Rarely do we find a college graduate among the earliest pioneers of Washington Territory. They were frontiersmen, coming to the farthest west from homes in the Mississippi Valley or its vicinity. The exceptions included clergymen and officers trained for army service.
Those pioneers who lifted first axes against the forest were keenly aware of their own educational limitations. Paradoxical as it may seem, after the log cabin shelter and the first essential field their attention centered on the establishment of schools. Their children must have better advantages than they had feed themselves enjoyed. This commendable aspiration accounts for the immediate rise of the public school and it also helps to explain the surprisingly early ambition for a university.
Superlatives are always dangerous in history. However, there is perfect safety in pointing out the first official voice raised in behalf of the Territorial University of Washington. It was the voice of Governor Isaac Ingalls Stevens as he delivered in person his first message to the first Legislature of the Territory of Washington on the second day of the session, Tuesday, February 28, 1854. His declaration was so fundamental to the work of education in the new commonwealth that the paragraph is reproduced here in full:
"The subject of education already occupies the minds and hearts of the citizens of this Territory, and I feel confident that they will aim at nothing less than to provide a system, which shall place within the means of all the full development of the capacities with which he has been endowed. Let every youth, however limited his opportunities, find his place in the school, the college, the university, if God has given him the necessary gifts. A great champion of liberty said, more than two hundred years ago, that the true object of a complete and generous education was to fit man to perform justly, skillfully, and magnanimously, all the offices, both private and public, of peace and war. Congress has made liberal appropriations of land for the support of schools, and I would recommend that a special commission be instituted to report on the whole school
system. - I will also recommend that congress be memorialized to appropriate land for an university.” (1)
That his advice was promptly followed is evidenced by the Memorial to Congress
passed by the Legislature on March 22, 1854. There it is shown that Congress by
its Act of February 27, 1850, establishing the office of Surveyor General for
Oregon Territory, had donated two townships of public lands to aid in establishing
a Territorial University of Oregon. These lands should be selected west of the
cascade Mountains, one township north of the Columbia River and the other township
south of that River. The Washington Territorial memorialists set forth their opinion
that, since Congress by its act of March 2, 1853, had divided Oregon by establishing
the new Territory of Washington, the grant of one township north of the Columbia
River should be annulled and they requested that Washington Territory should be
granted two townships for its own university.
The fact that congress granted with relative promptness the pleadings in that
Memorial excites surprise in the retrospect of history. In the first place the pony
express would exact its toll of time in transmitting the document across the continent.
But a far greater obstacle for swift action was the national disturbance over the
status of slavery. It was hoped that the Compromise of 1850 had settled that question.
Major Isaac I. Stevens was commissioned as Governor of the new Territory of Washington
on March 17, 1853, and four days later resigned his position in the Army and the
United States Coast Survey, saying in a private letter that he had done so because the
Compromise of 1850 had settled the slavery question and the days for a career in the
United States Army were passed. He was accepting a civil position. At the very time
that he delivered his Message and the Legislature was adopting and forwarding the
Memorial he had recommended for a university, both Houses of Congress were in a bitter
contention over the Kansas-Nebraska legislation, including debates as to whether or
not the Compromise of 1850 had supplanted the Missouri Compromise of 1820 as to
slavery in the Territories. The Kansas-Nebraska Bill became a law on May 30, 1854,
and on July 17 of the same year Congress enacted the law granting the requested two townships, or 46,080 acres, of public lands to the Territory of Washington to aid in the establishment of its own university. Under all the circumstances that was a
superlative. It provided the first foundation of the institution
Governor Stevens was correct when he declared in his Message - "The subject of education already occupies the minds and hearts of the citizens." The first newspaper to be published north of the Columbia River appeared in Olympia on September 11, 1852. Its main purpose was to advocate the division of Oregon Territory by the establishment of the Territory of Columbia from the land north of the River. To emphasize its advocacy the paper was named Columbian. It battled valiantly but when success was attained Congress had changed the Territory’s name from "Columbia” to Washington. Within a year the paper also changed its name to Pioneer and Democrat. During that early agitation it was pointed out that Oregon should not select one of its granted townships north of the River for their university. "We want a university
here, and trust the Willamette valley will be ashamed ever to urge an unjust claim for
our ’pound of flesh.’” Not only were the early pioneers interested in schools for their children but they were also ambitious enough to aim at a university during the very inception of Territorial Government.
That first session of Washington’s Territorial Legislature began its work on Monday, February 27th, and adjourned on Monday, May 1st, 1854. As the members returned to their log cabin homes, it is not likely that many of them could have hoped that Congress, known to be in the midst of the bitter Kansas-Nebraska debates, could find time or inclination to comply with the plea for a university so early as July 27th, 1854.
Of course the good news would have reached the Territory before the November elections and those chosen for the Legislature would be keyed up to establish an institution for reaping an intellectual harvest. The second Legislature met on Monday, December 4, 1854, and adjourned on Thursday, February 1, 1855. It is worth while to note that Henry R. Crosbie and Arthur A. Denny were re-elected to the House of Representatives and also that Seth Catlin, Henry Miles, .Benjamin F. Yantis and Daniel R. Bigelow served in both sessions of the Council (Senate). Of these men of experience, Mr. Denny was destined in this and subsequent sessions to play by far the greatest part in the establishment of the Territorial University of Washington.
So far as the University was concerned, the net harvest comprised two laws,
one for location and another for the selection of the granted lands. But in the
process of that harvest there was a dramatic struggle, the story of which has never
been correctly or fully told. The reason is obvious. The Journals of that session
are not indexed, requiring a page by page search.
On December 13, 1854, W. A. Strickler, who, with C. C. Terry, represented Pierce
and King Counties in the Council, sought to locate the University by introducing a
bill that became known as Council Bill No. 7. Two days later Representative Charles
H. Spinning of Lewis County introduced in the House a similar bill, known as House 7
Bill No. 7. The dates and identical early numbers indicate promptness in each
branch of the Legislature. The next day after its introduction, or on December 16,
Mr. Spinning’s House Bill No. 7 was disposed of with apparent ridicule. William
Cock, of Thurston County, who was chairman of the Committee on Education, moved that
the bill, then on its second reading, be postponed "till the 4th of July, 1855."
That motion was carried by 13 to 8. Mr. Spinning voted "no", of course, but Mr.
Denny showed his distrust of the measure by his affirmative vote to send it on to
the vacation time of firecrackers and skyrockets.
Council Bill No. 7 was subjected to a fierce bombardment. On December 18 it was considered in the committee of the whole and reported back without amendment, whereupon Mr. Miles offered an amendment to change the location from Seattle to "Cowlitz, on the land known as the Puget Sound Agricultural Co. Claim, in the county of Lewis." He alone voted for the amendment, the other eight opposed. The bill was then postponed until December 20 to be a special order of the day. Mr. Poe failed in his effort to change "Seattle" and "Kang" to "Coveland" and "Island". Mr. Yantis offered a substitute for the original bill which was adopted, with the assistance of Mr. Strickler, author of the original bill. Mr. Poe failed in an effort to change "Boisfort" to "Cape Flattery". Other futile attempts at amendment were by Mr. Miles to change "Boisfort" to "Vancouver, Clarke County"; Mr. Poe to change "Boisfort" to "Alki"; Mr. Poe to change "Boisfort" to "Cape Disappointment"; Mr. Miles to change "Seattle" to "Vancouver". After a battle over enforcing the previous question the
bill was ordered engrossed and read a third time.
Chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, reported the bill back recommending its 10
passage. On the same day consideration of the bill was postponed "till 3rd January next." On that day the bill was passed without further attempts at amendment,
the only negative votes were by Mr. Miles and Seth Catlin, President of the Council.
On Saturday January 6, the House received the bill as having been passed by the 12
Council. On January 10 and 11, it was read a first and second time and ordered to be 13
printed. During a long, stubborn battle over the bill on elections, Council Bill
No. 7 remained on the table until the afternoon of Wednesday, January 17 when, on
motion of Mr. Spinning it was taken from the table and referred to the Committee on 14
Education. That Committee reported it back with an amendment on January 23 and
recommended its passage. Just before adjournment that afternoon the bill was given
another second reading and was made "the order of the day for to-morrow." It was then that the House had its fling at the bill. Mr. Denny moved to take up the bill and he successfully resisted an effort at further postponement. Chairman Cock moved the adoption of the favorable report by his Committee on Education. Pending that motion, the Speaker, from the floor as Mr. Crosbie, moved an amendment to strike out Seattle and King County. The debate continued into the afternoon session. Mr.
Crosbie*s amendment was killed by a vote of 13 to 8, but he immediately offered another to strike out the named locations and insert "that the appropriation made for the purpose of the University be distributed among the different counties for common school purposes." When that was voted down, Mr. Irby received a like negative result
for his amendment to strike out "Seattle, King County" and insert "Vancouver, Clarke
"Yelm Prairie" without any branch at County", as did also Mr. McCaw to locate the University a£_ Boisfort or elsewhere. The question then reverted to the adoption of the committee report which was approved by a
vote of 12 to 9. Mr. Crosbie resumed his seat as Speaker and Mr. Spinning then moved
a suspension of the rules and that the bill be read a third time. This also received
the vote of 12 to 9 but was declared lost because it required a two-thirds vote to 17
suspend the rules.
Other business crowded Council Bill No. 7 to one side until the afternoon of
January 26 when it was hurried through to final passage without debate the vote being
14 to 7. Mr. Wallace of Pierce County, who had opposed the bill from the beginning,
moved to amend the title, "so as to read in the plural". (The motion was lost and the
record says: "Ordered, On a division of the House, that the Clerk report C.B. No. 7 18
to the Council, now." That "now" was deferred until the following day, Saturday,
January 27, when the Council Journal records its return "with amendments." On the
afternoon of January 29, the bill came up for final action accompanied by one more
flurry. Mr. Miles offered an amendment to strike out the word "branch" so as to
provide for two Universities, one at Seattle and the other on Boisfort Plains. It was
rejected by a vote of 7 to 2 and by the same vote the Council concurred in the House
amendments and council Bill No. 7 had become a law.
The idea of a plural University is traceable in part to that act of Congress granting two townships of public lands. The prolonged struggle over location is an early manifestation of what has since been called "geographical distribution" or "grasping for institutional patronage". However, there is a fairer slant to that struggle. Seattle and King County were outlying districts in 1854-55. There were but nine members in the Council, the representation of the counties being as follows: Clallam, Island, Jefferson and Whatcom, one; Pierce and King, two; Chehalis, Thurston and Sammamish (later called Mason), two; Clarke and Skamania, two; Cowlitz, Lewis, Pacific and Wahkiakum, two. Thus the more populous region along the Columbia River had four of the nine members. & similar apportionment of the twenty members of the House gave King County but one and a share of one other with Pierce County. There were three other members allotted to Pierce County, while Clarke County had four, and four others divided among her neighboring counties. The men who sought so earnestly to prevent Seattle from having any part in the location were really representing a majority of the population at that time.
The location law, passed January 29, 1855, is a short measure of three sections. Section 1 locates the institution in Seattle, King County, and a branch on equal
footing on Boisfort Plains, Lewis County. Section 2 divides the land grant and
Section 3 more specifically says one township of the granted lands is for the
University and the other township is for the Branch.
The other law, for the selection of the granted lands provides that the County
Superintendents of uommon Schools be constituted a Board of Commissioners to select and
locate the granted lands, except as to the Counties of Cowlitz, Lewis and Whatcom,
where Nathaniel Ostrander, Thompson Newlin and R. V. Peabody should serve instead of
the County Superintendents. No Commissioner should select more than two sections
before the next annual meeting of the Legislature, a schedule of selections must be
kept and each commissioner was allowed three dollars a day for time actually employed 20
in these duties.
It is, of course, well known that these laws were futile as to the actual establishment of the University of Washington; but they constitute the initial steps in the legal history of the institution. That they are not wholly forgotten had an interesting manifestation as late as 1919, when, on April 14, the Union High School at Boisfort was dedicated. The invitation for a member of the faculty to participate contained the persuasive clause: "Because, you know, this was once the legal location of the University of Washington."
While Arthur a. Demy was Speaker of the House of Representatives and Seth Catlin
was President of the Council in the third session of the Legislature, 1855-56, both
veterans from the other two sessions, no action was taken relative to the University.
The outbreak of the Indian wars absorbed most attention. In the fourth session, 1856-57,
Mr. Arthur a. Denny was promoted to membership in the Council. There was no University
legislation but a law was passed on December 17, 1856, to incorporate the Puget Sound
Wesleyan Institute, with headquarters in Olympia. The trustees named in the act are
recognized as prominent pioneer citizens from all parts of the Territory. Several of them had been participants in the debates over the location of the University.
Another chapter in the location jugglery appeared in the fifth session of the Legislature when a law was passed on January 30, 1858, relocating the University on "Cowlitz iarm Prairie, in the County of Lewis." The law required that there first be
Executed to the territory of Washington a deed for one hundred and sixty acres on "an eligible part of said prairie." The two townships of granted lands were to be
used for this institution and the act of January 29, 1855, was specifically repealed.
This new location measure was House Bill No. 32 and when it came up for final action in
the Council, Mr. Denny combatted it with several calls for ayes and noes. He lost in
each case and, by the close vote of 5 to 4, the bill became a law. Nothing came to pass from that law.
While the sixth session of the legislature (1858-59) had much to do about locating
new roads and the incorporation of Divisions of the Sons of Temperance, no time was
given to the University.
The seventh session (1859-60) was remarkable for its scope of work. xhe record
of its laws, resolutions, memorials and indexes required a total of 525 pages, the
largest volume up to that date, xhe first 292 pages are devoted to a sort of code of
legal practice, after which the first law published seeks to provide a commission of
three men to select and locate the lands granted for university purposes. The three
men to constitute the commission are named in the law as A. B. Dillinbaugh, John
Clinger, and Newland. The provision requiring the first meeting to be held
"at the office of John Cliner, in Lewis County" is the only indication that the
Legislature was thinking of the institution as having been located on Cowlitz Farm
Prairie. This act bears the date of January 20, 1860. The former land selection act
(January 31, 1855) was repealed. It was at least a more definite effort toward the use
of those two townships of land for a Territorial University.
That very diligent session teemed with the manifestations of hope and aspiration
along both material and intellectual lines. Just one month before providing for the
selection of the University lands, or on December 20, 1859, there was passed an act to
incorporate Whitman Seminary at Walla Walla. Those named to comprise the "President and Trustees of Whitman Seminary" were Elkanah Walker, George H. Atkinson, Elisha S. Tanner, Erastus S. Joslyn, W. A. Tenney, H. H. Spalding, John C. smith, James Craigie, and Cushing Eells. The last named, an associate of the missionary Marcus Whitman,
built up a wonderful reputation for devotion to that Seminary.
On January 10, 1860, the Seattle Library Association was incorporated.
The pioneers named to constitute this corporation were E. A. Clark, L. V. Wychoff,
David Graham, L. J. Holgate, Dexter Horton, John Pike, D. Parmelee, Thomas Mercer,
W. H. Gilliam, H. L. Yesler, Ira Woodin, J. W. Johnson, H. L. Pike, George Holt,
Walter Graham, John F. Carr, J. C. Holgate, H. Yan Asselt, E. Richardson, Musgrave
D. H. Hill, J. C. Card, J. Foster, H. A. Atkins, J. A. Gardner, S. C. Harmon,
R. M. Bacon, H. A. Smith and J. H. Nagel. . A number of these subsequently served
the cause of the University.
On the next day a joint resolution was adopted favoring a geological survey
of Washington Territory. Copies of the resolution were ordered to be sent to the
Delegate in Congress and to the President and members of his Cabinet.
Another university was incorporated on January 25, 1860, to be known as Puget 28
Sound University. The incorporators named were D. R. Bigelow, B. C. Lippincott,
G. A. Barnes, James Biles, A. Hall, W. Rutledge, W. N. Ayers, S. McCaw, J. B. Webber, Charles Prosch, J. R. Meeker, W. W. Miller, G. K. Willard, B. L. Henness, A. R. Burbank, A. A. Denny, A. S. Abemethy, D. Phillips, N. Doane, W. Wright, C. H. Hale, F. W. Pettygrove, J. L. Scammon, J. F. Devore, R. H. Lansdale, L. Shaffer, T. F. Beriy, A. H. Simmons, C. M. Carter, and John D. Biles. Those men are known to have been leaders in different parts of the Puget Sound region. Their first meeting was to have been held on "the first Friday in April, 1860", but no place was mentioned for that meeting or for the location of the institution. It was evidently a forceful foim of protest against inaction at the Territorial University then legally located somewhere on Cowlitz Fann Prairie.
One more evidence of the forward look in this session is the act of January 31, 1860, supplementing the act incorporating the Northern Pacific Railroad Company (January 28, 1857). While not practically of use it helps to show that pioneers
were willing to join in this and other efforts toward advancement.
With such abundant activities along significant lines, it would have been
natural to have expected a renewal of interest in the Territorial University. Such
was the case in the next session, the eighth session of the Legislature, 1860-1861.
Two University laws were passed, one to locate the institution in Seattle and one to
provide for the selection of the granted lands. These laws are so fundamental that
the history of their enactment should be carefully studied.
Arthur A. Denny had been reelected to the Council jointly from King and Kitsap
Counties. King County had but one member of the House of Representatives, while
Kitsap County had two - B. R. Stone and Albert Pingree. Evidently King and Kitsap
Counties were pulling together in regard to University legislation and had a perfect
understanding of the dissatisfaction over the fiascoes of the past. On December 12,
1860, Representative Stone of Kitsap County introduced House Bill 17 to locate and
establish the University at Seattle. The result was a complete surprise. The only
opposition was offered by Representative J. W. Anderson of Lewis County, where the
institution had been located by the law of 1858. He had influence as Chairman of
the powerful Committee on Judiciary, but on this particular bill his motives to
table, postpone or amend were all voted down. Rules were suspended and the bill was
rushed to final passage in a few moments. The bill, as passed, was sent promptly to
the Council where another surprise was experienced. It was taken up instantly and,
while motions were made to refer and delay, the rules were suspended and the bill
enacted on the same day, December 12. Few bills in the history of Territorial or
State legislation have enjoyed such speed of action. The law, as published carries
the word "Passed" but the dates are represented by two blank lines. It is possible
that December 12, 1860, would be correct. However, there was some delay for the
enrollment and signature of the bill. This was achieved in both houses on December
24, just before the adjournment over the holiday, and so December 24, 1860, may be more definitely the actual date when the Territorial University of Washington was located in Seattle.
