Page images
PDF
EPUB

The Miami of the Lakes, now known as the Maumee, and Swan Creek meet where the city of Toledo now stands, on land then claimed by the Territorial government of Michigan, but which was afterwards given up grumblingly to Ohio, Michigan receiving in its place the Upper Peninsula which was then considered little more than a barren wilderness.

So wisely did this committee act, therefore, that if this property had remained in the hands of the university it would be possessed of an endowment surpassing that of any similar institution in the United States. The 7th of July, 1827, a letter from the General Land Office declared river lots 1, 2, 7, 8, 9, and 10 reserved and appropriated as university lands.

The two townships of land conveyed by Congress to Michigan as an endowment for a university, when compared with amounts since granted to other States, were by no means exceptional in quantity. On the contrary, very many of the States now occupying the place of the old Northwestern Territory have received much larger appropriations for the same purpose. If the grant to Michigan has been productive of exceptional results it is owing to the fact that lands were selected of exceptional value. With so much wisdom, indeed, had the lands been chosen, that in ten years from the time the grant had been made, they were estimated by the superintendent of public instruction to have attained au average value of twenty dollars per acre.1

Unfortunately, the lands first selected were not as productive of exceptional results as they might have been under different management. Of course, to blame a board for every false step is to impose censure for lack of prophetic insight. We have every reason to congratulate ourselves that so much prudence was manifested, even if the powers of the prophet would have secured to the university an endowment that, however large, could scarcely be too large for present necessities.

Speculators soon turned their eager faces to the country of the Maumee. After various solicitations the board decided to exchange lots 1 and 2, containing some 401 acres, for lots 3 and 4, containing about 777 acres, and the conveyances were delivered February 7, 1830. In 1834 the board consented to sell these lots 3 and 4 and some other land for $5,000 to Mr. Oliver. An act of Congress was considered necessary to assure the validity of the transfer. The desired legislation was secured, and one of the last acts of the board before it gave up control to the new authorities of the State University was to authorize the sale of these two lots, as decided by previous vote. By this action did the university, for the sum of $5,000, dispose of lands which are now in the very best part of the city of Toledo, and one can scarcely resist the temptation to ponder on what might have been had the university trustees possessed the cunning insight of the land speculator. The sum of $5,000 and a little more was transferred in 1837 to the regents of the new university, and described as funds received from the sale of lands to Mr. Oliver. The remaining Toledo lands were estimated in a survey

1 C. K. Adams' sketch of University of Michigan.

2 U. S. Statutes at Large, Vol. vi, pp. 615, 628.
3 Ten Brook, p. 109.

of 1848 to contain 621 acres, and all of these now lie within the present corporate limits of the city of Toledo. Most of this property was sold in 1849 and 1850, and some as late as 1855, bringing in, with the sum before received from the Oliver transactions, a total of something like $17,000. Thus ends the history of the Toledo lands. No one has hinted at anything worse than a lack of faith and foresight on the part of those who were administering affairs, and there is no desire now to linger over an unpleasant recital.

It will probably be conducive to clearness and precision if the whole subject of the university lands be disposed of in the same chapter. It may be well to preface further accounts with the statement already suggested, that the board which had charge of the university funds before 1837 gave up in that year their control of all university matters to the board of regents, which was constituted after the manner laid down in the new State constitution, as will more clearly appear in a succeeding chapter on the organization and control of the university. A great work had been done in selecting lands under the law of 1826, and affairs by this early board had in general been wisely managed. Twenty-three selections were reported as already made, leaving about two-thirds of the two townships yet to be chosen by the new board.

