LAND GRANTS FOR
EDUCATION IN THE OHIO
VALLEY STATES.
BY CLEMENT L. MARTZOLFF.
In the discussion of the subject at hand
I find I am con
fronted with three very positive
limitations. First, because the
story of land grants for education is
one that even the most
investigating historian can find but
little new general material
upon which to write. Second, the program
committee has wisely
limited the time in which the subject
may be presented. How-
ever laudable this restriction may be in
the interests of the
audience, there is a constant feeling on
the part of the writer
that he has to confine himself to
certain lines and consequently
many pertinent facts and observations
must be omitted. Third,
this being an organization for the Ohio
Valley it has been thought
best to speak only of those educational
land grants made in the
six Ohio Valley states-Ohio, Indiana,
Illinois, Pennsylvania,
West Virginia, and Kentucky.
The lands granted for educational support
by the govern-
ment are in themselves an admission that
education is one of
the functions of the state. When these
donations were made in
the Ohio Valley it was not a new idea.
It was as old as history
itself. Aristotle recognized it and
Plato dreamed it into his
Republic and Laws. To the careful
student of history there is
nothing so evident as the fact of
education's being a function of
the state. It has from the earliest
periods of written history
been so regarded. Nor is it seen alone
in the theories of philos-
ophers and men who had visionary ideas
on the subject. The
actions of emperors and kings who might
be thought the least
likely to encourage schools and the
means of education, are
concrete evidences of this inherent duty
of a state toward its
citizens. Whether the government has
been democratic like
Athens, imperial like Rome, royal like
France or constitutional
like England, the necessity for the
fostering care of the state
has ever been recognized.
(59)
60 Ohio Arch. and Hist.
Society Publications.
We see this theory manifested in the
princes who grant
pensions to the man of letters. Look at
the educational centers
of Athens, Alexandria, Rome, Bologna,
Paris, Pisa, Salamanca,
Oxford, Wittenberg, Leyden and Berlin,
and ask why the govern-
ment aided them. Ask the libraries of
Assyria, Egypt, the Vat-
ican, London, Paris, Berlin, and St.
Petersburg the reason they
received government support. We find it
in the rude ideals of
the Spartans and the spiritualistic
beliefs of the Hebrews. Rome
stood for it, both as republic and
empire. Charlemagne, the
most unique character in medieval
history, founded a system
of free schools. The Arabian Caliph
Alhakim established schools
in every village. The first "state
university" began its exist-
ence in 1224 in Naples under the patronage
of Frederick II.
Oxford was chartered by King John. The
Protestant Revolu-
tion emphasized the idea. Out of the Reformation came a
growth toward a religious democracy,
giving impetus to the
development of free institutions, and
along with this came the
call for the education of the masses by
the state.
From Luther in Germany, Calvin in
Geneva, John Knox in
Scotland and Milton in England, the
common-school system
derived its life and became the common
heritage of the Anglo-
Saxon people. Gustavus Adolphus was its
patron. As early as
1583, Zealand began its system of state
education. Holland for
years led the van for public instruction
at the hands of the state.
Motley, in his celebrated history of
that country, tells how John
of Nassau urged upon the States General
the establishment of
free common schools. In France we find
the same ideas advanced
from time to time. The year 1560
witnessed in this country a
petition to the king for the cause of
popular education. French
educationists, including Helvetius. La Chalotais, Voltaire,
Turgot, Diderot, Compayre, and the
pedagogists of the eighteenth
century voice the same doctrine.
"Instances of old ideas clustering
about this common sov-
ereignty and universal education might
be cited indefinitely."
We are the heirs of all the ages. The
founders of the col-
onies were men of high ideals. They
planted upon American
soil the principles for which the
dreamer, the idealist, the re-
former, the great minds of all times had
stood. European tra-
Land Grants for Education in the Ohio
Valley States. 61
ditions and the forces of medieval
institutions prevented the
fruition beyond the seas. American soil
was lying fallow and
in the language of Horace Mann,
"The transference of the for-
tunes of our race from the old to the
new world was a gain to
humanity of a thousand years."
With such an array of evidence
confronting the colonists
of America it is easily seen how the
founders of the states
followed in the line of what had been
the theory and practice
of the progressive peoples of Europe. Of
the first six hundred
who landed in Massachusetts, one in
thirty is said to have been
a graduate from an European university.
In New England the
town meeting was ever dominant in
matters pertaining to the
common weal. It would naturally be
thought that here educa-
tion would be altogether in the hands of
the local authorities.