The law is a very brief one. The location feature carries a proviso retiring a deed for ten acres "eligibly situated in the vicinity of Seattle". It devotes the two townships of granted lands to the "support and endowment of said University” and repeals the act of 1858 and "all acts or parts of acts in conflict with the provisions hereof."
It has been shown that the law of January 20, 1860, provided a commission of three
men to select and locate the lands granted for the University. Henry M. McGill, who
served as Acting Governor throughout the session of 1860-1861, in his rather lengthy
message to the Legislature on December 5, 1860, said that one of those Commissioners
had declined to act and that he had appointed another to take his place. He had been
informed by the President of the Board that further legislation on the subject was 33
necessary. This, in addition to the desire for a different personnel on the Board,
explains the much discussed companion measure of 1861. Victor J. Farrar has discussed
the difficulty of apportioning the credit due for the new law. He stresses discussions between Arthur A. Denny and Rev. Daniel Bagley. He is probably correct there but he omitted mention of the part taken by Joseph Foster, the sole Representative of King County.
Mr. Denny had become discouraged over the former legislation about the University
and had bent his efforts toward securing the Capital for Seattle. He had set aside a
portion of his donation land claim and called it Capital Hill, which included the
present site of the New Washington Hotel. He must have been elated when the University
relocation bill was pushed through both houses in one day.
Joseph Foster was a man of vigorous character and spectacular vocabulary. He was
quite clearly a free lance in the House. When the eighteen standing committees were
announced, he did not get a chairmanship and only one of the subordinate positions, on
the Committee on Claims. They tried to put him on the undesirable Special Committee
on Legislative Divorces but he dodged it. He did not introduce bills but actively
espoused those he favored. Everyone called him "Joe" and in his vocabulary the name of Rev. Daniel Bagley was "Sky Pilot.”
It will be recalled that the bill relocating the University in Seattle was enrolled
and finally signed by Lyman Shaffer, Speaker of the House of Representatives, and Paul K. Hubbs, President of the Council, on the same day, December 24, 1860, the very day that the two houses recessed over the holidays. Mr. Foster came to his home near Seattle. Years afterwards, the present writer had the privilege of interviewing the two old pioneers as to what happened during that holiday recess.
Mr. Foster said that Mr. Bagley was accustomed to come down town in the morning with a basket on his arm. In the bottom of the basket was his Bible covered with a napkin. On top was the previous day's harvest of eggs. After selling the eggs, he would leave the basket and napkin in the store and take out the Bible to use in some ministerial duty. As the two men met on a wooden sidewalk this conversation took place: "Hello, Sky Pilot.”
"Good morning, Joe."
"I want to tell you something.”
"All right, go ahead.”
”1 have got a law down there at Olympia to bring the University to Seattle. I am going to hold to it tight until next session when I'll trade it for the Capital.”
"Now, let me tell you something, Joe. You go back and get me appointed a Commissioner to locate the lands and build the University and I will show you something a good deal better than the Capital.”
"Do you mean that, Sky Pilot?”
"I certainly do.”
"All right, Sky Pilot. I'll just go you one.”
Mr. Bagley, when eighty years of age, smiled and said: "Yes, yes," as he recalled that old meeting with his friend Joe.
The Legislature resumed its work on Thursday, January 3, 1861, and in just one week Mr. Denny introduced Council Bill No. 27, which became the companion of the location law. The bill was pushed through the Council under a suspension of rules. An amendment that was brushed aside by a vote of 6 to 3 sought to substitute Hunphrey O'Brien for John Webster as a member of the proposed Board of Commissioners.
The bill was sent to the House on the same day of its passage by the Council. On the next day it was given the first and second readings and referred to a special committee, appointed by the Speaker, consisting of Mr. Chapman of Pierce County, Mr. Foster
of King and Mr. Harris of Cowlitz. The special committee made its report on January
15 with amendments adding four sections and recommending its passage in that fom. On
motion of Mr. Foster the amendments were adopted and in spite of efforts toward delay the
amended bill, by a vote of 19 to 10, was passed and sent back to the Council.
Would the Council concur in those House Amendments? was the question that arose on
January 16. A motion was carried to re-commit the bill to the Committee on Education.
It was offered by Mr. James Biles, of Thurston and Samamish. He had opposed the bill
originally but in this case it was friendly action as Mr. Denny, author of the bill was
Chairman of the Committee on Education. His report for that Committee was offered on
Monday, January 21. recommending that the Council concur in the House amendments. This
was done without debate and promptly reported to the House. On January 29, the bill
was reported as correctly enrolled and on the following day, January 30, within one day
of final adjournment, the printing officers’ signatures were attached.
The law as published carries the erroneous date of January 11, 1861. The above history of the bill shows that the enactment was not finished until January 30, 1861.
It names Daniel Bagley, John Webster and Edmund Carr as a Board of Commissioners to secure the ten acres specified "within the vicinity of Seattle" as a site for the University and to select and locate the lands granted by Congress for University purposes. It specifies their duties, including authority to sell the selected lands "for any sum not less than one dollar and fifty cents per acre, according to the quality of the land." Acts or parts of acts in conflict were repealed. The legal foundation of the Territorial University of Washington was thus completed.
Hubert Howe Bancroft in his History of Washington, Idaho and Montana, page 213, declares that these favorable University laws were parts of a general scheme of legislative trades, which included the moving of the capital from Olympia to Vancouver and the location of the penitentiary at Port Townsend He says: "Such was the haste of the
legislative traders, that the all-in^ortant enacting clause was omitted in the wording
of the bill locating the capital, which thereby became inoperative.” The Laws of Washington, eighth session, 1860-1861, page 3, shows the law without the essential enacting clause. There seems to be no evidence that the enrollers of the bill purposely omitted the clause in order to save the capital for Olympia. The results of the legislative trading were that Vancouver did not get the Capital, Port Townsend did not get the Penitentiary, but Seattle did get the University.
Many of the citizens and especially those pioneer legislators of Washington Territory were of the opinion that the location of the University at Seattle would prove temporary as had been the results under the laws of 1855 and 1858. They were not prepared for the Vigor of action by Rev. Daniel Bagley and his associates, John Webster and Edmund Carr, on the Board of University Commissioners. That Board held its initial meeting on Washington’s Birthday, 1861, in a little triangular building where the Prefontaine Memorial Fountain now stands at the intersection of Third Avenue and Yesler Way. Mr. Bagley was elected President of the Board. He at once took the lead in work and responsibility so effectively that he was later called ’’Father of the University." Throughout his long life he maintained an interest in the institution and in 1910 his memory was honored by the naming of Bagley Hall, a fine fire-proof building used for the display of fine arts during the Alaska-Yukon-Pacific Exposition, and later devoted to the studies of chemistry and pharmacy.
Those honors were certainly earned by the number and weight of the burdens he bore during that ground-breaking period. The portion of the new law requiring the gift of a ten-acre site near Seattle caused him to appeal at once to Arthur A. Demy. As was probably expected, the response was instant:
"Take Capital Hill.”
Mr. Bagley and his two fellow Commissioners examined the hill and pronounced it "too far out in the woods.” Mr. Denny replied: "Very well, Help yourselves to ten acres anywhere on my claim.” They moved southward to a gently sloped ridge that would
still Command a view of the harbor and be nearer to Yesler’s Sawmill, the main industry of the town. On surveying the proposed tract it was found that the southeastern corner overlapped a little on a portion of the original Carson D. Boren claim which had become the property of Charles C. Terry and Judge Edward Lander. Those two pioneers promptly said: ’’All right. We’ll gladly join Mr. Denny in this gift."
After the World War, in 1919, two buildings used for the war-training camp on the new campus, were later named Terry Hall and Lander Hall while used for athletic training quarters. When those temporary buildings were destroyed a marker was placed there
expressing the hope that permanent buildings would take their places as memorials to
those who had joined with Mr. Demy as original donors.
Prompt action was necessary. Substantial results alone would prevent a renewal
of legislative jugglery as to the University’s location. It was first necessary to
clear the forest from that ten-acre site. That was one of the big jobs of the day.
Clarence B. Bagley, son of Rev. Daniel Bagley, was one of those working on that job.
He has written: ’’The men who did the actual work of clearing became more or less
prominent in the affairs of the city in later years. They were Henry A. Atkins, Lewis
Y. Wyckoff, Lyman B. Andrews, Clarence B. Bagley, Hillory Butler, Ira Woodin, Edwin
Richardson, Lemuel Holgate, John Pike and his son Harvey, John Carr, James Crow, James
Hunt, D. Parmlee and 0. Dudley.” The work cost about $3,000 for the whole tract.
The next task was the erection of the first building. Clarence B. Bagley gives a long list of pioneers who helped in that work. There were no drones in the community. ”A11 who had not regular employment elsewhere went to work with saw, plane, hammer, ax, pick, shovel or with whatever he could best turn his hand." Some of those on leading tasks are worthy of especial memory. The architect of the fine classical structure was John Pike, for whom Pike Street was afterward named. The one who surveyed the tract and supplied building levels was Edwin Richardson, A. P. DeLin and 0. C. Shorey carved the beautiful columns and put them in place. The tin work was done by Hugh McAleer, for whom McAleer Lake (now Lake Ballinger) was originally named. D. C. Beaty made the desks and William W. White did the blacksmithing.
Stone for the building’s foundation was brought from a quarry near Port Orchard, the
fir lumber from the mills at Port Madison and Port Gamble and from Yesler’s Mill at Seattle. The finishing wood was white pine from the mill at Seabeck. The paints, glass and hardware were doubled in cost because of the duties and steamboat charges when shipped from Victoria. The brick and lime were brought from Bellingham Bay by Captain Henry Boeder.
Contracts were carefully drawn for different parts of the work. Payments had to be made in coin and this produced one of the heaviest burdens that Rev. Daniel Bagley had to bear. It was the time of the Civil War and "greenbacking” a contractor was deemed disgraceful. Mr. Bagley’s son, Clarence B. Bagley, in 1916 published his History of Seattle. In Volume I., pages 137-138, he tells of his father’s money burdens as follows:
’’All Mr. Bagley’s accounts were kept in coin, according to the custom of the business men of the country. Should he receive $240 for a quarter section of land, he did not charge himself with that sum, but reduced it to coin dollars at the current rate. If paper was 60 cents on the dollar, he entered $144; if 50 cents, then $120; if only 40 cents, then it was only $96. Later a committee was appointed by the Legislature, who were unfriendly to Seattle, and mostly political enemies of Mr. Bagley.
They made an examination of his accounts and rendered a report showing a large balance due from him to the university fund, most of which was the difference between the coin value and par value of the paper money he had been compelled to take, and had used in the current transactions of the institution. A later committee of the Legislature made an exhaustive report and found $8 more due him than his own accounts showed. At the time his connection was terminated with university affairs he claimed a balance due him from its fund of a little more than $800, and $1,500 unpaid salary from the territorial treasury. In time the regents of the institution paid the former claim in full, and thirty years later he sued the state and recovered a considerable part of his claim for salary.”
When it is remembered that the only source for university funds was the Congressional grant of two townships of public lands and also that the next session of the Legislature might change the location unless substantial progress should be in evidence, it is clear that Mr. Bagley had to use vigor and speed. Public land could be purchased
from the Government on cash entry at one dollar and a quarter per acre. The law required that the university land should be sold for not less than one dollar and a half per acre. Some small tracts near the towns were chosen first. Mr. Bagley was then surprised to find that quarter-sections of one hundred and sixty acres were the smallest units considered in land-grants. He then had to buy the small tracts from the Government and, in turn, deed them to the purchasers. Complications grew and led to investigations as shown by the quotation from his son’s later writings.
The vigor and speed were not relaxed. The ground was cleared, levels obtained, and on May 21, 1861, the corner stone of the main building was laid with ample Masonic ceremonies. An incident of that day was cherished. Arthur A. Denny arrived late, saying "I have a good excuse. A baby boy was born in ray home this morning.” When that boy, Charles Latimer Denny, grew into a helpful manhood he was frequently called "Twin of the University."
The building was reared and roofed, the columns placed, and one room was -Jade ready for use. On November 4, 1861, actual teaching was begun.
The first principal teacher was Asa Shinn Mercer, ever afterwards listed as the first President of the University of Washington. He had graduated the year before from Franklin College, New Athens, Ohio. Ambitious to come west he selected Seattle where his elder brother, Thomas Mercer, was one of the pioneer citizens. He arrived in the summer of 1861 in time to perform some of the manual labor on the foundation work of the University. His recent graduation from college probably insured his selection to begin the educational work of the new institution. His brother was esteemed by the pioneers and, in addition, Rev. Daniel Bagley and Dexter Horton had known the young man from a» early childhood. Their influence was certainly helpful to him at that crisis.
Before the actual work of education was begun, haste received another manifestation. The Legislature met annually from 1854 to the winter of 1866-1867 after which the sessions were biennial. Thus the session for 1861-1862 would assemble in about one month after the beginning of those first classes. Rev. Daniel Bagley, alert and ambitious, issued through the newspapers an announcement signed by him as President of the Board of Commissioners and dated September 16, 1861. There were to be two quarters of eleven weeks each
and tuition ranged from five dollars a quarter for the primary department to ten dollars 46
for Latin and Greek.
That announcement showing the fact that primary and common school subjects were to be
taught in the Territorial University caused instant revulsion and part of the trouble
continued on to the period of Statehood (1889). Even in Seattle a meeting of protest
was held on November 1, 1861, three days before the beginning of instruction. Henry
L. Yesler, speaking for his fellow citizens, declared it would be undignified for the
University to teach such lower branches and the institution would be looked upon as
only a Seattle school. Mr. Bagley replied that the building was big enough for both a
school and university and if the local school board would cooperate it would help to
keep the institution going until it could be restricted to collegiate work alone. This
argument prevailed as it was deemed essential to have school work going on when the
Legislature should meet,
B. C. Lippincott, first Superintendent of Public Instruction for Washington
Territory, issued a report dated December 10, 1861. In addition to launching the work of supervising the common schools, he voiced a severe criticism of the haste in the beginning of the Territorial University. He wrote: "In fact, if the matter is well considered, we shall find that we are not yet prepared for a Territorial University.
We have reason to believe that there is not a young man in the Territory who could pass
an examination to enter the University course. Hence, where is the propriety of spending 48
all this money?"
The ninth session of the Territorial Legislature assembled at Olympia on December 2, 1861. The report by Superintendent Lippincott was soon placed before the members. In spite of that and other antagonisms, the University fared rather well during the session. One personality contributed largely to this result. John Denny of Seattle was a new Representative from King County. He was the father of Arthur A. Denny and had been associated with Abraham Lincoln in political contests in Illinois. Without doubt he was the most adroit politician in that ninth session of Washington’s Territorial Legislature.
It should also be stated that John Webster, one of the University’s original Board of Commissioners, was a member of the upper house or Council.
A surprising case of lethargy was revealed when this ninth session assembled on the legal date of December 2, 1861. There was no quorum of the House. Adjournments from day to day followed and the Speaker was not elected until Tuesday December 17. In two more days both houses were organized and met in joint session to receive the Governor’s Message.
. Jay S. Turney was Acting Governor. Among the reports accompanying his Message
was a brief one from the Land Office at Olympia signed by A. A. Denny, Register. This
helps to explain why his father, John Denny, had been elected to the place he had formerly
occupied as Representative from King County.
After the lapse of all that time in completing the organization of House and Council, University legislation was brought forward promptly and effectively. Friends of the institution were thoroughly prepared. Rev. Daniel Bagley, President of the Board of University Commissioners, had submitted a long report giving details of the acres
selected from the Congressional land grant. This was dated December 3. On December
20 he wrote a brief note to the Council, complying with a request for a report on the
expenditure of University funds, by submitting a complete report on the work done
and money expended. This report was signed by Daniel Bagley, John Webster and Edmund
Carr. The report is dated at Seattle, December 4, 1861, showing that it was in
readiness two weeks before it was called for. It was accompanied by a personal note
from Mr. Bagley frankly explaining certain items which he thought might be considered 50
doubtful. The Legislators thus had before them all this favorable information as well as the adverse report by the Superintendent of Public Instruction.
The Governors Message had been delivered on December 19, and the very next day Representative John Denny took the lead by introducing House Bill 4 to incorporate the University of Washington and on the following day (December 21) he introduced House Joint Resolution No. 1 providing for a Legislative Committee to visit the University buildings. No hesitancy or fear were evident in that leadership.
The incorporation of the institution could wait for discussion and amendment but everybody was anxious for the proposed visit and investigation. Rules were suspended to rush through House Joint Resolution No. 1 providing for the committee of five. Paul K. Hubbs and J. M. Moore were selected by the Council and J. R. Bates,
S. Yantis and C. C. Bozarth were selected by the House. They proceeded at once to Seattle, taking with them the Superintendent of Public Instruction.
Victor J. Farrar, who had the advantage of the papers and the memory of Clarence
Bagley, has written a compact account of that visit as follows: "The City of
Seattle wisely prepared to receive them enthusiastically and appointed the day of their arrival (December 31) as the one for dedicating the University. The committee was met at the wharf by a brass band, entertained profusely and invited to take part in the exercises. Seats on the platform were accorded them and, after the principal address by President Mercer, short speeches were asked for. In this way all prejudice was broken down. Superintendent Lippincott completely forgot himself and spoke of the University and commissioners in the highest terms. Chairman P. K. Hubbs then dedicated the University and received and accepted said University for and on behalf
of the Territory of Washington.”