Michigan began even before 1835 to force her way into the Union, but various reasons prevented her recognition, among them the unfor. tunate controversy with Ohio over the possession of certain lands situated along the border line. But in 1837 Michigan was received into fellowship, and certain clauses of the acts of Congress then passed are of interest in this connection. By one provision section sixteen in every township of the public lands, or an equivalent if such section had been previously disposed of, was granted to the State for the use of schools. By another the seventy-two sections set apart for the support of a university by the act of 1826 were granted to the State to be appropriated solely to the use and support of the university, in such manner as the legislature might prescribe. This legislation, it will be noticed, gave the control of the university lands to the legislature of the State, whereas the board in charge of university affairs had before this used its discretion in all such matters.

The history of legislative management in the ensuing 20 years presents another gloomy recital. We can not prophesy what might have been the results of management by the board or how large a fund might have been obtained by more conservative manipulation. Of the actual results we are sorrowfully certain. It will not do to forget, however, that Michigan was sorely troubled for some years after 1837. The financial difficulties of the country were accentuated in the West, and Michigan came in for a full share of burdens and scourgings caused by reckless investments and a wild improvement policy. The unsettled lands all through the West had been held at fictitious prices, and it could hardly be hoped that under the wisest management any great return

could be obtained from the sale of the university lands in accordance with the policy entered upon in the very first days of statehood. We are obliged to consider that puzzled legislators, dazed by the disasters of the times, scarcely saw with clearness of vision or looked into the future with hope; and we may content ourselves with the soothing reflection that after all, considering everything, affairs might have turned out much more unfortunately. Here, again, inquiry can discover no dastardly motive for the course taken, and traces of corruption will probably be sought for in vain.

The superintendent of public instruction of the new State, in his first report, entered into some elaborate calculations with regard to the value and the sale of the university lands. It was one of the duties of this officer to make an inventory of all lands and other property reserved in the State for school purposes, to report to the legislature on the location and condition of such property, and to give his views relative to its disposal. He estimated in this report that the first 20,000 acres would in all probability sell for $20 per acre, giving a fund of $400,000; and even at $15 an acre, a sum of $300,000 would be received from which the university could expect to obtain an annual income of $21,000.

With such an income, how easy to lay the foundation of a university on the broadest scale and place it on high and elevated ground at the very commencement of its career of light, usefulness, and glory.

What remained of the 72 sections he thought would undoubtedly sell, as soon as the fund should be needed, at the same rate. At the lowest estimate, he expected from the sale of all the university lands a fund of $691,200, yielding $48,384 per annum, and from a sale at the expected figure he anticipated $921,000, which might be expected to give an income of $64,912. "Judging from the decisions of the past" he believed that the amount received would exceed the highest computation. The legislature adopted this view, not too sanguine in consideration of the condition of Michigan property at that time, but unfortunately not to be fully realized. An act approved March 21, 1837, authorized the superintendent of public instruction to sell at public auction a portion of the university lands sufficient to amount to $500,000, provided none were sold lower than $20 per acre. Successful sales were made in this year. An average price of $22.85 was received and a total of $150,447.90. This was of course an encouraging beginning, and it was largely due to this encouragement and to the fact that the legislature seemed to have adopted the policy of not selling for less than $20 per acre, that steps were at once taken for the establishment of the university. The prospects were certainly bright. There was every reasonable ground for expectation that at no distant day the principal sum of $921,600 would be secured, which would yield an income sufficient for the needs of the university for many years to But there were soon clouds in the sky, darkening this bright

come.

outlook. There remains to be told a tale of hasty legislation and egregious mismanagement, which ended in the receipt of a sum small in comparison with the one so confidently expected. Even without the stimulant to hasty sale and legislation, it is quite probable that the lands would not have brought in what the superintendent had estimated. The crisis of 1837 caused a general drop in prices for wild lands and the speculation that had been rife for some years before disappeared, to give place to an inactive market and business depression. The despondency of the years between 1837 and 1840 was but slowly thrown off, for the disastrous consequences had not been confined to a section, but depressed the whole country.