But not so, for already in 1642 the legislative body of Massa-
chusetts began legislation for the
education of all, under colonial
and state control. There is abundance of
evidence to be pre-
sented to justify this position of the
colonial fathers. We see
it in Massachusetts; we find it in
Virginia; it is voiced in Penn-
sylvania; New York recognizes it;
Hamilton and Jefferson each
had schemes of general education, which
have left their impress
upon New York and the Central West.
This culmination of the world's ideas
concerning education
in America is happily expressed by Dr.
E. E. White: "With
matchless wisdom they (the fathers)
joined liberty and learn-
ing in a perpetual and holy alliance,
binding the latter to bless
every child with instruction which the
former invests with the
rights and duties of citizenship. They made education and
sovereignty coextensive, by making both
universal."
The founders of our commonwealth had an
abundance of
precedents to guide them. It was not a
new theory emanating
from visionary brains. These men were
careful students of the
theory of government. They well
recognized and appreciated
the relations existing between a state
and the means of education.
As there were many precedents for the
founders to exercise
and provide for the future paternalism
of the state toward the
schools, so it was not a new theory
either that they should
manifest their paternalism in land
bounties.
62 Ohio Arch. and
Hist. Society Publications
It is true that they were not giving
much, for land was
cheap; but it had the element of
permanency in it. Throughout
the colonial history of this nation we
find numerous cases of
land endowment for educational uses.
Beginning with 1619 we
find it in Virginia; in 1653, in Boston;
in 1636, in Charlestown,
Mass.; 1639, Dorchester, Mass.; 1640,
Rhode Island; 1641,
Massachusetts; 165I, Ipswich, Mass.;
1663, Providence; 1665,
Hadley, Mass.; 1671, Connecticut; 1683,
Delaware; 1686, Penn-
sylvania; 1690, Virginia; 1700,
Connecticut; 1723, Maryland;
1753, Wyoming Valley, Pa.; 1754, New
York; 1763, New Hamp-
shire; 1777, Georgia; 1780, Virginia;
1783, Georgia; 1783, Penn-
sylvania; 1784, New York; 1785, Vermont;
1787, Pennsylvania.
In the latter state William Penn had
said: "That which
makes a good constitution must keep it,
namely, men of wisdom
and virtue. These great qualities must
be carefully propagated
by a virtuous education of youth, for
which spare no cost, for
by such parsimony all that is saved is
lost."
This teaching has certainly borne
fruit. Wherever the
Quakers have formed settlements they
have always taxed them-
selves liberally for the support of
public education.
The twelfth article of the frame of
government to the
colony of Pennsylvania grants:
"That the governor and pro-
vincial council shall erect and order
all public schools."
The Pennsylvania Constitution adopted in
1776 is the ear-
liest constitutional provision among the
states for the mainte-
nance of a university.
Article 44 of the Pennsylvania
Constitution declares: A
school or schools shall be established
by the legislature in each
county for the convenient instruction of
youth, etc.
The Wyoming Valley, in Pennsylvania, is
well known to
every schoolboy and schoolgirl as the
scene of some of the most
harassing events in the Revolutionary
War. Here occurred one
of the worst Indian massacres in our
history. This land was
settled by the Connecticut people and it
was claimed by both that
state and Pennsylvania owing to the
overlapping of territorial
grants.
Under the direction of the Susquehanna
Land Company 600
citizens from Wyndham County,
Connecticut, established them-
Land Grants for Education in the Ohio
Valley, States. 68
selves in this fertile valley. Here,
true to the Connecticut habit,
they appropriated 900 acres to each
township for the support of
schools, and organized education with a
near approach to the
present school system. This local
arrangement continued until
the establishment of the present
organization was effected in
1834.1
Perhaps it is well to note in passing
that the University of
Pennsylvania in its earliest days
received from the Proprietary
Government of Thomas Penn 7500 acres of
land in Berks
county.
In 1779 the legislature granted certain
escheated lands to
the college valued at £25,000.
Franklin College, Pennsylvania, received
with its charter a
grant of 10,000 acres of land in the
western part of the state.
That the founders of the republic
projected nothing new or
untried in their plan of government has
long ago been con-
ceded by the most casual student of
history. The idea that they
were a set of men inspired does not now
obtain. There is very
little that is novel or unproved in the
Constitution of the United
States.
Nearly every provision there had some precedent in
some of the colonies. These men were careful students of
history. The colonies for a hundred
years had evolved by ex-
perience certain plans and ideals. While
the mother country
was trying to straighten out her kings;
while absorbed in the
days of the Stuarts, Cromwell and the
English Revolution; while
engaged in the series of wars between
herself and her rival,
France, culminating in the battle of
Quebec,-the colonies had
time to grow because there had been but
litle interference from
beyond the sea. This century and more of
experience, reaching
down to the period of constructive
statesmanship, the men who
were to organize our government had to
draw from. They
were not visionary theorists but
practical men of affairs and
their chief duty was to construct from
these experiences.