On Monday, January 6, 1862, the five members of that visiting committee
rendered a brief but very favorable report approving all that they had seen. The
report was promptly adopted. It ought to be here recorded that the joint resolution
appointing the visiting committee carried this provision: ”Thet the President of
the Board of University Commissioners pay the necessary express arising therefrom,
and charge to University account."
The University was dedicated and officially accepted, but five days after the
visiting committee’s report was adopted, or on January 11, there was passed another
joint resolution for a careful investigation of all transactions by the Board of
University Commissioners. The joint committee appointed under that resolution
rendered a favorable report on January 25, saying "the business has been conducted
with commendable economy, prudence and energy."
While those visits and investigations were proceeding, Representative John
Denny’s plan for incorporating the University was frequently considered in the midst
of other items of legislative business. The results achieved took the form of two
laws, one to incorporate the University and one to provide for the safe keeping of
the moneys arising from the sales of University lands. In the incorporation act, finally signed on January 29, 1862, instead of January 24 as officially published, we have the first mention of a Board of Regents. Section 1 names Daniel Bagley,
Paul K. Hubbs, J. P. Keller, John Webster, E. Carr, Frank Clark, G. A. Meigs,
Columbia Lancaster and C. H. Hale to constitute the first Board of Regents. It will be noticed that the three members of the Board of University Commissioners are included. The duties and responsibilities of the Regents, the President, Professors and Tutors are all carefully set forth. There is also provided a Board of Visitors to comprise three persons. Section 9 declares that the University shall consist of at least four departments: "1st. A department of literature, science and arts. 2d.A department of
law. 3d. A department of medicine. 4th. A military department." The influence of the Civil War may he noted in that last provision. While the Regents have ample
powers, "the immediate government of the several departments shall be intrusted to
the President and the respective Faculties.” Annual reports must be made to the Legislature.
The other law reveals the fact that it was intended to continue the Board of University Commissioners. Section 2 provides: "That for the safe keeping, manageirent and control of the University fund, the board of commissioners, the President of the board of regents, and the treasurer of the University fund, shall constitute a board of directors.”
The disturbances of the Civil War must have affected this session of the Washington Territorial Legislature. It took two weeks for quorums to assemble at the beginning and when the last day arrived, January 30, 1862, there was not a quorum in either House or Council when the session was adjourned sine die.
While subsequent sessions of the Territorial Legislature considered University matters, sometimes harshly critical and sometimes with friendly interest, it is fair to conclude that a crisis was passed in that session of 1861-1862. The institution was not only incorporated with a Board of Regents provided, but it had been dedicated and accepted. These facts would not be again disturbed.
There was to be much disturbance in the University’s actual work of education.
The early records are scant and far from satisfactory. Rev. Daniel Bagley kept ample records of the lands and moneys but he did not keep equal records of the educational work. His son, Clarence B. Bagley, one of the first students, devoted much time in his later years to the compilation of history. His records are helpful in this connection. He has written that when Asa Shinn Mercer began teaching on November 4,1861, there were about thirty pupils in attendance and the first school year embraced five months. Then Mrs. Ossian J. Carr, taught a private school of twenty-four pupils in the same room during the months of May, June and July, 1862. Mr. Mercer began the second year of the University on October 20, 1862, with Mrs. Virginia Calhoun as his assistant. President Mercer was called out of town several times during the winter
when Clarence B. Bagley presided in his place. Dillis B. Ward occasionally acted
as Mr. Mercer’s assistant during that same winter. Among the first pupils attending
were five from Olympia - James B. Biles, Susan Isabella Biles, Edgar Bryan, Augustus
Geary and Edwin Austin; four from Victoria - George W. Little, John McCrea, Ed.
Francis and Allen Francis; Sarah Loretta Denny, daughter of John Denny; Eugenie
McConaha, first white girl born in Seattle; and Orion 0. Denny, first white boy born
in Seattle, son of Arthur A. Denny. Mr. Bagley seeks to perfect the record as follows:
'•An official list of students is not accessible, but in addition to those named
it is known that these also attended: Margaret Lenora Denny, Rolland H. Denny, Rebecca
Horton, Alice Mercer, George W. Harris, Sylvanus C. Harris, Robert G. Hayes, Charles
Hays, Zebedee M. Keller, James Hunt, L. L. Andrews, Jane Wetmore, Birdsie Wetmore,
Frank Wetmore, E. Inez Denny, Madge Denny, Charles Tobin, Findley Campbell, Sarah
Bonney, Gertrude Boren, Mary Boren, Joseph Crow, Martha Crow, Emma Russell, John B.
Libby, Levi Livingston, Christine Delin, Andrus Delin, Eva Andrews, William R. Andrews,
Ed. Harmon, Fred Young, Frances Webster, Lewis Post, John W. Humphrey, Arthur Brownell,
Thomas Winship, Edward Sanford Bueklin and William M. Belshaw. It is believed the
fifty-eight named herein attended the second Mercer school, and more than one-half
of them the first. It is also believed that it is a complete list of Mercer’s 56
second term pupils."
Obviously, that list is important for two main reasons: it comprises the first
student body of the University of Washington and it includes members of the pioneer
families of 1861-1862. There is but one - Rolland H. Denny - known to be living as
this record is being compiled in 1934.
In preparing for the second session to begin on October 20, 1862, Principal
A. S. Mercer dated at Seattle on September 17, an advertisement for the newspapers
setting forth the courses of study from primary to collegiate grades, the prices
of tuition from five to ten dollars per quarter and board at three dollars per week.
Proper discipline and safeguards were promised -
Compared to the zeal of clearing land and constructing the first building, was the effort to get students. Mr. Mercer has left this personal account of it:
"Previous to opening the school, I spent three weeks, hiring two Indians and a
canoe, and traveled about four hundred miles visiting every logging camp on the
east side of Puget Sound from Bellingham Bay to Olympia, trying to induce any young
men whom I might find engaged in the logging camps to come to Seattle and enter the
school: succeeded in getting about one dozen, varying in age from twenty to twenty-
five years. In order to secure them, I agreed to pay them $1.50 a cord for chopping
wood from the down timber in front of the University grounds, which had been donated
to me for that purpose by Arthur A. Denny. I contracted with the captain of the
steamboat EljLza Anderson, the only steamboat at that time plying upon Puget Sound,
to supply him with wood, getting $2.50 per cord. H. L. Tesler, who owned the wharf
and usually charged 25 cents per cord wharfage, donated or gave me the free use of
the wharf, thus saving 25 cents per cord. This enabled me to pay the boys $1.50
per cord - an extra high price. There were but two horse teams in the country at
that time, and teamsters’ prices were high. I paid $1 per cord for having the wood
hauled to the wharf. These young men, being expert handlers of the ax, averaged two
cords each Saturday, thus earning $3 per week. In order still further to make it
possible to have a school I sent to San Francisco and bought groceries at wholesale
prices, and the captain of a sailing vessel brought them to Seattle free of charge.
I then hired a man and his wife (Mr. and Mrs. 0. C. Shorey) to open a boarding house
on the grounds and board the students for $3 per week - a very low price and only
possible by reason of getting the goods as above indicated."
Fortunately another record has been saved from those beginning days about an acquisition for which a feeling of sentiment has clung through all subsequent years. Mr. Bagley has written this about the old University bell: "The bell that has ever been noted for the quality and power of its tones (it now hangs in Denny Hall) came from Troy, N. Y., around the Horn, and with its fixtures cost, in place in the tower, $386. I (Clarence Bagley) was the first to sound on it a long peal out over the Sound and town, on or about March 19, 1862. For many years, in times of dense fog, it was rung to let steamers on the bay know the direction to steer. Its tones have
reached Port Madison, across the Sound twelve or fourteen miles and at other times
as far as Renton in the opposite direction.
With such manifestations of vigor and enterprise, the University would normally
he expected to go steadily forward in development, but such was not to be the case.
The students left for one reason or another until, on one occasion, only five pupils
appeared for classes. Mr. Mercer closed the school without formalities on March 13,
1863, and resigned his position as Principal or President. He was destined to add
another chapter to the history of Washington Territory in 1864 and 1866 by bringing
from the Atlantic Coast two groups of settlers, mostly women, to Puget Sound. These
expeditions were not connected with the University. They became locally famous and
have been recorded under such titles as "The Mercer Immigration," "The Mercer Expe-
d it ions" and "Mercer Girls."
The apparent collapse of the student body did not discourage the Board of Regents. As soon as President Mercer indicated a desire to step aside, an offer was made to Thomas Milton Gatch, an educator in Oregon, on November 12, 1862. The old minutes of the Regents show the influence of inflated currency. Professor Gatch agreed to come if the salary would be paid in coin. The Regents agreed to pay in government money. The incident was thereupon closed.
William Edward Barnard became the second President. No catalogue was issued,
but on August 15, 1863, he published an extended advertisement in the Seattle Gazette 61
which has been saved. Here we have statements of the calendar, courses of study, discipline and costs. One paragraph introduces the new President as follows:
"The Board of Regents have recently elected W. E. Barnard, A.M., President of the University. Mr. Barnard is a graduate of Dartmouth College, and was for two years at the head of one of the most flourishing academies of New England. His subsequent experience as Principal of La Creole Academy at Dalles, Oregon, and still later, the reputation he acquired while connected with the Willamette University at Salem, as a thorough teacher and disciplinarian, justify the expectation that the University of Washington Territory under his management, will rank second to none on the Pacific Coast.”
The hope thus asserted was only partially fulfilled before the second collapse.
The academic year beginning on September 7, 1863, had forty-two students still enrolled for the last quarter beginning on May 9, 1864. President Barnard had had experience in the far west. He believed it was possible to have a university even in a wilderness.
He is described as being a Puritan. In that first advertisement, under the head of "Discipline", he declared: "Frequenting of saloons, and attendance upon theaters and balls, are not allowed, but students are required to be at their respective places of abode at stated hours. A respectful observance of the Sabbath is required, and at 3 o'clock P.M. each Sabbath the students will assemble at the University Chapel, to study the Scriptures as a Bible Class. The reading of the Scriptures, regarded as the
only safe text book of morals, will be a daily exercise of the school.”
This, of course, was his official attitude. He soon became convinced that
social influences, and not scantiness of population, were responsible for the
school’s low morale. He wrote a letter to a friend including the following:
’’Society is greatly disorganized; drunkenness, licentiousness, profanity, and
Sabbath desecration are the striking characteristics of our people, and of no
portion more than those at Seattle. Of course there are a few honorable exceptions.
We have two distilleries, eleven drinking establishments, one bawdy house, and at
all the drinking establishments, as at our three hotels, gambling is openly practiced;
and Sunday is no exception. These are the influences we have to encounter to build
up an institution. I need not say it is discouraging and well nigh hopeless.”
Such language, in speeches as well as letters, angered some of the citizens.
He felt that crusading was as important as teaching and did not flinch. The angered
ones seized upon the first opportunity to combat him. He had greatly improved the
campus by removing debris left after the construction of the buildings, grading and
planting the grounds and placing necessary walks. Complaints arose over this
expenditure of funds. In the midst of the clamor President Barnard resigned in
February, 1865. This was a surprise. The complainers were only trying to silence
him. He began a successful real estate business and would have continued in it if
the Regents had been able to secure a new President for the University. Mr. Barnard
was prevailed upon to resume the duties. He continued as President until his final
resignation on April 15, 1866. At that time the student body had declined to fifteen.
In that interim from February, 1865, to April, 1866, he published two small adver-
tisements, giving terms of tuition and board. These must suffice for the informative catalogues familiar in later years.
The Legislature had been kept informed. The Board of Regents, provided for in the Act of January 29, 1862, rendered its first report dated December 1, 1862. It goes into details as to buildings, grounds, granted lands and organization of the institution’s work. The statement is made that J. P. Keller, one of the first
Regents, had died and the Governor had appointed Henry McGill to the vacancy.
Rev. Daniel Bagley had been elected as the first President of the Board of Regents but resigned on account of a trip he needed to make to the Eastern States. Thereupon, Mr. McGill was elected President and Frank Clark was elected Secretary. The latter signed this first Regents’ Report. There follows a report by the Board of University Commissioners signed by Mr. Bagley under the date of November 20, 1862.
A statement of Organization gives courses of study for the Primary Department Grammar School, Preparatory Department and Freshman Class. The last group comprises classics, algebra, geometry, trigonometry and physiology. There were fifty-one
pupils, thirty of whom were in the primary department and only one in the freshman 64
On December 22, 1862, the Council ordered that a committee of three be appointed
to “examine into the matter of the Territorial University" and the President appointed
Councilmen Cochran, More and McFadden. No report seems to have resulted.
In its next session the Legislature debated as to the selection of men to
manage the University as Regents. The result was the enactment of a law on January
19, 1864, naming H. L. Yesler, Cyrus Walker, Frank Clark, C. C. Phillips, James
Tilton and Hezekiah Davis to serve in lieu of "Messrs. Bagley, McGill, Clark,
Webster, Carr and Meigs, whose terms of office have expired."
Near the end of the session, on January 30, 1864, the Legislature received a report from Thomas Mercer, Treasurer of the University. From the sales of lands he had received $47,535.07 and had disbursed $40,616.42. A balance due from land purchases interest was being charged at one percent per month and on money loaned at one and one-half percent per month.
It is interesting to find that the old pioneer, Thomas Mercer, served the University as Treasurer but it is puzzling to see that money was loaned from the slender funds. This is frankly treated in the Regents’ Report to the Legislature dated December 19, 1864, as follows:
"The Board of Regents was unable to ascertain the condition of the fund till last October, i'rom oral information, at the meeting in March ’64, authority was given to pay teachers and incur other expenses; but upon receiving in October a statement from Rev. D. Bagley, President of the Board of Commissioners, of the condition of the fund, it was ascertained that the revenue would not allow the payment of the salary of the University President for the last few months, so it was deferred, with the understanding that the facts should be reported to the Legislature, with the hope that your Hon. Body would devise means by which the Regents could comply with the contract with Mr. President Barnard, relating to his salary, as also other necessary expenses, as the Board of Regents could not pay him from the principal of the fund; and there was such an amount of interest money overdue from the borrowers of the fund, and also some of the sums lent were unavailable, particularly in the case of Mr. Thos. Chambers, who is reported by the former Treasurer of the fund as a debtor to a large amount; but Mr. Chambers claims damages for alleged failure on the part of the President and acting Treasurer of the Board of Regents to comply with the terms of the contract by which Mr. Chambers was to receive the sum of money borrowed by him from the University fund."
It is known that Mr. Chambers afterwards settled the account by deeding to the University one-half of his donation land claim near Steilacoom. That land was held by the University until after Statehood when it was sold by the State Land Commissioner. The alumnus, Howard G. Cosgrove, while serving as a Regent (1909-1913), took the case to the courts but was unable to get back to the University either the land or the money received from its sale.
That Regents’ Report recommended that the management of the University be
placed in the hands of one board instead of two for the sake of economy and to center
responsibility. The older Board of Commissioners had been continued and part-of
its three members were also members of the Board of Regents, .among other items touched upon the Report said: "In June last, a meeting of the Board of Regents was
held at Seattle, and in view of the state of the fund, the Board of Regents discharged
all assistant teachers, and continued the University under the sole direction of the
President, Mr. W. E. Barnard, A. M. At that time the pupils numbered about 42."
Furthermore, there was trouble about the difference between currency and coin. The
Report says: "During the two years last past there has been a gradual transmutation
of this fund to the legal tender currency, but during the same time the expenses of
the University have been paid in coin or its equivalent, the effect of this, for a
year past, has been practically to reduce the principal one half."
Such a report would certainly stir the Legislature to action. Two days after
its receipt a joint resolution was adopted providing a committee of five from each
house "to take into consideration and report upon the report of the President of the
board of regents of Washington Territory University."
No time was wasted. The Joint Committee visited the University and on Monday
January 2, 1865, rendered its report to the House of Representatives (also rendered
to the Council on January 3).
That report was severely critical. The buildings were in good repair except a
leakage in the roof of the main building; the furniture was adequate, the library
was small and of little value, the management of the University by its President had
not been "the most judicious" and the Regents should "take such steps in relation to
teachers as will promote the best interests of the school." But by far the most
critical part of the report was devoted to the questions of lands and funds. The
bookkeeping was called wholly unsatisfactory as to records and as to differences
between currency and coin. It was recommended that the Board of Regents secure a
skilled accountant and that the Board of Comrais'sioners- be abolished. It was shown
that 2808.75 acres of land had been selected beyond the total of 46,080 acres granted
by Congress. As a supplement to the report the committee submitted a bill which, if
enacted into law, would correct the conditions mentioned in their complaints.
The report was adopted but, of course, such adoption did not include the passage of the supplemental bill. In other words the Board of Commissioners was not then abolished. On January 7, 1865, the two houses assembled in Joint Convention for the election of Territorial officers at which time three Regents were elected, one at
a time, - J.J«H. Van Bokkelen, W. H. Langford and John Collins, to take the places
of Messrs. Hubbs, Hale and Lancaster whose terms had expired. This was a new method as Regents and Commissioners had previously been appointed by regularly enacted laws.
That the Board of University Commissioners had not been abolished was clearly shows in the proceedings of the Legislative Session of 1865-1866, when a report was received on January 3, 1866, signed by D. Bagley, President. It gives accounts of lands and cash. Appended to the first portion is the following: "I have personally examined and audited the account of Daniel Bagley since last settlement with the Regents of W. U., and find all correct. H. L. Yesler. In behalf of the Regents. Seattle, W. T. January 1, 1866.”
The details are not important but the close is significant: "Total coin and
legal tender - $2,159.48. coin disbursements more than coin receipts - $459.00."
