, the terms upon which the apportionment should be made, as follows: * * in

*

"The Regents shall distribute the whole income proportion to the number of pupils instructed in each Academy or Seminary, for six months during the preceding year, who shall have

Referring to a resolution offered by Mr. Cochran and adopted, repealing the rule of 1818, and reviving that of 1817. This was on the same day as that on which the report, above cited, was made.

pursued classical studies, or the higher branches of English education, or both, and that no pupil shall be deemed to have pursued classical studies, unless he shall have advanced as far at least as to have read the first book of the Eneid of Virgil in Latin; and no student shall be deemed to have pursued the higher branches of an English education, unless he shall have advanced beyond such knowledge of common, vulgar and decimal arithmetic, and such proficiency in English grammar and Geography, as are usually obtained in Common Schools."

This requirement passed into the Revised Statutes of 1830, and remained in force until the substitution of the written examinations of the Regents in recent times.*

The ages of students claimed as pursuing classical or higher English studies, were not limited either by the act of 1828, nor by the ordinance of the Regents.

In 1834, the committee on apportionment, in speaking upon this point, said:

"Where such students have been under the age of ten years, the practice has been heretofore to make every presumption against them, so as to require the most rigorous proof that they had pursued all the preliminary studies, and acquired all the preliminary knowledge required to make them such students, and the result of such practice has been that very few under the age of ten years, have been allowed as classical scholars. But as claims to have them so allowed are presented every year, the committee make a final decision on the subject; and they respectfully suggest that that decision be against allowing children under the age of ten years, to be ranked among classical scholars, or scholars in the higher branches of English education."

'Chap. 228, p. 237, Laws of 1827.

* On the 18th of March, 1818, an ordinance was passed by the Regents defining at large and more precisely, the studies required in a classical and in a higher English course, entitling Academies to a share of the moneys distributed from the income of the Literature Fund. In classics, they were to be equal to half of Corderius, half of Historia Sacra, a third of Viri Romæ, and two books of Cæsar's Commentaries in Latin prose, and the first book of the Eneid of Virgil. In higher English, besides reading and writing, they were to have acquired such knowledge of the elementary rules, compound numbers, fractions, reduction, practice, single rule of three and simple interest, as is commonly taught in District Schools. In grammar, they were to be able to parse correctly any common prose sentence, and correct examples of bad grammar. In geography, they must have studied to the extent of the duodecimo edition of Morse's, Cummings', Woodbridge's or Willett's geography. They must have attended at least four months during the year, with exercises in composition and declamation, at convenient and ordinary intervals.

This recommendation was adopted February 26, 1834, as a rule, in the distribution of the Literature Fund.

In noticing the chapter of the Revised Statutes which continued the law of 1827, we should especially indicate a new provision then introduced, which operated most unequally and unjustly while it remained in force. We refer to

The Apportionment of Moneys to Academies by Senatorial Districts.

The Revised Statutes (which in this respect took effect at the beginning of the year 1830), contained the following provision :'

"The Regents shall have the control of the whole income arising from the Literature Fund, and shall annually divide such income into eight equal parts, and assign one part thereof to each Senate District. They shall annually distribute the part so assigned to each District, among such of the incorporated Seminaries of learning, exclusive of Colleges, within such District as are now or shall become subject to their visitation. by a valid corporate act.”

This rule of equal division among Senatorial Districts, thus introduced, afterward became a subject of grievous complaint among those who suffered from its unequal operation, and it may be well to here notice some of the statistics of distribution for some years previous, in order to enable the reader to judge, as to how far it was justified, at the time of its adoption, adding the apportionment of 1830 to further show how the rule operated during the first year after it took effect:

Distribution by Academies and Senatorial Districts, from 1823 to 1830, inclusive.

1 Section 23, article 1, title 1, chapter 15, part 1 of Revised Statutes.

$57 00
49.00
114 00
98 00
179 00
25 00
90 00

$117 81
108 75
99 68
181 25
54 57
126 87

$127 67

110 65
170 22
127 67

64 57

864 57
$171 47
250 00 104 11
42 87

$205 57 312 46

153 22

42 87

123 34

233 87

165

123-34

129 02

189

238 29

274 18

97 98

148 15

164 46

Total............

$426 83 $611 23 $693 00 $1,114 87 $1, 106 40 $1,927 38 $1,977 93 $1,250 00

Total for State..... .............185,000 00|85,000 00|85,590 00|$6,000 00 $6,000 001810,099 93/$9,993 88 $10,000 00

Sum due had the apportio n ment been made by Senatorial Dists..

$625 00 $625 00 $698 75 $698 75 $698 75 $1,262 48 $1,249 21 $1,250 00