From what has been already adduced it
ought to be quite
evident now that among these experiences
that became a part
of the assets of the fathers was the
idea that education is the busi-
ness of the state. With this came its
corollary that if educa-
1Com. of Ed. 1896-97,
p. 668.
64 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
tion is the business of the state, the
state should support it. The
nature of this support was never hard to
determine. It would
be the resultant of two forces--that
which was easy for the
state to give and that which would have
a degree of permanency.
Here in the United States land fulfilled
both conditions. So
these two ideas, education by the state
and land grants for edu-
cation, were among the bequests that
colonial history gave to
the fathers.
That these ideas were prevalent in the
decade following
the Declaration of Independence, has
already been shown. The
attitude of the statesmen of the time
assumed without question
the power of the state in providing the
means of education.
The roll of men who took advanced ground
is a list of notables.
for it contains such names as
Washington, Madison, Franklin,
Dane, King and others. The constitutions
formed as the colonies
emerged into states recognized this
vested right and duty of
government.
It is not our purpose to review the
governmental conditions
obtaining in this period. Everything was
in almost a state of
chaos. It was a conflict between
sovereign states on one hand
and a weak, anaemic government, trying
to be sovereign, on the
other. Finally the western land-holding
states ceded their claims.
for that is about all they possessed, to
the general government
for the common good. This cession, with
the campaigns of
Continental soldiers, the victory of
American diplomacy at Paris
in 1783, and various, treaties with the
Indians, whereby their
titles to these lands were extinguished,
gave the central govern-
ment the only domain over which its rule
was absolute.
Out of this condition came the interest
and activity con-
cerning the western country. There was
an abundance of land
yet in the colonies. The Ohio Valley was
not open to settle-
ment because of the demand for homes.
The very weakness
of the government drove it into the
western real-estate business.
It owed a war debt. Continental soldiers
of the line were still
unpaid and the government could not pay
them, for it had no
power to collect taxes from sovereign
states. But it had land in
plenty that could be sold or given in
lieu of money. On Sep-
tember 5, 1782, a proposition came
before Congress that the
Land Grants for Education in the Ohio
Valley States. 65
money accruing from such lands as might
be sold should be
used to pay the states' debts, whereupon
Mr. Witherspoon in-
jected the mustard seed of nationality
into the virgin soil of
our institutions by securing as a
substitution for "states' debts"
the words "national debts."
Colonel Timothy Pickering was
quartermaster general of
the American army. In view of the
promises of lands made
several times by the Continental
Congress to the soldiers of the
Revolution, Colonel Pickering early in
1783 outlined a plan for
the formation of a new state west of the
Ohio river. After
stipulating the amount of lands various
soldiers should receive,
according to rank and service, and
providing for the organ-
ization of a government and other
matters pertaining to it, he
directed that "all the surplus
lands shall be the common property
of the state and disposed of for the
common good." Among
the things considered as being for the
"common good" was
"establishing schools and
academies."
This paper was given to General Rufus
Putnam, who secured
288 officers of the Continental line as
petitioners. General Put-
nam forwarded it to General Washington
and asked him for
his influence in securing its passage by
Congress. General Wash-
ington transmitted it as requested and
strongly recommended
it. This was on June 17, 1783. Congress
paid no heed to the
petition.
The next attempt looking toward the
settlement of the
Northwest was the ordinance of 1784,
reported by a committee
of which Jefferson was chairman. Nothing
was said here about
lands for schools and it seems strange,
too. The report was not
in keeping with Jefferson's record in
matters concerning edu-
cation.
The land ordinance of 1785 marks the
initial step in land
endowments by the United States. The
committee selected repre-
sented twelve of the thirteen states.
Rufus King of Massachus-
etts seems to have been the master
spirit in shaping and pushing
to a successful issue the ordinance. But
it is to Timothy Picker-
ing, whose correspondence with Rufus
King reveals his attitude,
that we are indebted for the plan of
reserving a certain part of
the land as a perpetual endowment for
public education.
Vol. XXV- 5.
66 Ohio Arch. and Hist.
Society Publications.