On the next day (January 4, 1866,) the Legislature received a report from the Board of Regents signed by Frank Clark, President. It recites the financial troubles in a report from Charles C. Terry, Treasurer of the University. In President Clark’s report is the brief statement: "The action of your Hon. body has saved me the necessity of making any recommendation about the necessity of doing away with the Univer- 71
This evidently had reference to the fact that Councilor John Denny of King and Kitsap Counties had introduced on December 20, 1865, Council Bill No. 12 to amend the incorporation act of the University and to abolish the Board of University Commissioners. It was prcnptly referred to the committee on Education of which John Denny, author of the bill, was Chairman. The next day he reported the bill back to the Council with his Committee’s recommendation that it be passed without amendment.
That bill became a law and is published in the Laws of Washington, 1865-1866, pages 120-121, where it is stated that it passed the Council on January 3, the House on January 4 and was approved by Governor William Pickering on January 17, 1866. Between those erroneous dates there was much debate. Each house adopted amendments which sent the bill back to the other house for further consideration. On January 13 the President of the Council gave notice that he was signing Council Bill No. 12.
Three days later the Council received a report from the House that the Speaker
had signed the bill. On January 18, the Governors message approving the act was 72
During the discussions of the bill an amendment was adopted to strike out Section 5. We do not have a copy of the original draft and it may be that the stricken portion would have abolished the Board of University Commissioners, which would have justified the statement, quoted above, from the Regents’ report signed by President Frank Clark. The only other inference of justification is in the language of the law as finally passed. This increased the Board of Regents from nine to fifteen members and gave them full control over all moneys belonging to the University fund.
Those who know about the pioneer families of Washington Territory will be interested in the names of the nine who by this law were added to the six holdover Regents. They were G. a. Meigs, C. Clymer, D. T. Denny, D. R. Bigelow, C. H. Hale, G. F. Whitworth, H. K. Himes, H. Burnett and A. S. Abernethy. So large a Board with residences far apart would have been unweildly, but the law provided that five would constitute a quorum, Provision was also made for the election of two members who, with the President of the Board would constitute an executive committee. This act was an amendment to the older act of incorporation, dated January 24, 1862.
The last year of Mr. Barnard as President of the University was by no means a hap y one. As already state", he was persuaded to give up his real estate business and resume the duties as President of the University. The student body approached the vanishing point. "It is thought that when Mr. Barnard resigned, on April 13,
1866, the number in attendance was less than fifteen, and that Rev. George F. Whitworth did no teaching during the unfinished term of 1866. A primary school, however,
is believed to have been conducted."
That was as definite as Mr. Farrar could state it as there were no catalogues or other records published. A small advertisement in the Seattle Puget Sound Semi- Weekly is signed by President Barnard, dated April 5, but published on April 19, 1866. Between those dates the Presic^ent^ resignation had been accepted. On May 21, the same paper carried an advertisement, signed by the new President, Rev. George F.
Whitworth, declaring that the Primary Department would be conducted by Ml's. H. Smith and that due notice would be given of the opening of other departments of the University. That notice was signed August 18, 1866, naming the opening date of the new academic year as September 10. In the meantime the news columns of the same paper announced on April 16 that the Board of Town Trustees had made arrangements to pay the common school fund into the treasury of the University in exchange for the admission of the children of Seattle into the University free of tuition charges.
The old Minute Book of the Board of Regents, pages 39-42, shows that President Barnard had been striving toward that end. On April 13, 1866, he presented a lengthy report dated April 11. He showed that the attendance of the last quarter had been seventeen - eight from Seattle, two from Dwamish River, three from White River and four from Whidbey Island. His report discusses very frankly the personal dislike of himself that was retarding a full cooperation by the Seattle School District. He followed the long report with a very brief one, tendering his resignation, which was accepted as of that date, April 13. At another meeting, three days later, Rev.
George F. Whitworth was elected President.
There was no ill feeling manifested at the time of this second resignation by President Barnard. He left Seattle with a united feeling of goodwill and sympathy. This was intensified by a tragedy on May 13, 1866. His daughter Gertrude, while withdrawing a book from a stove into which it had been thrown, was fatally burned. President Barnard moved to Oakland, California, where he remained for the rest of his life, achieving success in the real estate business.
For a brief time in his administration, President Barnard had the assistance of Antoinette Josephine Baker as an instructor. She deserves to be remembered in these annals. She was related to fine New England families, on her mother’s (Dorothy True) side to that of James Russell Lowell, and on her father’s side to those of Nathaniel Hawthorne and Mary Baker Eddy. She began teaching school in Lowell, Massachusetts, at sixteen years of age. While engaged in that work, she was invited by Asa Shinn Mercer, to join his second group of so-called "Mercer Girls" and go to Puget Sound
where she could have the position as assistant in the new Territorial University of Washington, she arrived in Seattle on May 19, 1864, and began her work at once.
Funds were soon exhausted and she accepted the chance to teach the school at Monti- cello (now Longview). On February 21, 1865, she was married to Edwin R. Huntington, of the well known pioneer family. They moved to Castle Rock. There she lived a life full of good work for schools, churches and neighbors. She helped to organize the first Presbyterian Church in Castle Rock. When she died on June 15, 1916, that church was practically filled with flowers brought by those who wished to show appreciation for so many years (78) filled with useful service.
It is not difficult to see how Rev. George F. Whitworth became attractive as a
successor to President Barnard. When the Legislature increased the membership of the
Board of Regents to fifteen, Mr. Whitworth was one of the new ones selected. He was
evidently looked upon as one of the most effective members as he was chosen with
Hiram Burnett to serve on the Executive Committee at the meeting of the Regents on
April 10, 1866. At that same meeting, in compliance with the new law, the terms of
the new Regents were fixed by lot. Mr. Whitworth drew the short term of one year.
If it were not for that element of chance the surmise would be natural that the Regents were deliberate in designating that short term. It would have been inconvenient to have the President of the University as a legal member of the Board of Regents. That they were then thinking of him as a future President of the University is evident from the fact that he was appointed chairman of a special committee of four to draw up a statement "in the nature of By-Laws which shall prescribe the duties of the Executive Committee." That statement was set forth and adopted at an evening session on the same day. It gives power to the Executive Committee over the physical properties and educational work of the institution, but in the last paragraph the President of the University is given power to select and appoint his own assistants.
Mr. Whitworth had thus embraced his opportunity to smooth the way for the new President of the University. It is not positively known that he then expected to succeed to that office within a week but it is recorded that President Barnard resigned on April 13 and that Rev. George F. Whitworth was elected to the position
on April 16, 1866.
President Barnard dated on April 5th a small advertisement including the statement: "This institution will open on the Second Monday of April.” It was published in the Seattle Puget Sound Serai-Weekly of April 19, 1866, six days after his resignation had been accepted. President Whitworth followed with a small advertisement in the same paper on May 19th saying: "The Primary Department of this Institution will open on Monday next, 21st inst., in charge of Mrs. H. Smith." It also contem-
plated the admission free of charge pupils of the Seattle School District and arrangements would be made later for the admittance of the advanced pupils. On August 27 he announced in that paper that the University would re-open "on the 10th of September next." That arrangement with the Seattle School District helped those very lean years. Their funds were turned into the University treasury.
Comparatively, his year, 1866-1867, was successful. There were sixty students
in attendance. Six of these were from places outside of Seattle. 'This fact seems to
have intensified a feeling of opposition to the University.
The Legislature, which met on December 3, 1866, and adjourned on February 3,
1867, manifested a disapproval of via at had been done and a determination that the work should not continue along the old lines, a law was approved on January 31, 1867, by which the Board of University Commissioners was abolished; all acts pertaining to the appointment of Regents were repealed; a new Board of five Regents was established; this Board was empowered to investigate and report to the Legislature all findings as to the institution and its land-grant funds; the five new Regents were named -
B. F. Dennison, David T. Denny, Frank Mathias, Harvey K. Hines and Oliver F. Gerrish.
It is well to mention also that this same Legislature provided that biennial sessions
should supplant the annual sessions that had been the custom previously.
The new Board of Regents met in Seattle on March 29, 1867, organized and proceeded at once to investigate the land-grant funds. Rev. Daniel Bagley, President of the former Board of University Commissioners presented his report with books and papers and accounts. The Regents adjourned to an afternoon session and later adjourned to the next morning and that meeting was in turn adjourned to April 1. Three long
meetings were devoted almost wholly to lands and funds. Seven large pages of
closely written minutes show Mr. Bagley answering questions and seeking to explain
his books and accounts. On this point, Mr. Farrar has written:
"Now Bagley was a poor bookkeeper. Had he in the beginning purchased a fine
looking set of books, made his entries according to the most approved methods, in
fine black ink, with bright red rulings, he might have stayed his pursuers. But he
had done none of these things. His books were heterogeneous and soiled. Many of his
important transactions had been kept upon loose leaves abstracted from his cash book.
He had a habit of jotting down this and that with the expectation of mending the
whole at his leisure. All together he made a weak appearance. Still, he might have
escaped had he understood the management of greenback transactions."
Just before the Board of Regents adjourned that grilling meeting of April 1. to June 28, 1867, they found time for some action for the University itself.
President Whitworth reported that the University Boarding House "will change hands tomorrow." Thereupon Regents Denny and Mathias were appointed with President Whitworth to make an inventory of all the property and exact a receipt from the new Boarding House keeper. The President was also ordered to mark, number-and care for the books in the Library.
Although this indicates that the Regents had small interest in the academic work, the institution was expected to go on. President Whitworth published two small notices in the Seattle Gazette on April 15 and June 17, but these were soon followed by rather drastic action by the Regents. In place of minutes of a meeting on June 28, 1867, tlie official record shows an order of that date signed by the five Regents notifying President Whitworth that his contract was ended on that day, adding: "Much as we regret the necessity of our present action, we see no other of preserving
the remnant of what should have been an ample endowment had the fund been managed with ordinary prudence."
The University was closed.
But President Whitworth’s interest in it was not ended. In a few years he had become President for a second time. In many ways he was a remarkable man among the pioneers.
George Frederick Whitworth was born in the Town of Boston, Lincolnshire, England, on March 15, 1816. The family moved to Terra Haute, Indiana, in 1832.
He graduated from Hanover College in 1839. He came to the Pacific Coast in 1853 as a pioneer of Presbyterianism in the Pacific Northwest. Clarence B. Bagley has written of him: "Probably no resident of Washington has left so deep an impress upon public affairs of so wide a range. By turns he was teacher, editor, deputy surveyor, civil engineer, clerk in the Indian department, deputy collector of customs, and at all times he was active in religious, moral, temperance and educational work, not only in his own community, but throughout Washington. He was active in putting into operation the infant industries, particularly coal mining. Twice he held the presidency of the university; he served a term in Thurston County as superintendent of public instruction and in his declining years he founded an academy at Sumner in Pierce County, which later was moved to Tacoma and named Whitworth College. This institution passed through many vicissitudes and was later
moved to Spokane, where it bids fair to be a school of importance."
While the University remained closed, the Board of Regents held meetings on October 11 and 12 and on December 13, 1867, during which they discussed claims for payments presented by President Whitworth, further evidence by Mr. Bagley about lands and arranged to present the whole case before the approaching session of the Legislature.
That report was placed before the Legislature on December 18, 1867. It is a long one and carries a transcript of the minutes of the meetings where Mr. Bagley was so extensively grilled. It was promptly referred to a special committee consisting of Representatives Park Winans, John W. Brazee and Ira Ward, who reported on January 10, 1868, that the Regents had not thoroughly investigated Mr. Bagley*s books and accounts, saying: "It is true that Mr. Bagley has not kept his books strictly according to rule, yet your committee cannot find any place where they show an intention to cover up or mystify with intent to do wrong." They recommended that Mr. Bagley be paid $814.76 as shown by the committee’s checking
of the accounts and ^1500 for tvro years of service. They also appended a separate
report entitled "Defense of Daniel Bagley."
Bills were introduced and debated to pay Mr. Bagley and to pay Regents for
their services. These bills did not reach final enactment. One bill was enacted on January 28, 1868, which simply named A. A. Denny and W. H. Robertson in place of
D. T. Denny and Harvey K. Hines whose terms as Regents had expired. On the same
day a Joint Resolution was passed empowering the Regents to settle the claims
arising from the land transactions and to re-open the University "by lease or 82
In an attempt to exercise the authority thus given, the Regents inserted an advertisement in the Seattle Intelligencer of April 13, 1868, offering to lease the University for a term of years. This declared: "Propositions to lease it as a sectarian institution will not be entertained." Papers in Olympia, Portland,
Salem, San Francisco and Sacramento were requested to give the advertisement six insertions and send bill to B. F. Dennison, President of the Board of Regents.
The property was given description as follows:
"The Institution embraces ten acres of ground, well cleared and fenced; the University Building proper; President’s House, Boarding House and Outbuildings, with a good supply of running water. It is pleasantly and beautifully situated in Seattle, W.T., is well suited to school purposes, and is in condition to be occupied immediately."
No satisfactory offer was received and the University remained closed for the greater part of two years.
On April 5, 1869, the Board of Regents signed a rather lengthy advertisement which ran for some time in the Seattle Intelligencer, beginning: "This Institution will be permanently re-opened on Monday, the 12th day of April, 1869, under the charge of Professor J. H. Hall, as President, assisted by such Professors and assistant Teachers as may be required." Three other smaller advertisements appeared in the same paper under dates of August 30, 1869, August 22, 1870 and August 28, 1871. These were the announcements for those years. Terms of tuition per
session of fourteen weeks ranged from $8.00 in the Primary Department, and $15.00 in the Collegiate Department. Modem languages were introduced at differing rates of tuition - French, $7,00; German, $9.00; and Spanish, $8.00. .another new work was the Commercial Department, $60.00 for "Full Course.” Charges for board remained steadfast at $3.50 per week.
'lhe re-opening encountered difficulties. Three denominational schools had opened in the field. Seattle had built its own school and withdrawn its pupils from the University, while the University buildings had suffered, many moveables having been carried away.
The new President was John Henry Hall, born in New York City, May 4, 1837. He
graduated from the High School there at the age of fourteen, .after attending Columbia
University he transferred to Oberlin College. After graduation, he returned to New
York and taught school there for three years. He moved to Oregon in 1859 and for six
years was connected with McMinnville College. Soon after being called to Seattle, he
met with the Board of Regents. They were favorably impressed and asked him for a
report. In this he gave his views of the purpose and need of education saying in
part: "Statistics are abundant showing that the people of this country do not value
education less, but that in changing conditions of society, they prefer that system
which is best adapted to the new exigencies of life, and which •..111 the best prepare
men to master the problems of the times in which they live."
The pages in the Record of the Board of Regents are blank. No mention of President Hall is found there until January 29, 1872, when this item was entered: "Ordered that Prof. Hall be requested to continue the School until July next on the same terms as heretofore.” This made his tenure three years and one terra. The attendance during his administration was from 60 to 100, about one-third from places outside of Seattle.
In the three years of President Hall's administration the Legislature held two sessions. In the session of 1869 the Regents rendered a report, new Regents were appointed, two University bills were introduced but not enacted and the Governor included a scorching reference to the institution in his message to the Legislature.
Governor Alvar Flanders had dated his Message on September 24, 1869, and delivered it before a joint session of both houses on October 7. His drastic criticism of the University was as follows:
"The condition of the Territorial University should receive your careful attention. The history of this institution, of its management of the lands donated by Congress for the endowment of a Territorial University, is a calamity and a disgrace. Everything connected with the management of the University lands up to 1867, can be correctly described only by saying that it was characterized by gross extravagance and incompetency, if not by downright fraud. Forty-six thousand and eighty acres of land were donated by Congress for the founding of this institution. Nearly all of this land has been sold, forty-three thousand, nine hundred and twenty-eight acres, (43,928) and there is nothing at present to show for this munificent donation but a building possibly worth fifteen thousand dollars, which appears better fitted for a monument to the folly and extravagance of the persons under whose direction it was built, than the purposes for which it was intended. I would recommend that the Regents appointed by the Legislature, January 25th, 1867, be authorized to continue their investigations, and that a sufficient sum be appropriated to enable them to procure the attendance of such witnesses as they require, and to defray the other incidental and necessary expenses attending the investigation. Also to enable them to bring suits in the courts for the recovery of any moneys which they may find due the University, should they deem it expedient.
"This is in accordance with the recommendation of the select committee of your honorable body, *on the report of the University Regents/ made to the Council at the last session of the Legislature. This committee in their report say, TIt is now, however, too late to remedy the errors of the past. All that remains for us, is to gather up what is left of the wreck, and ascertain what means may be still available for the purpose of carrying on the University.*
"It is a source of profound regret that an institution designed to accomplish so much good for our Territory, has been so badly crippled and defeated of the high ends contemplated by the gift made for its endowment. Should you decide to ask Congress
for a further grant of land to aid the University, as was recommended by the select
c0r.2rd.ttee before alluded to, let it be shown that a safeguard will be cast about the
gift to protect it from waste and from diversion from the true purpose for which it 84
So far as can be determined that arraignment had little effect on the institution
or on the Legislature. The Regents’ brief report was placed before the Legislature
on October 24, ashing for money to pay the expenses if further investigations were
desired, telling about the engaging of President Hall at $600. per year for three years
and closing as follows: ’’The favorable indications since the re-opening of the school
leads us to entertain the hope that it may yet be of incalculable benefit to the youth
of the country, and a credit to Washington Territory.” This was accon^arded by the
University Treasurer’s reporting $68.20 as the amount of cash on hand.
Instead of the appointment of University Regents by the enactment of a law, the
session of 1869 elected them in Joint Convention on October 30 at the same time that
Territorial officers were elected. The three Regents elected, each receiving a
unanimous vote, were Franklin Matthias, A. B. Young and H. A. Atkins.