Almost immediately after the organization of the State government there were troubles with "squatters" who had settled on the university lands and did not desire to give up their claims. The legislature was appealed to and entered upon a course of unwise legislation by releasing the university claims to some 16 sections that had been chosen by the university on the Niles and Nottawaspe reserves in 1836.1 This act of March 20, 1838, contained the provision that Congress should consent and grant an amount of land in the place of these sections, judged to be of equal value to those given up. This indicates a state of mind toward the university fund which may give ground for expecting other legislation, even less considerate and wholesome. There could be no reason or justice in thus preferring the settler to the university, and the subsequent legislation shows that the process was begun of shunting the university from pillar to post in a manner that bade fair to allow no certain standing ground. Congress seems not to have granted the permission, but pressure was brought to bear upon the legislature by other settlers, and in 1839 an act was passed whereby settlers on the university lands who could prove that they had occupied and cultivated their farms in accordance with the preëmption law of Congress before their location by the State were allowed to obtain lawful title by the payment of $1.25 per acre. The remonstrance of the board against this disregard of their rights was without effect at first. Resolutions were introduced into the board to discontinue work on the buildings at Ann Arbor and for the curtailment of other expenses. Fortunately, however, Governor Mason vetoed the bill. The grandiloquent message of the young governor discloses among its intricate and ambitious sentences that he suspected the land-speculator of attempting to masquerade as a poverty-stricken squatter. This may not have been the reason for the passage of the act, but there is good ground for suspicion.

The time of payment for the university lands was extended in 1838 and 1839. In 1840 4,743.12 acres were sold at an average price of $6.21. The superintendent of public instruction2 in 1837 had confidently 2 Superintendent's Report, 1841.

1 See Laws of Mich., 1838, p. 115.

reported that $15 per acre was the lowest price for which the lands would be sold, and the price established by the legislature was $20 per acre. But by this sale the fund expected was considerably diminished. Had this land been sold for $15 per acre the university would have received some $40,000 more than it thus received, and a sale at the price first established by the legislature would have yielded nearly $65,000 more than the sale thus ordered. Again and again from this time on sales were made at less than $20, and finally, in 1842, the price was set at $12 per acre, and by a species of retroactive le gisation 1 lands heretofore sold at $20 per acre or over might be reappraised, and if the board of appraisement decided that the lands were worth less than the price at which they were sold, the superintendent of public instruction was instructed to give credit for the balance.

Of course, the board of appraisement, which was composed of the county judges and the county surveyor, must have been influenced often by personal and local considerations, and the result was very much the same as if all the lands had been sold at $13.42 per acre.2 The report of the superintendent for 1843 shows that $34,651 had thus been deducted from the funds of the university. Up to this time sales had been made to the amount of $220,000. But by such untoward legislation as this the sum was reduced to about $137,000—a loss of $83,000.

Although the legislature in 1837 had directed that the lands should be sold for not less than $20 per acre, there seems no just reason for considering this a contract, morally inviolable by that body. The board of regents were doubtless induced by this action of the legislature, as well as by the high price obtained for the first land placed on the market, to take steps at once for the broad and liberal establishment of the university. But the inevitable decline in values throughout the West was not due to legislative action, and to argue that a legislature by a mere act of a directive nature restricts its own action for the future under all circumstances, and in spite of all exigencies and popular needs, is to argue that a legislature is morally powerless to exercise its authority, and is bound perpetually by its every action. Much of this legislation was unfortunate, possibly some of it was due to unworthy motive. But the burden of the difficulty came not so much from the fact that the price was lowered, as that special legislative action continually interfered in an apparently thoughtless manner with the wise and conservative management of the superintendent.

The various acts of reappraisal gave opportunity for the reduction of the price because of the testimony of prejudiced witnesses and interested judges. One instance is given us of the sale of land at $2 an acre. The judgment of President Angell in this matter is entirely just :

We can see now that it would have been far better for the university and perfectly just to the purchasers to extend the time of payment, but not to reduce the price. The general result of the management of our lands has been that instead of obtaining for

1Laws of 1842, p. 45.

2 See Report of Superintendent, 1843.

« PreviousContinue »