The different steps taken in Committee
and on the floor of
Congress by which the educational clause
became a part of the
Land Ordinance of May 20, 1785,
interesting though it be, can-
not be considered here. But the words
"There shall be reserved
the lot No. 16 of every township for the
maintenance of public
schools within said township," was
the leaven committing the
government to a liberal patronage of
education. This was our
first Congress land and here the United
States Government
originated the American Land system,
whose leading principles
are still followed. In the language of
Mr. Hinsdale, "The dedi-
cation to the support of public schools
of lot No. 16 in every
township was a far-reaching act of
statesmanship that is of
perpetual interest. It was the first and
greatest of the long
series of similar dedications made by
Congress to education;
and the funds derived from the sale of
these original 'school
lands' are the bulk of the common-school
endowments of the
five great states of the Old
Northwest."
It is not the purpose here to detract
any from the meed
or merit due the fathers for this act of
statecraft. But it must
also be remembered that these fathers,
while they were astute
students of the precedents in history,
while they were "far-see-
ing," they were also intensely practical, utilitarian, sort
of folks
who were quite as much interested in the
present as in the
future. They had an eye to business as
well as to culture. The
Government was in the real-estate trade.
To facilitate sales,
the land was put up with a prize in each
package. Every induce-
ment for ready purchase was freely
given. The same principle
animating land companies and railroads
today, in exploiting
the advantages of a section, to where
they are running Home-
Seekers' Excursions, on the first and
third Tuesdays of each
month, was the dominant passion even
then. There was no
difference, essentially, between the
granting of lands for educa-
tion and religion than there was of
reserving the salt springs
for all the people.
It may be sacrilege here to say it, but
it needs no stretch
of the imagination and no straining at
the leashes of the truth, to
perceive Manasseh Cutler, "The
Father of the Ohio University,"
when he played that magnificent game of
bluff, by preparing to
Land Grants for Education in the Ohio
Valley States. 67
leave when the Board of Treasury
hesitated to give him the
two townships of land for "an
university," was as much inter-
ested in securing that institution to
use as an advertisement for
the sale of his lands as it was for the
education of the youth.
The pamphlet issued by the odious Scioto
Company, to
further its abortive intention of
settling, but highly successful
method of selling, its lands, expresses
in the same lines with the
extravagant accounts of candles and
custards growing on the
bushes, the fact that there is going to
be a university, "to shed
luster on the settlements." Far be
it from me to depreciate this
motive, but lest we forget, it is well
to stop and consider once
in a while that the fathers, along with
their prophetic visions
and high motives, were also very human.
Mention has been made of the Land
Ordinance of 1785,
which reserved Section 16 of each
township. This applied only
to what is known as the Seven Ranges,
the first land surveyed
by the National Government, and located
along the river front
of eastern Ohio.
Two years later the celebrated and
historic year of 1787.
three acts of tremendous importance were
enacted in the inter-
est of national land grants for
education. There was the gen-
eral provision in the Celebrated
Ordinance of that year, the
oft-repeated "religion, morality
and knowledge" clause; the
action of the Board of Treasury in
selling to the Ohio Company
the tract of land in southeastern Ohio
and giving Section 16 for
schools and the two townships for the
University, and the incor-
poration in the United States
Constitution of the clause confer-
ring upon Congress absolute control of
the public lands.
When John Cleves Symmes purchased his
land between the
Miamis he had a right to expect the same
treatment as had been
accorded the Ohio Company. Accordingly,
the one-thirty-sixth
reservation was made for the schools and
one township set
aside for the University. It is only
fair to say we today are
the guests of that University for which
such provision was made.
The lands granted for education up to
this time were made
by the Congress under the Articles of
Confederation. The new
government did not seem disposed to
follow its predecessor in
this line. Its failure to do so was not
because it did not have
68 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
the opportunity. Various tracts were set
aside and opened for
settlement in the first decade of our
present Constitution, but
no reservations for education were made.
Petitions from various
parts of the country, praying for such
benefactions, went un-
heeded. It is only explainable on the
grounds that the govern-
ment perhaps was not in such pressing
need of revenue or that it
had other sources of income besides that
of lands. Inducements
in the shape of bonuses were
unnecessary. Again, in some of
these new tracts, as the Military Bounty
Districts, the land was
given away. While the people here would
need schools, as in
other sections, yet the high motive for
the dissemination of
knowledge did not seem to have occurred
to these patriots.
It was not until April 30, 1802, when Ohio was knocking
at the door of the Union for admission
and Thomas Jefferson
was on the other side of the door
extremely anxious to admit
the newcomer, because he needed the
electoral vote in the im-
pending election, that the national
government returned to the
principle of educational land grants. It
then and there estab-
lished a new precedent from which it has
never veered.
The Chillicothe statesmen drove a hard
but a just bargain.