The Legislature in its session of 1871, gave little time or attention to the University. There was adopted one joint resolution to appoint a visiting committee comprising three members of the council and five members of the House, and one law appropriating $75.00 to pay the expenses of the visit. No report of their findings is of record.
The record for the Board of Regents for March 13, 1872, has this entry: ’’Communication of E. K. Hill of Ypsilanti , Mich., stating terms and conditions upon which he would take charge of and conduct the University, received, considered and agreed to. Secretary ordered to give him notice of their acceptance.”
Eugene Kincaid Hill became the new President. He had been recommended by his brother Captain Ceorge D. Hill, a Civil War veteran well remembered among Puget Sound
pioneers. The younger brother was a senior in the Michigan State Normal School, as
was his fiancé. They were married on July 2, 1872, one day after receiving their diplomas, and started for the
disappointed over the wilderness background. Mr. Hill was a third cousin of william Cullen Bryant. The newly married couple had built great ideas of the career so quickly opening before them. In spite of their disappointments, they went bravely to work on their tasks. They maintained the University’s three departments - preparatory, academic and collegiate.
In their first year, President Hill conducted the academic classes and taught mathematics to those of collegiate grade. Mrs. Hill conducted the preparatory department and taught the foreign languages in the higher branches. At the end of that first year, the preparatory department was closed for all below the sixth grade as Seattle had begun work in the public school.
The second year, beginning in September, 1873, brought an increased attendance.
President Hill’s enthusiasm led him beyond the institution’s means. He engaged three
additional teachers - Miss May W. Thayer, Mr. Theobolds and Miss Johns. By February,
1874, he was surprised to find the available funds had become exhausted. His term as
President ended abruptly. The classes in the University were continued for the rest
of the year by Miss Thayer and Mr. Frederick H. Whitworth, son of Rev. George F.
Whitworth. Because of his name and his subsequent prominence as an engineer a tradition
arose that Mr. Whitworth was head of the institution for that brief interim. That
tradition is silenced by this entry in the Board of Regents’ Record for March 7, 1874:
”0n motion, B. Brown, D. Bagley and E. M. Smithers were appointed a committee to
engage Miss May Thayer to conduct the school for the ensuing term.”
If the available money had not so suddenly disappeared President Hill would have
left a much better record for his administration. He was the first one to visualize
the need of coordinating the work of the common schools with that of the University
and advocated the first Territorial Teachers’ Institute. He also founded the first
literary society called "The Lyceum.” He moved to California where he taught school for some sixteen years. Returning to Seattle, he taught school here until the Klondike gold rush. There he died on January 31, 1899, in a snow-covered cabin, his only companion being feeing, his son Olimie E. Hill. The son remained in that cabin with the
corpse of his father until rescuers reached him on April 27. This was one of the most tragic experiences in the annals of the Klondike. The heart-rending story was told in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer of September 24, 1899.
The Legislature of 1873 assembled on October 6 and three days later Governor Elisha ?. Ferry delivered before a joint session his first gubernatorial message.
It was a hopeful and suggestive document. His reference to the Territorial University was as follows: "The Territory has had for a number of years, a fine, commodious University building, but owing to the very limited means at the disposal of the Board of Regents, it can hardly be said that we have a University except in name. Experience has fully demonstrated that with the present endowment it is impossible to conduct the institution on a University basis. I would therefore urgently recommend that a sufficient appropriation be made to enable the Board of Regents to establish and maintain a
course of instruction, equal at least to that provided in first-class seminaries and
The Legislature met in Joint Convention on October 28, to elect Territorial officers
The five elected as University Regents were E. M. Sraithers, H. A. Atkins, J. T.
Jordan, a. a. Denny and Beriah Brown.
By a joint resolution passed on October 25, a committee was appointed to visit 89
the University. a brief report was submitted by the joint committee on November 12. It was very different from the time when the first visitors were received by a brass band. The report says: "Upon cur arrival we were unable to find any of the acting Regents of the University, but the Hon. J. J, McGilvra kindly offered to accompany us to the University buildings, and, in company with that gentleman, we proceeded to make an inspection of the premises." They complimented the work of
President Hill and made a few recommendations, such as repainting the buildings.
It has been shown that soon after that report, in February, 1874, President
Hill’s administration ended and Miss May W. Thayer undertook to carry on to the end of that school year, it required courage. One writer is quoted by C. B. Bagley as
follows: "During one of these periods it became very lonely and bitterly cold in the
great empty, echoing hall. Friends advised her to give up the school. But the brave
woman, with her tiny ’university’, moved to the upper room in the house of Mr.
Thomas T7. Prosch, where she continued to teach amid more congenial surroundings.”
Miss Thayer was a graduate of Mount Holyoke and taught school in Massachusetts and Hew York before 1873 when she came to the Territorial University of Washington as an assistant to President Hill.
l-iev. George F. Whitworth was about to become President of the University for the second time but he was to encounter an undignified struggle. Cn July 4, 1874, a local newspaper announced that Professor a. B. Nicholson of Kingston, New York, was to be the new President of the University. Two days later there was recorded at a meeting of the Board of Regents this terse entry by Secretary H. A. Atkins;
’’President stated that he had engaged a. B. Nicholson to take charge of and conduct the University for one year. The Board refused to ratify the engagement and directed the President to immediately notify Mr. Nicholson of this refusal by telegraph and that the Treasurer furnish the money necessary to pay the expense of sending such a message.” At the next meeting of the Board of Regents, on August 17, this record was made: "Proposition of Geo. F. Whitworth to conduct the University School agreed to only reducing the amount stipulated to six hundred dollars per annum.” later at the same meeting: ”B. Brown tendered his resignation as President of the Board. Resignation accepted and on motion E. M. Smithers was elected President."
Beriah Brown was evidently displeased that his choice of a President had been rejected. It is not clear that he sent the telegram as ordered. At any rate, Mr. Nicholson arrived on the scene in August only to find that Mr. Whitworth had the position. He failed in a suit for damages. The people and the newspapers were aroused over tbe jangle, when the University opened under President Whitworth on September 14, 1874, there were only twenty-four students, a discouraging low ebb.
President Whitworth’s second administration, though destined to be a brief one, was more successful than his first experience. The attendance increased to a maximum
of one hundred and twenty-five, and he had the pleasure of issuing the first catalogue and the first diploma to a graduate. He began a so-called scientific course to lead
to tlie Bachelor of Science degree to serve those who did not wish to struggle
through the classical requirements for the Bachelor of Arts degree. It has been
shown that the University’s Incorporation Act of January 29, 1862, provided for a
Military Department. Instruction in this line was evidently delayed. Clarence B.
Bagley, in writing about President Whitworth’s second administration says:
"A military department was organized by him, also instruction, theoretical and
practical, in civil engineering was given during school hours and when he could spare
the time outside upon the campus, and during the long summer days out in the forests
and in the mountains. He taught school as he preached, because he loved humanity,
and in spite of small pay and all sorts of discouragements he left his impress upon
the affairs of the university that continued for many years after he had finally 91
'lhat first catalogue has become a very rare document, The copy in the University Library is the only one known to be in existence. It was printed in Olympia by "C. B. Bagley, Printer" and bears on the title-page: "For the year ending July 30, 1875." The Board of Regents as published embraces the well known names of E. M. Smithers, H. A. Atkins, J. T. Jordan, Rev. D. Bagley and Dr. J. c. Kellogg. The last name was a mystery until this rare catalogue was found. In the official Record of the Board there is but one very meager entry for the year 1875 by H. A. Atkins, Secretary. Initials are omitted and survivors of the several Kellogg families could not identify the "Kellogg" there recorded as Chairman of the Board.
The .board of Instructors is given as follows: Rev. Geo. F. Whitworth, a. M.,
President, History, Rhetoric, and Philosophy; F, H. Whitworth, A.B., Mathematics;
T. Hanford, A.B., Ancient Languages; Miss May W. Thayer, German, Botany, Physiology; Mrs. S. Russell, Instrumental Music; Miss Sarah Chatham, Vocal Music.
The list of students contains ninety-six names of interesting pioneer men and women while they were boys and girls. Many of the first names are "Eddie,” "Lizzie,”. "Willie,", and "Hettie ." two who are best known sixty years afterward are Laurence Booth and Laurence Coleman.
The courses of study are arranged in two parts: School - Primary Department, Intermediate Department and Preparatory or .academic Course; and College - Classical Course of four years and Scientific course of three years. The list of text hooks used is followed by a calendar of the sessions, rates of tuition and expense of boarding.
The organization of the Military Department, in accordance with the charter of the University, is announced with the following officers: Captain, E. S. Osborne; First Lieutenant, George F. Uliitworth, Jr.; Second Lieutenant, H. H. Lewis; First Sergeant, to. B. Webster.
One fine evidence of a purpose to serve the people is found in the announcement saying: "The regents, feeling the importance of providing some means by which the resources of this Territory can be illustrated, have entrusted to the President of the Institution the gathering together of such objects as will be best adapted to furnish practical and beneficial knowledge, touching the natural productions either upon or beneath the surface of the soil; or as may tend to exhibit the Indian history of this country
This survey of the conditions confronting the institution is found on the last page of the catalogue: "Various reasons hitherto have operated to prevent the Institution from becoming what it is designed to be, most of which are incident to a new and sparsely settled country. The Territory is still in its infancy; society is only in its formative state; nothing as yet is really permanent; the unsettled state of things, and tfee restlessness of the people have an unfavorable influence, adverse to a thorough and systematic course of study; our common school is in so imperfect a condition, that the district schools do not to any extent become feeders for a College, while these causes operate, the conversion of the University to a College proper must be slow and gradual. From the necessitj7' of the case, it must yet provide instruction in the lower branches of study, until such time as our district schools shall be thoroughly graded, and the Academy system engrafted thereon. To build up the University, schools must grow up here on the ground. The Institution will aim to supply as far as possible the present needs, by endeavoring to do its work thoroughly, and so to train up the youth
who attend it, that they shall become true men and women."
While the first catalogue was being prepared, the Board of Regents published two announcements in 1S74 as did President Whitworth in 1675. Mr. Bagley depended on his memory and his collection of letters. The Record of the Board of Regents shows only blank pages between the meetings of February 8, 1875 and January 29, 1878. The secretary failed to transcribe his penciled notes. It is known that the institution wa3 closed again for lack of funds in the autumn of 1876 and that Miss May W. Thayer again gathered together some of the students for instruction. The first diploma was granted on June 30, 1876, to Clara A. McCarty (Mrs. John H. Wilt) who had transferred to the new course and received the Bachelor of Science degree.
Some constructive work for the University was accomplished by the Legislature in its session of 1675. On October 26 a significant act was approved relating to University lands, lifter all the official investigations, accusations and approvals, here comes a law declaring that all deeds of such lands "executed in the name of Daniel Bagley, president of the board of university commissioners, instead of being executed in the name of the Territory of Washington, shall be deemed, (?) taken and held good and valid deeds in law." On November 12, two other acts were approved. One was very brief declaring three Regents to be a quorum and authorizing the President and Secretary to transact necessary business when the Board was not in session. The other law provided for certain necessary repairs on the University buildings, not to exceed $1500, to be paid by the Territorial Treasurer "out of any funds in the treasury not otherwise appropriated". This is the first case of appropriating money from the Territorial Treasury for the benefit of the University. The Legislature also adopted a joint
resolution on October 9 providing for a committee to visit "the Insane Asylum, Peniten-
tiary and University." An effort to employ a mechanic to visit the University 93
In the fall of 1875, Henry L. Yesler, prominent citizen of Seattle, conceived the idea of helping the University through a lottery. He would raffle his sawmill and adjacent property including a brewery and from the proceeds he would donate. to the
University from $25,000 to $50,000. He got an enabling act through the Legislature.
Such a clamor was raised against the idea of connecting the University with a lottery
that he changed the beneficiary to a projected road through the Cascade Range. The
plan failed as the courts decided that the proposed lottery was illegal.
An epoch was reached in the early history of the University of Washington in the year 1877.
That was the year that a. J. Anderson arrived to become the new President. The Courses and departments as he found them were solidified and expanded. The foundations were completed and there were to be no more closings of the institution for lack of funds. He issued the second catalogue which reallj7- became the first one in the unbroken series of annual catalogues. The student body increased in number and effectiveness.
The Legislature made its first appropriation for the educational work of the Territorial University. Thus 1877 must be remembered as one of the most important years in this history.
Alexander Jay Anderson was born at Grey Abbe, Ireland, on November 6, 1852. His
parents, Joseph and Jane (McKay) Anderson, of Scotch ancestry, migrated to America
when their son was but fifteen months old. The father became a fisherman on the St.
Lawrence River. It was necessary for the boy to depend largely upon his own industry
to obtain an education. He was graduated from Knox College in 1856 and became a teacher
in secondary and academic schools in Illinois and Kentucky. In 1869 he moved to Oregon
to accept the principalship of Tualatin Academy of Pacific University, being promoted
in 1872 to the professorship of Pedagogy and Mathematics. After two years he moved to
Portland, serving successively as Principal of Central School and of Portland’s only
High School. 1‘rora that work he came to the Territorial University of Washington. The
year after graduating from Unox College, he had been married at Morris, Illinois, to
Miss Louise M. Phelps, she was a wonderful wife, mother, and colleague throughout her
husband’s active career.
The Anderson family arrived in Seattle during the summer of 1877. The University had been closed for more than a year. There were hopes that the Legislature in its
approaching winter session would do something to put the institution on a more film financial basis. In September, Professor Anderson opened a private school in the University building. His method was energetic and constructive. He had had experience in building up other crippled schools.
Hope in the Legislature proved not to be misplaced. On November 9, 1877, the Governor approved what is known as the University Free Scholarships Law. It appropriated $1500 for each of the two years 1678 and 1879. The money was to pay the tuition of forty-five students at the rate of thirty-three and a third dollars per year. One student was to be selected by each Representative, Councilman, and District Judge and three should be selected by the governor. Districts were to govern so that every part of the Territory would be included. Careful provision was made for the certification of the appointments and it was decreed that such moneys "are only appropriated for the payment of the salaries of professors and tutors." That the new policy was deemed permanent is manifest by the provision for appointing the free scholars including the phrase "and every two years thereafter." Another evidence of
public sustenance was the briefer law approved on the same day providing payment for
Regents in attending meetings of the Board. The free scholarship bill had been
introduced by Representative John McReavy of Pierce and Mason Counties and the other
bill by Representative Joseph Foster of King County, the old friend of University 97
legislation. Mr. KcReavy's bill was cast aside, a bill introduced by Councilman c. H. Hanford of King County was substituted for it and subsequently enacted. An adverse flurry in that friendly session occurred on October 17 when Representative Amassa Miller introduced House Bill 62, "An act to sell the Territorial University." The Council was informed that such a bill had been introduced but it did not pass in either house. That Legislature adjourned on November 9, 1877. Its good work for the University soon became known throughout the Territory.
The method of selecting Regents was changed. Up to and including 1875 they were selected in the Legislature by enactment of law or by election in joint session.
On N0veci)er 9, 1877, last day of the session, Governor Elisha P. Ferry sent to the Council a long list of nominations for Territorial officers including these five
Regents; C. H. Larrabee, it. H. Steele, G. Y. Calhoun, D. Bagley, and John Rea.
The appointments were confirmed by the Council. That method of selection has continued. evidently Itr. Rea did not qualify as within a year the name of .alien Weir appears as the fifth Regent.
The Regents were waiting to reopen permanently the Territorial University of Washington. Their first meeting was held on January 29, 1876. a.. J. Anderson was
promptly elected Secretary of the Board and from that time on there are no blank
pages in the Record. At the second meeting, February 16, 1868, there was spread upon the minutes a long and legally phrased contract with President Anderson. It mentions, "in modification of the contract heretofore made." It is thus evident that his private school was a port of his agreement awaiting permanence after the Legislature had acted.
That second Catalogue was a tiny one of twelve pages, each page being only three by four and five-eighths inches in size. It is called "Annual Announcement, June, 1878."
The Faculty as announced comprised five instructors, three of whom were members of the Aiderscn family as follows: "A. J. Andersen, A.K., President, Psychology and Mathematics; Mrs. L. P. Anderson, French and Elocution; C. M. Anderson, Book-Keeping and ’-ilitary Tactics; A. T. Burnell, A.B. , Greek, Latin and English; Mrs. Emma uuttenburg, German."
There are fifty-nine young women and sixty-seven men or a total of one hundred and twenty-six listed as students. No indication is given of those who were enjoying the free scholarships provided by the Legislature, but the residences given show a wide distribution ove:* the Territory. Two each were given as from California and Oregon.
The outline of three years work in the Classical Course gave much of Latin,
Greek, mathematics, zoology, and physiology. One of the "Remarks" is as follows:
"Its classical course is meant, in the present financial condition of the Institution, to be only a complete and thorough preparation for the best Eastern Colleges, but its
growth is to keep pace with the finances of the Institution.” The Scientific course likewise had three years, showing less Latin and Greek, with chemistry, botany, psychology, astronomy and United States Constitution, taking the place of the omitted classics. j.wo years of appropriate courses were mapped out for the Normal Course "designed to assist those intending to teach in the public schools."
Evidently not all of the forty-five free scholars were appointed for the first year. One of the brjg f remarks says the support of the University was: "First, §1000 by direct appropriation of the Legislature, being the payment of the tuition of thirty pupils appointed as directed by law; Second, §500 interest on endowment fund, and third from tuition of pay-pupils."
An unexplained incident is recorded in the minutes of the Regents at their meeting on August 14, 1878. President Anderson submitted his resignation. It was discussed but on motion of Col. 0. H. Larrabee, seconded by Rev. Daniel Bagley, by unanimous vote, the Board declined to accept the resignation. President Anderson then proceeded with preparation of his second Catalogue.