If the citizens of the Seven Ranges, and
the Ohio Company's
Purchase and the Symmes Purchase could
have land endowments
for their schools, why not the remainder
of the state? Congress
would not permit herself to give such a
munificent donation
without some tangible return. It was
therefore agreed that for
these school grants and several other
considerations not per-
tinent to this article, Ohio would
exempt from all taxes for
five years after the date of sale all
lands sold by the United
States government. This was the bargain.
Nothing is said in the
enabling act about "religion,
morality and knowledge," but
instead reference is made "of
acceding to a proposition, the
tendency of which is to cherish and
confirm our present happy
political institutions and habits."
Time does not permit to detail the
various grants given from
time to time, until one-thirty-sixth of
the entire area of the
state was given in perpetuity to the
cause of education. The
last one to be granted was that of eight
hundred acres for the
French Grant in Scioto county. The
precedent so established in
Ohio became the settled policy of the
National government, and
Land Grants for Education in the Ohio
Valley States 69
at once went into effect. In Indiana
Territory the school sections
were set aside and the townships for
seminaries were located as
soon as the land was offered for sale.
These reservations were
vested in the states of Indiana,
Illinois and Michigan as each
was admitted to the Union.
In the management of these grants the
states were to serve
as trustees. The land was under the
control of legislative en-
actment. It could not be sold. Various
systems of leaseholds
evolved themselves. The state of Ohio
proved herself to be a very
poor trustee in administering her trust
in both Section 16 and the
University lands. Other states have done
better. The several
Ohio legislatures having to do with
these lands have no reason
to be proud of the ruthless manner in
which this splendid en-
dowment has been squandered by unwise
legislation. In short,
it amounted to the embezzlement of its
trust and its wards, the
children of the state, have been
deprived of their inheritance.
The maladministration of the educational
lands in Ohio is the
darkest blot in her history.
Beginning with 1827 Section 16
was permitted to be sold
and the purchase money made a part of
the irreducible debt of
the state. This was one way of
clarifying the situation, but it did
not stop the graft. But about ten
thousand acres in Ohio re-
mained unsold. Illinois has
approximately 7,000 acres.
The methods used by Ohio in manipulating
the University
lands would make a chapter all by
itself. The amounts received
by the institutions are a mere bagatelle
to the splendid incomes
it might have afforded by judicious
management.
Transylvania University in Kentucky
affords us an unique
illustration of the founding of a
college. During the Revolu-
tionary War the old Dominion declared
forfeit to the Common-
wealth the property of all within her
borders who bore arms
with the British. Now it chanced in the
County of Kentucky
there were three wealthy Tories whose
aggregate holdings
amounted to eight thousand acres. By act
of the Virginia legis-
lature, these lands were escheated, and
in 1780 were dedicated
to the cause of education. Three years
later an additional grant
of 12,000 acres was made and the new
University came into
being.
The acme of land grants for education
was reached in the
70 Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications.
Morrill Act of July 2, 1862, when each
state was given 30,000
acres for each representative in
Congress for the purpose of
subsidizing colleges for the
agricultural and mechanical arts.
Under this apportionment Ohio received
630,000 acres; Illinois,
480,000; Indiana, 390,000; Pennsylvania,
780,000; Kentucky,
330,000; and West Virginia, 150,000. Here in
Ohio the Ohio
State University has been the recipient
of an additional gift. In
1871
there remained in the Virginia Military District quite an
amount of unpatented surveys. These,
Congress gave to the
State of Ohio, which in turn donated
them to the State Univer-
sity. The sum realized from these lands
amounted to something
over $550,000.
The so-called "swamp-lands"
have furnished some of the
states with additional permanent
revenues for education, where
it was used for that purpose. Congress,
by act of 1850, gave
something like 621/2 million acres to
the western states. Ohio
got 25,000 acres, for which she realized
less than one dollar per
acre.
This in general is the way in which
education has been fos-
tered through land grants in the Ohio
Valley. I have dwelt more
upon Ohio conditions for several
reasons. First, because it was
in Ohio that the system of the National
Government, acting as
benefactor, originated, and because it
was here that so many
various land grants were made. Second,
because Ohio is an ex-
treme type of the mismanagement of the
trust, and the third
and best reason is, I know more about it
than that of any other
state.
But there is one thing that impresses
itself upon me as I
study the question. It is the vast field
afforded for research. It
is a perennial source of discovery.
There is so much history
wrapped up in it because it comes so
close to the people. Some-
body some day will write a book. It will
contain the story of men
searching for homes, of statesmen
wrestling with the problems
of constructive legislation, of men and
women turning their faces
to the light. It will be the story
telling of ambitions, of aspira-
tions, of hopes, of discouragements, of
failures. But it will be
an interesting story because it will be
so real, so human. And
that is history.