The Faculty for the academic year of 1878-1879 was expanded. The same five were retained. Another son of President and Mrs. Anderson was added. Oliver P. Andersen was to teach "Plain and Ornamental Penmanship." Other additions were "Miss R. E. Scott, A.B., Latin and Greek; J. T. Martin, B.S*, Physiology and Common English; C. B. Plummer, Elocution; Miss Minnie Sparling, Painting and Drawing; G. U. Ward, Vocal Music; Miss Jennie Hancock, Telegraphy."
The classical course was expanded to five years and the scientific course to four years. The normal course remained at two years. The commercial course was added with two years of work leading to a diploma.* The summary of students indicated a total attendance of one hundred and fifty-five.
Among the advantages enumerated is this statement: "Seattle is accessible by daily lines of steamers." That was, of course, before the days of railroad transportation to Seattle. That catalogue comprised twelve pages but the size of the page had been increased to five and one-half by eight inches.
The Regents' records of this time indicate that they were occupied mostly with land problems and the adjustment of interest accounts of those who had borrowed University funds. In August, 1879, they arranged the details of digging a well to serve the boarding house.
The Legislature on November 6, 1879, adopted a memorial to President Rutherford B.
Hayes asking him to detail an officer of the United States Army to serve the University
as "professor of military instruction and higher mathematics." That was an interesting
forward glance but it was seme years before such assistance was obtained from the
Territorial Government. On November 12, Governor Elisha P. Ferry sent to the Council
his nominations of five men to become the new Board of Regents. The Council confirmed
the appointments at once. The new Regents were Orange Jacobs, a. A. Denny, and H. G.
Struve of King County; J. P. Judson, of Thurston County; and James Power, of Whatcom 100
County. On November 14, an act was approved continuing the provisions for free
scholarships. The appropriation was $1000 far each of the tw) years to pay the tuition
of thirty free scholars and §500 to purchase "philosophical instruments and books of
reference." Since the first effort to secure forty-five such scholarships had failed,
thr number was here reduced to thirty. while the bill was being considered, or Dn
November 7, an effort was made to pay the traveling expenses of the free scholars.
That effort failed.
The new Board of Regents held their first meeting on January 20, 1880. It is evident that Arthur a. Demy had not accepted the appointment as Dr. G. A. Weed appeared in his place as a qualified new member of the Board. They elected as officers H. G. Struve, President; A. J. Anderson, Secretary; and Orange Jacobs, Treasurer. Their meetings during the year 1880 were devoted to consideration of land-fund accounts,
(which comprised what was sometimes called the endowment), to the paying of current bills and the expenditure of the $500 appropriation for books and apparatus. At the meeting of January 20, 1680, it was ordered to pay $3.50 "on t&e bill of D. B. Ward for shoveling snow from the boarding house." That was a time of deep snow. Several of the early catalogues mention the fact that Mr. and Mrs. D. B. Ward were in charge of the boarding house. On March 6, President Anderson recommended the purchase of a list of reference
bocks and lie "was authorized to correspond with publishers and ask bids for furnishing
said list of books to the University.”
Four students were graduated and received diplomas in 1880 but there is no record of approval by the Regents. Their records are blank for 1876 when the first diploma was granted. That duty of the Regents would develop in later years. On September 13, 1880, the Regents took a forward step when they approved two expenditures of $15.00 each for such apparatus and books "as the Faculty shall select.”
The Catalogues for 1680 and 1881 show distinct progress within the institution. Additions to the Faculty included Professor Frank P. Gilman, natural history, physics and astronomy; Newton McCoy, Latin, Greek and English; Mrs. J. M. Flowers, French and German; W. E. Davis, telegraphy; Mrs. M. M. Curtis and E. Steinle, instrumental music; and Miss M. L. Hansee, English, history and Latin. President Anderson increased his teaching load as developments required until he was listed for psychology, pedagogics, literature and mathematics. Mrs. Anderson was also a burden bearer. 8he was preceptress for the girls who boarded at the President’s home. During the four years she conducted classes as they developed in French, elocution, botany, logic, rhetoric, b©4eey, zoology and physiology. Her program was different each year. Four of the five Anderson sons rendered service on the Faculty. Charles M. Anderson was principal of the commercial department and Oliver P. Anderson taught penmanship. They left the Faculty in 1881 and two other of the sons began work. Louis F. Anderson began teaching Latin and Greek in his senior year, and a. J. Anderson, Jr., taught penmanship while still in his junior year. That family cooperation was of distinct advantage during those lean financial years.
o.he efforts of President Anderson and the Board of Regents in the purchase of apparatus and books resulted in this announcement in the Catalogue of 1881: "a judicious expenditure of the $500 appropriated by the Territorial Legislature of 1879 for apparatus and reference books has borne excellent fruit in the classes in chemistry, Natural Philosophy, .Botany, Mineralogy, Zoology and other branches.”
The cabinet and the library now needed each a separate room. Louis F. Anderson, besides being a senior in the classical course and a teacher of Latin and Greek, had taken on the duties of Librarian, the Catalogue announced: "Including the Seattle City Library, which has been given in charge to the University, students have access to 1800 bound volumes and 800 pamphlets, the Librarian, Mr. L. F. Anderson, will always be ready to gratefully acknowledge the receipt of any good book or pamphlet donated to the University Library." a similar bid was made for prepared specimens in natural science. Such beginnings seem feeble and rudimentary when compared with the modern Library,
Museum and numerous laboratories on the University of Washington Campus.
The catalogue of 18S1 makes another announcement significant as to what would develop in the future. It is undoubtedly the initial step toward a Law School. The announce-, ment is as follows: "The course of Law Lectures begun during the past year by Ks-Delegate Orange Jacobs on United States constitution, E&-Governor F. ?. Ferry on Domestic Relations, Judge J. R. Lewis on Contracts and Hon. W. H. White on IT. 8. Constitution, is to become a permanent feature, of the University, and other eminent members of the legal fraternity of the Territory will also take a part in it."
Three literary societies are recorded as doing satisfactory work within the institution: the Gnothautii, "or men, organized on February 20, 1878; the Euphronean, for women, organized on April 22, 1879; and the Erosophic, for men, organized on April 22, 1881.
The Board of Regents at the meeting of May 30, 1881, voted unanimously to grant diplomas to all who completed courses of study and to establish the degrees of Bachelor of Arts and Bachelor of Science. Those graduating were few but there have been some such graduates for each Commencement Day following 1880. At this same meeting a Board of Visitors was appointed consisting of "Hon. J. R. Lewis, Hon. Elwood Evans and Rev. Geo.
The Legislators in the session of 1881 were unwilling to grant financial aid by the free scholarship plan as in the two previous sessions. They thought the institution should depend upon its "endowment". The only University law enacted was a brief one approved on December 1, 1881, authorizing the Board of Regents to locate all remaining
portions of the land grant and the Territory was to pa3r the expenses of such locating
not to exceed one hundred and fifty dollars. The Council Journal of that session
was never printed hut the House Journal was published and bears evidence that both
houses had passed bills to renew the free scholarship appropriations. These were handed
back and forth with amendments and neither one reached final concurrent enactment.
It may be that the legislators thought they might pass the responsibility on to
Mr. Henry Villard who had helped to save the University of Oregon by a gift of $7,000
in 1876. Editor Hirk C. yard of the Seattle Daily Chronicle suspected this evasion and
uttered hitter criticism of the Legislature for its opposition to the University. This
was while the Legislature was still in session and a week before its adjournment he
published a letter from Hr. Villard offering his help if the Legislature failed.
That the Legislature knew of Mr. Vi 1 lard’s helpfulness to the Northwest is shewn by a
joint resolution on October 4, 1881, inviting him and ’’parties accompanying" to visit
the capitol as "a fit opportunity to present the claims of the respective sections for
the investment of capital." It is only a surmise that this may have caused the subsequent debates and final failure to grant the appropriation.
Governor William A. Newell reappointed three members of the Board of Regents - H. G. Struve, G. a. Weed and Orange Jacobs - but instead of J. P. Judson and James Power, he selected Arthur A. Denny of Seattle and B. L. Sharpstein of Walla Ualla. At their first meeting, on January 28, 1882, they became aware of Hr. Villard’s plan to save the University from closing its doors on account of the Legislature’s refusal to support it. President Anderson, still serving as Secretary, presented to the Board a letter he had received from I.!r. Villard, dated at 83 Broadway, New York, January 9, 1882. Fortunately, that letter was entered in the Regents’ Records where it is still available.
Henry Villard’s willingness to help and his capacity for constructive work were well known. His career as an American was a fascinating one. Bom in Spire, Bavaria, on April 11, 1S35, he was educated in the Universities of Munich and Wurzburg. On moving to America in 1853, he changed his name from uustavus Hilgara to Henry Villard.
The varied nature of his work became at once apparent. He studied law and soon moved to Chicago where he began newspaper work. He went to the newly discovered gold region of Colorado in 1859, where his newspaper correspondence developed into the book, The Pike’s Peak Gold Region, (1860). He gathered and published in the New York Herald statistics intended to influence the location of a Pacific railroad route.
During the Civil 77ar he was an army correspondent. On January 5, 1866, he married Fanny, daughter of 7/illian Lloyd Garrison, jjtoiii 1868 to 1870 he served as Secretary of the American Social Science association. Visiting Germany for his health, he was drawn into negotiations with G-er.'an bond-holders and this resulted in 1674 in his reorganization and development of transportation enterprises in the Pacific Northwest. Oregon’s natural resources and promise of growth impressed him most favorably. Then he heard that the newly organized University of Oregon was about to lose its first main building, Deady Hall, because of unpaid bills, he telegraphed that personal check for $7,000 and saved the day. Small wonder that the institution named its next large building villard Hall! He made subsequent donations totaling $61,010.
President Anderson was teaching in an Oregon college when Deady Hall was saved in 1876, When, in 1881, he found the Territorial University of Washington facing disaster, it was natural that he should hope for help from Hr. Villard. The legislature was being criticized in the newspapers for its refusal of support. Mr.
Villard’s first letter, mentioned above, as written to President Anderson, began:
"I presume I am indebted to you for the transmission of various printed documents relating to your institution which I have read with much interest." He was ready to assist but thought they should wait until the Legislature had adjourned as the appropriation needed might still be made. It has been shown that this caution was not respected. His letter was published. Under these conditions President Anderson’s negotiations must have been highly diplomatic and Mr. Villard’s desire to help must have been thoroughly sincere.
It was surely with a feeling of triumph that President Anderson submitted to the Board of Regents that letter in which Hr. Villard agreed to supply the funds refused by the Legislature. He asked for a statement of how much would be needed to sustain
the institution for the two years until the Legislature would meet again and ended his letter with this sentence: "In the meantime I have given directions to our
Manager at Portland to send you from my private account one thousand dollars that you may he able to meet your inanediate necessities."
The Hegents were profoundly impressed by the letter, they asked President Anderson to comply with the request for further information and appointed a committee to frame proper resolutions of gratitude. His resolutions were adopted at the meeting of February 4, 1882, and during that same month Mr. Vi Hard wrote that he would complete the $4000 needed for those two years by sending £1000 every six months. This brief letter was recorded by the Regents at their meeting meet-tug of March 11, 1882. Mo
further resolutions are recorded, but the Seattle Daily Chronicle of May 25, 1882, when
publishing an account of the University’s Commencement Day exercises, added this paragraph:
"Hon. h. G. Btruve, President of the Board of Regents, made a statement as to the
conditions of the institution and, in the course of his remarks, paid a glowing tribute
to the liberality of Mr. Villard in generously aiding the University".
Just before that Commencement Day, President Anderson surprised the friends of the University by tendering his resignation, at their meeting on June 5, 1882, the Regents adopted the following resolution:
"Resolved by the Board of Regents of the University of Washington Territory: that
we deeply regret the necessity that compels Prof. a. J. Anderson’s resignation of the
Presidency thereof - that we gratefully acknowledge that the University has enjoyed a
degree of prosperity and efficiency under his administration not enjoyed before; and in
parting with him we cheerfully recommend him as an accomplished and thorough teacher,
and a Gentleman of fine executive ability in the management of an institution of 108
It should be added that Professor Anderson soon thereafter entered upon a successful experience as President of Whitman College, Walla Walla, Washington. Another beautiful gesture of farewell was thus recorded by the Regents at the meeting of June
1882: "Resolved that the degree of Master of Science be conferred on Mrs. L. ?. Anderson in recognition of her eminent attainments in botany and idoology and her unselfish work in securing to the University a valuable cabinet of specimens in Natural Hi story. ”
The presidency was offered to Professor Thomas Condon of the State University of Oregon but it was declined and on June 26, 1882, Leonard J. Powell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction of Oregon, was requested to submit his name as a candidate for the position. This resulted in a formal proffer of the position on July 11, and six days later Professor Powell was present at the Regents* meeting when the contract was completed. It was then voted that the school year should begin on September 20, 1882.
On October 2, President Powell was elected to serve as Secretary of the Board of Regents and also as Librarian of the University.
The last catalogue issued in the administration of President Anderson was for the academic year of 1881-1882 but was issued so late that it contained the President’s resignation and the Regents’ resolution adopted on June 5, 1882. It shows the substantial educational foundations attained and a student body of 139. There are listed seventeen who had received degrees or diplomas as graduated from 1876 to, and including, 1882. The catalogue for 1382-1833 dropped to smaller pages but was filled with compact information about the first year in the administration of President Powell. The summary of students showed a total of 237, but 53 of these were shown as "primaries in training school." President Powell was listed also as Professor of Mental and Moral Sciences. Among other members of the new faculty was Professor Orson Bennett Johnson, obtained from the Oregon Cabinet of Natural History. He was listed as Professor of hoology, Oeology, Botany and Mineralogy. When President Eliot of Harvard was introduced to him and asked what chair he occupied, Professor Johnson told him, whereupon President Eliot made his famous reply: "Oh, you do not occupy a chair, you occupy a settee." Professor Johnson impressed himself so indelibly upon his students through long years of service that a beautiful building on the new campus has been named in his honor.
Many pioneer students will recall the truth of the reference to him in that little
Catalogue of 1382-1883: "He not infrequently takes his entire classes upon excursions
into the woods or along the shores of the sound to study nature where nature is, and
to instruct them in the art of making collections and preparing specimens."
Mr. and Mrs. Dillis B. Ward relinquished the management of the University Boarding
Hall aud their places were taken by Professor and Mrs. J. M. Ripley.
The University Regents, knowing that "last spike" ceremonies were contemplated by
Henry Villard as President of the Northern Pacific Railroad Company, took occasion as
early as .April 13 to appoint President H. G. Struve of the Board and President Powell
a special committee to invite Mr. Vi Hard and his guests to visit the University when
they reached Seattle. Those "last spike" ceremonies were held at Missoula, Montana,
on September 8, 1883, and four days later the participants reached Seattle. In the
meantime the city’s extensive preparations included a pavilion on the campus for the
occasion’s public exercises. It was a great day for the University. Speeches were made
there by Mr. Vi Hard, Carl schurz, Carter Harrison of Chicago and others of the visitors
but all insisted that the greatest speech of all was the address of welcome made by a
student, Nellie G. Powell, daughter of President Powell. It was another and most appropriate occasion to thank Mr. Villard for helping the University. Half a century afterwards, on March 9, 1934, Mr. Villard’s son, Oswald Garrison Villard visited the University of Washington. He had been with his father’s family at those ceremonies in 1383 and the first question he asked was: "What can you tell me of Nelli ^Powell?"
The answer was that she had passed away after having reared a fine family as the wife of Daniel M. Drumheller of Spokane. That visit by Oswald Garrison Villard in 1934 aroused an interest in his father’s saving the pioneer Universities of Oregon and Washington in 1883 and caused a search for the old records. These were then published in Old Oregon (Eugene) for February, 1954, and the Washington Historical quarterly for April 1934.
President Powell’s administration experienced no event comparable to that "last- s^ike ? ceremony of the Northern Pacific Railroad. It was a sort of national tie-up.
In less than a month, the Ninth Biennial Session of the Territorial Legislature
convened on October 1, 1685. Governor William Augustus Newell in his message, delivered
before the joint session on October 3, made a strong appeal for public aid of the
University, saying: "Up to the last session of tlie Legislature it was the invariable
practice to give substantial aid." He claimed that the lands granted by Congress and the
ten acres donated in the center of Seattle would in time support the institution, but
added: "I recommend that the appropriation sought be allowed."
That advice was promptly followed. As early as October 31 there was approved an
act appropriating §3000 each for the years 1884 and 1885 and !“300 each for the purchase
of books and apparatus. This seems generous as Ilr. Villard had been told that §4000
was sufficient for the previous two-year period, rhe idea of free scholarships persisted.
On November 23, an act was approved providing for the appointment of thirty-six free
scholarships, one by each member of the Legislative Assembly. The keeping of careful
records of each appointee was specified in the law. It should also be recorded that the extensive law approved on November 28, to "Amend the Common School Law of the Territory of Washington" included a provision that the Superintendent of Public In-
struction should report biennially "on the condition of the territorial university."
This is probably the first legal recognition of the University as a part of the common school system. Governor Newell made no change in the membership of the Board of Regents.
The meetings of the Board were frequently occupied with consideration of business
connected with the Congressional land grant and in 1884 a futile effort was made by
D. B. Ward, E. Bryan and Thomas T. Jordan to lease parts of the ten-acre campus on
which to erect dwellings. The Regents also approved regularly those who were entitled to diplomas and degrees after having completed their courses of study.
President Powell submitted a detailed report to the Board of Regents on November 1, 1884, showing how the University was progressing under the new aid granted by the Legislature. Students were recorded from all parts of the Territory as a result of the free scholarships law. The most significant change in the faculty was the
resignation of Mattie L. Hansee, Ancient Languages, and the engagement of Professor George 0. Curme for Ancient and Modern Languages. After two years in the University of Washington, Professor Curme had unusual success as Professor of German for ten years at Cornell and since 1896 at Northwestern University. The Catalogue for 1884-1885 shows President Powell as giving instruction in mathematics and astronomy while Rev.
D. J. Pierce was added to give his former work as Professor of the Intellectual and Moral Sciences.
On Commencement Day, 1885, the largest class in the history of the institution up to that time received diplomas and degrees. President Powell submitted to the Board of Regents for approval the names of six for the Bachelor of Science degree and four for the Normal Diploma. The University was proud of its class of ten. At the same time the University conferred its first Master of Arts degree, Louis F. Anderson and its first honorary degree, Doctor of Laws, Judge Orange Jacobs.
On September 29, 1885, the Board of Regents took initial steps toward organizing Schools of Law and Medicine. Doctors G. A. Weed, Thomas T. Minor and Rufus Willard were appointed a committee "to consult with other regular physicians of this city and report to this board a plan of organization for the department of medicine." Similar action was taken for the Law School with H. G. Struve, Orange Jacobs and Roger S.
Greene as the committee. Each committee prepared a full report of proposed courses of study, members of faculties and other details. The reports were adopted by the Board of Regents on October 13, 1885, and to that extent the two new schools were parts of the University. The faculty of the Law School was to include Roger S. Greene, Elisha P. Ferry, Orange Jacobs, Elwood Evans, Benjamin F. Dennison, Thomas Burke, J. C. Haines, John B. Allen and Junius Rochester. The faculty of the School of Medicine included the following physicians and surgeons: Thomas T. Minor, Rufus Willard, Edward L. Smith,
John Baker, Gideon A. Weed, C. H. Merrick, L. R. Dawson, John W. Waughop, John G. Sundberg and J. T. M. Smart, Neither of the new schools functioned regularly although Junius Rochester as stated Instructor gave some work in law for a number of years. The official minutes of the Regents’ adoption of the Law School plan show a penciled note,
"Repealed July 28, 1894
In advocating those two new schools, President Powell harked back to the Act of Incorporation, January 29, 1862, and stressed its word "shall" when providing the
V t \'.k
departments of education which then included law and medicine. In the elaborate attempt
in 1885 to comply thus with the law of 1862, President Povell and the Regents appealed
to the Legislature but the appropriation bill was voted down, "leaving the colleges of
law and medicine only on paper as they had always been."
One other provision of that old law was more successfully revived by establishing a military department. In his report to the Regents on March 20, 1885, President Powell spoke of this revival of the Cadets as follows: "Recently the young gentlemen of the University have organized a military company and have an hour’s drill at the close of the school every day." He praised the apparent good results.
The collegiate departments were strengthened, the Normal Course was expanded to three years and all the students were more carefully segregated into academic classes.
The heartening improvements were emphasized by increasing efforts to utilize the environments of the institution in the fields of botany, zoology and geology. On December 3,
1885, Regents E. G. Struve and G. A. Weed were appointed a committee to draw up a lease enabling the Young Naturalists to erect a building on the campus. (Many years later the Cobb Building was reared on the same site.) The Young Naturalists at first consisted of a group of boys interested in the collection and preservation of specimens of natural history. They were aided by Arthur A. Denny who allowed them the full use of a small library building on his home estate (now Arcade Square). When Professor 0. B. Johnson came to the University, he immediately joined with those boys and greatly stimulated their activities. When the lease was drawn, it stipulated that the collections of natural history specimens should be available for the study and use of University students. A three-story building was erected and was in effective use until the University moved to its new campus in 1895. Soon thereafter the Young Naturalists, whose members had developed into business and professional men, held a meeting and voted to present their library and their natural history collections to the University. The Notary Public who validated the signing of that old lease was W. H. Gorham, whose children were subsequently
students in the University.
While the legislature was not favorable to the proposed schools of law and
medicine, it was generous to the University. The act approved on January 16, 1886,
appropriated $10,000 for two years to pay the salaries of teachers and professors
in the '’literary department", $300 for books and $300 for "philosophical and
chemical apparatus." The same law provided for the appointment of free scholars by
members of the Legislature, and also the deduction of actual traveling expenses
from tuition by all students attending from localities outside of King County.
Watson G. Squire, who succeeded to the Governorship in 1884 reappointed all the Sharpstein of Walls who was replaced by N. T. Caton.
old Regents except B. L.^QaJmn.. Governor Squire experienced but one session of the
Territorial Legislature but he submitted one of the finest reports to the Secretary
of the Interior and worked so effectively toward securing Statehood that he was
elected one of the first two Senators of the State of Washington.
After Commencement Day of 1886, President Powell became ill. Regents appointed
Secretaries protein. They showed sympathy by continuing the ill man in his office
and by voting on October 1, 1886, to admit the children of President Powell to the
University "free of costs." Professor 0. B. Johnson was authorized, "owing to the
illness of President Pov;ell," to arrange for the Commencement exercises of 1887.
Sadness over that absence was emphasized by the fact that two of his children,
Kellie G. Powell and Edward T. Powell, received their degrees on that day. President
Powell died on August 17, 1887, and the next day the body was borne to Lakeview
Cemetery by a group of his former students, "accompanied by a large concourse of
students and citizens of the city."
Between that last Commencement Day and the death of President Powell, the Regents met on June 26, 1887, when they elected a new President of the University in the person of Thomas Milton Gatch, A.M., Ph.D. Twenty-five years before this, in 1862, Professor Gatch was elected to this presidency but declined it because the Regents would not agree to pay his salary in coin instead of Civil War greenbacks. No such question arose in 1887 and President Gatch entered upon his duties which he was to perform successfully for eight years. He had had a greater
-if,, r^TV-x^ • -v; •• . •/*
educational experience than any of his predecessors in the office: He was born in
Clermont County, Ohio, January 29, 1833; graduated from Ohio Wesleyan University,
1855; aimed at the ministry in Lane Theological Seminary but left for the California <
goldfields; changed to teaching profession in 1857 as Professor of Mathematics in
University of the Pacific at Santa Clara; Superintendent of Schools, 1858; Principal
of Puget Sound Wesleyan Institute, Olympia, 1859; Professor of .ancient Languages at
Willamette University, 1860; President, 1861; in California, 1861-1865; Principal
of Portland Academy, 1866; President of Willamette University, 1870; Professor of
History and English, University of Oregon, 1880; Principal of Wasco Academy, 1886;
in Europe, 1886.
Governor Eugene Semple appointed a new Board of Regents consisting of J. C.
Wethered, T. T. Minor, S. C. Heren, Charles F. Whittlesey, J. B. Reavis. Mr. A. A.
Denny declined reappointment. Evidently, Doctor Minor and Mr. Wethered did not qualify as the University Catalogue for 1888 gives the new Board of Regents as follows: John Leary, Seattle, President; Charles F. Whittlesey, Seattle, Secretary; James S. Winterrmite, Tacoma; J. B. Reavis, North Yakima; S. C. Herren, Winlock.
Even before the new Board of Regents was appointed, President Gatch published the small Catalogue for 1887. The summary of students showed a total of 168, with an additional page of 22 who had been appointed by the Legislators as free scholarship pupils. The Alumni list had a total of 49 who had received diplomas and degrees up to and including the Class of 1887. The spirit of the new administration was revealed in a message from the President including the following:
"Young man! Young woman! What can you do this coming winter that will be of such incalculable benefit to you in the life struggle before you, as to devote your time and energies to the acquisition of that knowledge and mental discipline which will be to you a source of power and a well-spring of joy in all the years of your after life?”
The Territorial Legislature, in its last session before Statehood, was again in generous mood toward the University. The act approved on January 27, 1888, was almost an exact duplicate of the one in the previous session. The appropriations
were $10,000 for two yearsT salaries and $300 each for the purchase of hooks and apparatus. The provision for free scholarships was also the same as in the previous law. There was a flurry of opposition while the bill was being enacted which probably accounts for a joint resolution, adopted on February 2, 1888, instructing the Board of Regents to make before the next session of the Legislature a full exhibit
of the assets of the University, including lands, money, interest on credits and
the character of the deed to the ten^acre campus in Seattle.
While the Legislature was still in session and before the new Board of Regents had qualified, the northwestern corner of the campus was leased to Colonel J. C. Haines on behalf of the First Regiment of the National Guard of Washington* and as Trustee for Companies B. D. and E. The motion was adopted at a meeting of the Board of Regents on January 27, 1888, and on the next day the lease was executed in ample form. The term of the lease was ten years. The spirit of complete cooperation was manifest in the rental of one dollar per year, in the restrictions against noises, liquor and other nuisances, in permission for use of the drill hall by students in the day time and the agreement that the lease might be abrogated by the Legislature of the Territory "or of the future State." There were other evidences of confidence in the approach of Statehood.
The old Board of Regents held its last meeting on April 2, 1888, the session being devoted to the payment of current bills. The new Regents met on April 16.
They organized by the election of J0hn Leary as President and Charles F. Whittlesey as Secretary. J. B. Metcalfe, Attorney General of Washington Territory met with the Board on May 5. He was to render assistance as to the condition of land contracts and other legal needs. At the same meeting it was ordered that an investigation be made as to the need of dormitories (and) as to the propriety of adding agriculture and mechanic arts as departments of instruction. From a telegram sent by the Board of Regents to Governor Eugene Senple it is apparent that both hoped to secure for the University the benefits of the Hatch Bill passed by Congress, to advance education in the line of agriculture.
This new Board of Regents was unusually industrious. Feeling that Statehood
mt 1i w.M'i i^V-
was near at hand, they sought to have all University laws compiled, to secure all possible data about the granted and acquired lands, to provide a voucher system for all bills and to spread upon the minutes regular statements of account by the Secretary- Treasurer. One of their long meetings was held on January 31, 1389, adjourned over to the next morning, when a strong resolution was adopted expressing surprise that the Young Naturalists and the Jrirst Regiment of the National Guard of Washington were occupying buildings on the University campus and declaring those maintaining such buildings to be "mere naked trespassers on said University grounds." That flurry was futile.
Those buildings continued to be used under the terms of the leases granted by the fonnsr Board of Regents.
No minutes are recorded between May, 1889, and June, 1890. Between those dates, the Territory became a State. No reference whatever is made of that change by the Regents except the dating of one meeting was at "Seattle, W. T." and of the other "Seattle, Wash."
The University during this period of transition continued under the administration
of President Thomas M. Gatch. another writer has said: "No profound academic changes
took place during the Gatch regime... .His administration, therefore, belongs to that
of his predecessors Powell and Anderson and is a part of the middle period of the 122
institution." While this may be true in one sense, it should not be allowed to stand as a denial of a fine progress achieved. The faculty was improved, courses of instruction were strengthened and academic foundations were made more secure for the rapid expansions that were to occur on removal to the new campus. President Gatch and his faculty also make only slight allusion to the change to Statehood. The Catalogues for 1891 and 1892 carried on the title-page "State University of Washington," Before and after those two issues the word "State" does not appear.
President Gatch continued to serve also as Professor of Ancient Languages until 1891 when he transferred to Mental and Moral Science. The Ancient Languages classes were conducted by Charles G. Reynolds in 1891 and in 1892 Mark Bailey, Jr., began a long term of teaching in that field. Another prominent member of the faculty was Joseph
Marion Taylor, Professor of Mathematics, who supervised the construction of an
astronomical observatory. Others were Miss Ellen Jeannett© Chamberlin, who taught
German, English Literature and History and who served also as preceptress, continuing
later as Professor of English Literature and Language. Her sister, Miss Julia L.
Chamberlin, taught Piano and Harmony and was Director of the Conservatory of Music.
There were 112 students listed as taking work in that early Conservatory or Department
of Music. Before leaving the old campus five students, Blanche L. Robinson, May
Clohecy, Abbie A. Drew, Carrie Noble and Edith V. Simon (Cochran) , were regularly
published as "Musical Alumni". For some unknown reason they were not continued in subsequent lists of alumni. Similarly, Miss Claire Gatch presided over the Department of Art with a total of 30 students taking the work. The last Catalogue for the old campus shows a total in all departments of 468 students.
Student activities were developing. The Department of Military Science, presided over by John L. Hayden, Second Lieutenant, First Artillery, United States Army, had replaced the voluntary Cadet Corps, comprised a regular organization of two companies. The Athletic Association, forerunner of the Associated Students, University of Washington, (A.S.U.W.). was developing sports, especially football and baseball. In 1892 a general assembly was held to adopt college colors. There was a spirited debate as many students favored the adoption of the national colors of red, white and blue. The final adoption of purple and gold was caused by the suggestion of Miss Louise Frayzer, Instructor in English, Rhetoric and Elocution, who quoted to the assembly from Byron’s "Destruction of Sennacherib "the following lines:
"The Assyrian came down like the wolf on the fold,
And his cohorts were gleaming in purple and gold;
And the sheen of their spears was like stars on the sea,
When the blue wave rolls nightly on- deep Galilee."
Another event, durable among the students, was the selection of their college yell. An Athletic Association committee, led by Asa Lee Willard, who later achieved reputation in dramatics, met in Professor J. M. Taylor’s room and phrased the yell from words of the Chinook Indian Jargon:
"U. of w. Hi ah, Hiah,
U. of W. Siah, Si ah,
The University, its President, Faculty and Board of .Regents, paid almost no attention to the transition from Territorial to State government in 1889. Far different was the case with the people as a whole and especially those who were politically minded.
On Washington’s birthday, 1889, President Cleveland approved the act of Congress known as the Enabling net to provide for the admission as four new States of North and South Dakota, Montana and Washington. Each of the four was to assemble delegates on July 4th and proceed with the framing of a Constitution. In Washington Territory the seventy-five delegates assembled at Olympia on the day specified. They completed their task on August
The Constitution was ratified by the people at the same time as the new State officers were elected on October 1. The newspapers were filled with news of the Enabling Act, of the election of Constitutional Delegates, the day by day record of the Constitutional Convention, the nomination and election of the first State officers and the inauguration of the first State Governor. It was certainly a great political year.’
The University was not mentioned directly in the new Constitution. Article IX. is devoted to Education but its five sections provide only for the common schools. Indirectly the University is provided for in Article aIII where it is declared that educational, reformatory and penal institutions "shall be fostered and supported by the state, subject to such regulations as may be provided by law,” and that regents and similar officers "shall be appointed by the Governor, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.”
That last provision later annulled the attempts by the Legislature to name certain State officers to serve as ex officio members of the University Board of Regents.
There must have been some impatience over the delay In President Harrison’s Admission proclamation. The Legislature chosen at the election of October 1, when the Constitution was ratified by the people, met at Olympia at noon on November 6, under the last Territorial Governor, Miles C. Moore. Both House and Senate began organization.
On the afternoon of November 11, Governor Moore sent to the Senate and
; . ' 69
"The President signed the proclamation declaring Washington to be a State in
the Union at 5 o’clock and SO minutes this afternoon."
On the next day a resolution was adopted naming Monday November 18 as the day
for the inauguration of the Governor and other State officers. In his inaugural
address, Elisha P. Ferry, First Governor of the State, declared: "The eleventh day of
November, 1889, will ever be a memorable epoch in our history. It will be known and
designated as ’Admission day.’ Its anniversary will be celebrated, and it may very
properly be placed among our legal holidays. On that day the Territory of Washington,
after an existence of more than thirty-six years, ceased to be, and in its place the
State of Washington, the forty-second star in the national constellation, was called 125
The Legislature, sensing the completed change to Statehood and conscious of
needed foundations for legal procedures, plunged into work with commendable industry.
University affairs received attention in two laws and one concurrent resolution, the
last named being a provision of power for an investigating committee to send for
persons and papers to secure definite information about the title of the ten-acre
tract in Seattle* One of the laws was labelled: "School Lands; For the Relief of
Purchasers Of," and made provision for the bringing of action in court by any such purchaser of school or university lands \daose deeds needed validation. The other law
was devoted wholly to the institution and bore the title: "An Act in relation to the
establishment and government of the University of the State of Washington."
That law was largely the work of Representative S. C. Herren, from Winlock,
Lewis County. He was a Regent of the University}' and the only one of that Board who had been elected to the House or Senate at that time. He was one of the most active men in the House of Representatives, serving as Chairman of the important Judiciary Committee and as a member of the Committees on Education and State University and Normal School. Under such conditions, he would be accorded leadership in all matters pertaining to University legislation. On December 9, 1889, he introduced House Bill
No. 72 and followed it to enactment. That he was influenced by his birth and education in North Carolina is evidenced by certain provisions of the law, such as those for a Chancellor, who should also be President of the Board of Regents, and granting ex officio membership on the Board of Regents to the State Superintendent of Public Instruction. For a few years those provisions were effective in the University Catalogues. Regents J. W. Sprague, J. J. Browne and James R. Hayden were, in turn, listed as Chancellor and R. B. Bryan and C. W. Bean were published as ex officio Regents. The last was made ineffective by citing Article XIII of the Constitution.
Other provisions of the law were that Regents should receive four dollars a day when actually at work for the University; the President and professors should have control of the colleges but instructors were not to be considered members of the faculty; honorary degrees were authorized, excepting "no degree shall be conferred in the consideration of the payment of money or other valuable thing;" students coming from outside of King County would have their traveling expenses deducted from their tuition. Ten thousand dollars were appropriated "to carry into effect the provisions of this act." This ambitious law was speedily modified by enactments in subsequent sessions.
In compliance with that new law, the Board of Regents was raised to a membership of seven. Governor Elisha P. Ferry, on March 27, 1890, submitted to the Senate a message including: "Regents of the State University: John Leary and Thomas Burke, of King county; J. W. Sprague and John P. Judson, of Pierce county; J. J. Browne,
Spokane bounty; Thomas H. Brents, Walla Walla county, and John F. Gowey, Thurston county." Later, on the same afternoon the Senate confirmed all those appointments. That the new Board was rather slow in organizing is shown by the last record of the Board on June 7, 1890, when a quorum, Regents Leary, Herren and Whittlesey received the last financial report of Regent-Secretary Charles F. Whittlesey, showing a balance on hand of §4162.76.
Changes were rather swift. John Leary, the only member of the old Board that was reappointed, did not accept and J. R. Hayden was selected in his place. In less than a year the second session of the State Legislature was convened. Governor Ferry was ill. Charles E. Laughton, Lieutenant Governor and Acting Governor, submitted a message to the Senate on February 18, 1891, with this statement: "Regents of the State University at Seattle: P. B. Johnson, Y/alla Walla, in place of Thomas H. Brents, declined; Richard Osborn, Seattle, in place of Thomas Burke, declined;
A. A. Phillips, Olympia, in place of John F. Gowey, declined."
revised appeared regularly in the University Catalogue.
That Board of Regents was on the verge of the greatest change in the institution since its foundation. It was to be reorganized and moved to a new campus. The Regents did not relish the responsibility and labor associated with the University lands and buildings and the proposed relocation of the institution. Their request
for relief caused to be enacted the law approved on March 7, 1891.
created the Board of University Land and Building Commissioners, to comprise the Governor, one Regent to be elected by the Board of Regents and three citizens to be appointed by the Governor, "not more than two of whom shall be from the same political party." Their duties and powers were extensive.
Many participated in the work leading up to framing and enactment of that law.
A special joint committee from the Senate and House made an elaborate investigation at Seattle. The present writer finds his own name signed as chairman to the report on
that investigation, which report outlines the desired legislation.
was held on February 6, 1891, with representatives of the city government, the Seattle Chamber of Commerce, the Board of Regents, and Faculty of the University and a number of prominent citizens including those who could speak for the donors of the original campus. Committees were appointed to investigate proposed new sites. Code Commissioner W. Lair Hill served as chairman of a committee who ascertained the legality of using lands of the eonmon schools as a site for the University. This resulted in selecting the fractional section 16, township 25 north, range 4 east of the
“ V'1 :
Willamette meridian comprising about 350 acres. The City of" Seattle adopted an ordinance quit-claiming to any possible interest in tbe old campus of ten acres. Tbe original donors and their successors promised to do the same which resulted in the suggestion to sell that tract for $250,000 or $300,000.
All the items in that report were embodied in the law creating the Board of University Land and Building Commissioners. They began work at once . The law had been amended before enactment limiting the new site to 160 acres. Clearing the land was interrupted by the discovery that the State Auditor was prohibited by the newly approved Constitution from issuing warrants in the absence of a direct appropriation. That meant delay on the new site. Fortunately, it also meant delay on the proposed sale of the old carpus in the center of Seattle. The original donors, Mr. and Mrs. a. A. Denny, were still living and gladly signed the quit-claim deeds to permit the University’s use of the land for other purposes than the actual carpus. The original tract had included fractions given by Charles C. Terry and Edward Lander. The heirs of Mr. Terry joined in the quit-claiming as did Judge Lander who was still living in Washington City. Clearing that title wa3 undoubtedly the best work accomplished by the short-lived Board of University Land and Building Commissioners. 'The ten-acre tract has grown immensely in value. It is the best portion of the University’s endowment*
The continued retention of the ten-acre tract is really remarkable in the light of legislation and plans to sell it. In the Regents* Annual Report to the Governor for 1890 is found this recommendation: "That a law be enacted by the Legislature empowering the Board of University Regents, with the concurrence of the Governor and Secretary of State, to dispose of the present site of the University, if deemed advisable, provided that arrangements to that end can be effected with all parties now in interest. In the opinion of the Regents ampler grounds are essential to the prosperity and well-being of the University, and grounds more remote from the center of a rapidly growing and expanding, a. The experience of educational institutions
:— : : T r
ir‘ •• i.\
■unites upon the idea that such institutions flourish best removed to a distance from the excitements and temptations incident to city life and its environments.”
Probably that is the first published expression of the idea of a new campus and coupled with it is the plan to sell the ten-acre tract. It will be found that the plan grew in imminence as the shears and expenditures followed. The quit-claiming clearance of the title was so important that the personnel of the Board of University land and Building Commissioners, which achieved it, should be here recorded. The Governor was an ex-officio member, the Regents elected James R. Hayden from their Board and the Governor appointed John Arthur, of Seattle; John McReavy, of Union City, and Charles F. Leavenworth, of Olympia. They selected William E. Boone, of Seattle, as architect, Fred G. Plummer, of Tacoma, as engineer, and Martin D. Smith of Spokane as secretary. As already stated their work was suddenly interrupted by the discovery that a direct appropriation was essential.
The present writer was re-elected to the House of Representatives, Legislature
of 1893. He and his wife were graduates of the University of Washington, Class of
1885. There were, therefore, abundant reasons, personal and family, for enthusiasm
in the work of re-establishing the institution. He was appointed chairman of the
House Committee on State University and Normal School. Later, in April, 1894, he was
appointed Secretary of the Board of Regents. The amount of that work is rather
appalling in retrospect. Two authors, Clarence B. Bagley and Victor J. Farrar, have
written about it with fulsome praise, too much praise for one individual. Many others participated in the work. So far as possible, the achievements will be recorded here impersonally.
Regents, Faculty and students of the University were excited during the two years following the announcements of a new campus and new buildings in the planning. The City Government, the Chamber of Commerce and citizens generally were also deeply interested. The hope of securing for a city park the fractional section of school land lying between Lakes Union and Washington was abandoned as energies were turned toward securing it for the new University Campus. This enthusiasm was easily transmitted to the Third State Legislature which assembled at Olympia on Monday,
January 9, 1893.
A large portion of the members of both Senate and House accepted an invitation for a week-end excursion to the proposed new site. Actual stump speeches were made on the grounds, This certainly paved-the way for the favorable legislation that was to follow.
That enjoyable excursion was by no means the only contact between the Legislature ■,
and the University, as in the case of 1891, so in 1893 a special joint committee was
to carry on investigations. Acting Governor Charles E. Laughton had urged in his message
of January 8, 1891, that such a special committee should, with a committee from the
Board of Regents, conduct such an investigation "into all matters connected with and
pertaining to the university since it3 establishment." The result of that investigation has been discussed. That command seems to have held over as none like it was given to the Legislature of 1893. Elisha P. Ferry, the outgoing Governor, in his farewell message covered State needs in a thorough manner but only incidentally referred to University lands and Governor John H. McGraw followed with a brief inaugural }.34
address. A joint committee was organized and soon realized its duties as investigators. This committee consisted of Senators C. E. Claypool and Trusten P. Dyer, Representatives Edmond S. Me any, F. B. Turpin and J. H. Smithson. Their investigations would embrace at least four main items: status of the titles and remnants of the lands granted by Congress prior to 1860, possibility of the sale of the ten-acre campus for immediate funds, work accomplished and planned by the University Land and Building Commissioners, and plans of the Board of Regents for university maintenance during the period of change.
The Joint Committee met at the Seattle Chamber of Commerce on the morning of Saturday February 18, 1893, and were there joined by James R. Hayden, William D. Wood and David Kellogg, comprising the executive committee of the Board of Regents; John Arthur, President prptem, and Fred G. Plummer, Engineer, of the Board of University Land and Building Commissioners; President T. M. Gatch and Professor J. M. Taylor of the University Faculty. Later, they contacted W. E. Boone, architect for the University Building Commissioners and Rev. Daniel Bagley, President of the original Board
of University Commissioners, who had handled the lands of the first Congressional
grant. The investigations were intricate and extensive, resulting in an elaborate
report which was presented to the House of Representatives on March 6 and ordered
”spread on the journal.”
The whole party visited the old campus to inspect the land and buildings. That the State was advancing and values rising rapidly is shown by the doubling of figures since the price was suggested two years before. The report said’: "We estimate that this land will easily bring between §400,000 and §500,000, if properly sold, as soon as the present prevailing money stringency is relieved."
The leaseholds of the National Guard and the Young Naturalists did not need disturbance.
The records of the University Land and Building Commissioners were found to be "in most excellent foim” but the extensive work of W. E. Boone, their architect, had been stopped. His plans had contemplated fourteen buildings for the proposed new campus. Bids had been called for the main structure. They ranged from §450,000 to §750,000 and had all been rejected. The Board had decided to proceed by "day work." This was soon stopped "by the State juiditor refusing to issue any further warrants." There had been no appropriation. This was one of the first, though belated, applications of section 4 of Article VIII of the State Constitution prohibiting the expenditure of public money without a direct appropriation by law.
In the consultation with the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents plans were evolved to sustain the University during the time of reorganization. It was also manifested that the Regents would prefer to resume their full responsibilities. This would mean dispensing with the Board of University Land and Building Commissioners.
By far the most extensive investigation was that pertaining to the status of the old land grant. Rev. Daniel Bagley submitted to a cross examination. Questions and answers were fully recorded. It is the most complete discussion of that involved question in existence. Mr. Bagley traced the transactions from the original
: .., X-'V.•: •.., "•'Jfwyi ■ ■ •—T :
grant of two townships, or 46,080 acres. All had been sold but 2550.55 acres and 1200 acres still remained to be selected. The complications revealed seemed unbelievable. The Secretary of the Interior that 160 acres was the smallest
unit to be handled in granted lands. If a smaller tract, deemed valuable by its location, were chosen the University would be charged 160 acres for it. Mr. Bagley would then buy it on cash entry and sell it to his original customer. Such complications required several trips to Washington City. The records in the Land Office at Olympia were destroyed by fire. Mr. Bagley*s own records were then needed and were accepted in the courts for cases seeking to perfect titles. The success of this investigation is revealed by the last entry as follows: "Mr. Dyer suggested that Mr. Bagley turn over all books to Major Hayden, and that Major Hayden have a certified copy prepared to give Mr. Bagley, and let the Board of Regents have the original.
Mr. Bagley agreed to comply with the suggestion." The difficulties and complications of the old land grant were thus drawn toward solution.
Between the time of that thorough investigation and the submission of the report to the House of Representatives, or on February 27, 1893, House Bill No. 470 was introduced and its rapid progress toward enactment was begun. The drawing of that bill required much care and labor. The errors and undesirable features in the legislation of 1890 and 1891 must be corrected. The results of the investigations, by the Joint Committee must be embodied in the proposed law. Hon. Alfred H.
Anderson of Shelton, who, as a Representative from Mason County in 1891, took a prominent part in the legislation of that session and acquired a love of the University that endured through his life. He gave good advice in drawing the new bill. State Treasurer Addison A. Lindsley had been a Delegate to the State Constitutional Convention in 1889. He gladly aided in the efforts to avoid possible constitutional pitfalls. Justices of the State Supreme Court, in personal conferences, kindly discussed the manuscript sections that seemed in any way to be at all questionable. Veteran members of the Legislature, especially members of the Joint Committee on the State University and Normal School, Governor John H. McGraw,
■ — ■ - :——
Regents and other officers of the University were freely and fully consulted.
When the sections were all drawn and before the copy was prepared for the printer the sheets were pasted end to end, the whole bill measuring over six feet in length.
After its introduction, House Bill No. 470: was quickly considered by House and Senate. One significant amendment was adopted by striking out the appropriation section as it was decided to include that feature in the general appropriation bill. It was then ready for the commendation in the Joint Committee’s report of March 6 as follows: "As a result of our visit of inspection and investigation, we have come to the conclusion that a vigorous policy must be adopted to place the University of Washington up to the standard it should reach, and we believe that all the requirements of the present looking to the attainment of this desired end will be met by the amended and reprinted House Bill No. 470, and we heartily recommend the passage of said House Bill No. 470."
Every member of the Legislature was canvassed as to his willingness to vote for the bill. Representative E. B. Turpin of Thurston, a member of the Joint Committee, canvassed his fellow members of the minority party. Very few of either party would cast a negative vote. The congestion of work in those final days of the session caused the leaders of the University legislation to hold back for one important bill after another until the evening session of the last day when House
Bill No. 470 was hastened forward to enactment. Acknowledgment should be made of courteous helpfulness at that crisis. As soon as the final vote was recorded,
Thomas G. Nicklin, Chief Clerk of the House, grabbed the bill and personally carried
it upstairs to the Senate where Secretary Allen Weir gave it the final reading before
its passage. Enrollment and signatures were completed before adjournment.
That law reorganized the University of Washington. It is the most important law in the history of the institution since the foundation law in early Territorial days. Its provisions should be briefly sketched here:
Section 1-authorized and directed the Governor to purchase the new site. The purchase price could be paid at any time but, until it was paid, the Regents should
pay into the school fund annually interest on the purchase price at legal rates.
The fee of the land "shall vest in the State of Washington for the use of the University of Washington."
Section 2 directs the Board of Regents to proceed with the necessary construction work on the new campus, careful provisions being made for the selection of an architect by competition.
Section 3 requires bids for construction and materials and bonds for proper fulfilment. All bidders must be citizens of this State.
Section 4 specifies the duties, powers and restrictions of the architect and his subordinates.
Section 5 makes similar regulations for the superintendent of construction and also specifies the substantial structure needed for the main building.
Section 6 gives the aim and purpose of the University such as providing "for students of both sexes, on equal terms, a liberal instruction in the different branches of literature, science, art, law, medicine, mechanics, industrial training, military science, and such other departments of instruction as may be established therein from time to time by the Board of Regents." Tuition was to be free for residents of Washington. The Regents were to have power to establish tuition for the arts and special courses of study and also for non-resident students. Provision is also included for entrance examinations and for the accrediting of high schools and other educational institutions in the State whose work would make entrance examinations unnecessary.
Section 7 accepts the quitclaim deeds secured from the donors of the original campus and then proceeds with an elaborate plan for the sale of that valuable ten- acre tract in the center of Seattle. Power is given to six-eighths of the Board of Regents as it was then believed that the Superintendent of Public Instruction was a legal ex-officio member of the Board of Regents.
Section 8 places in the hands of the Board of Regents the ten-acre tract while being sold and then significantly adds these words to a proviso: "or may lease all
unsold portions under such restrictions as said Board of Regents may provide."
On that proviso the subsequent saving and use of the ten-acre tract hinged.
Section 9 is brief but very important as follows: "That 100,000 acres of the
lands granted bjr section 17 of the enabling act, approved February 22, 1889, for
state charitable, educational, penal and reformatory institutions are hereby assigned
for the support of the University of Washington." This was half the grant for that
purpose among the generous grants at Statehood. The enabling act had mentioned the
University only in the regranting of the original two townships which had been almost
entirely exhausted in Territorial days. The Board of Regents still have a voice in
the disposal of those 100,000 acres thus assigned, which is not true of the other 137
Section 10 conveys authority to the Board of Regents over the granted lands and requires them to make biennial reports to the Governor.
Section 11 requires the State Treasurer to keep a separate and permanent fund to be known as the University Fund.
Section 12 allows the State Auditor, Governor and State Treasurer, on recommendation of the Board of Regents, to invest the University Fund in national, state, county or municipal bonds.
Section 13 authorizes and directs the Board of Regents to demand and receive all books, records and properties from the Board of University Land and Building Commissioners, which Board was thereupon abolished.
Section 14 provides for the necessary bonds or papers for the safe keeping of arms and equipments loaned to the University by the United States War Department.
Section 15 repealed all acts or parts of acts in conflict with this act.
Section 16 declares an emergency and thereby puts this act into effect upon its approval by the Governor.
The Governor’s approval was attached to the law on March 14, 1893. Three days later, March 17, he approved the General Appropriation Bill in which there was this item:
"For paying the expense of selling the present site of the state university,
for preparing the grounds at the new site, and for the erection of the new buildings
of the state university, §150,000
"Provided, That the money hereby appropriated for this purpose shall be returned
into the state treasury by the board of university regents from the proceeds of the
first sales of the old site of the university, consisting of ten acres in the city 138
In that same bill there was another University item, §39,000 for the expenses of the Board of Regents and maintenance of the institution. This was vetoed as were many other items. Following the approval bill is a letter from Governor McGraw to Secretary of State J. H. Price explaining the many vetoes he ha3 found it necessary to apply. Ambitions in the newly achieved Statehood had been given too free a rein.
He concluded: "I am, therefore, constrained to withhold my approval of the items specified, although all of them may be worthy and proper subjects for legislative appropriation whenever the income of the state and the provisions of the constitution may warrant their approval."
In a letter to the author of the University Bill, Governor McGraw asked about that "six-eighths vote." He decided to withhold his veto and to call attention of those concerned to the provision of the Constitution against ex-officio Regents. In that way the error was corrected.
The membership of the Board of Regents, into whose hands were entrusted these large tasks of reorganization, was as follows: J. J. Browne, of Spokane; J. R. Hayden, of Seattle; William D. Wood, of Seattle; Frank Allyn, of Tacoma; David Kellogg, of Seattle; John F. Gowey, of Olympia, and A. P. Mitten of Seattle. Before the new buildings were ready for occupancy a few changes were made in the membership: B. F. Houston succeeded Frank Allyn, of Tacoma; R. E. M. Strickland succeeded J. J. Browne, of Spokane; and George H. Preston succeeded A. P. Mitten of Seattle.
One of the first things accomplished under the new law was Governor McGraw*s purchase of the fractional school section to be used as the new site. After advertising the auction to be held on the King County Courthouse steps, in Seattle, the
|—; * .
Governor met all bidders, the final price being $28,313.75. The Regents paid interest on that sum each year until, a few years later, the total price was paid into the school fund and the land became the property of the State of Washington for University purposes.
Tlie Board of Regents avoided the error of hiring an architect outright as had been done by the Board of University Land and Building Commissioners. The Regents inserted advertisements in the newspapers of Seattle, Spokane and Tacoma on October 30, 1893, calling upon architects to submit plans in a competition. The prize was to be $1000 and acceptance as the architect for the new main building, the cost of which was not to exceed $125,000. The contest was carefully safeguarded and was to close on February 17, 1894. It was then found that Charles W. Saunders, an architect in Seattle had won the prize. Advertisements for bids on the construction work gave May 9, 1894, as the date of opening the bids. There were seventeen of them, ranging frcan $112,000 to $136,418. That of Cameron & Ashenfelter of Spokane, being lowest, was accepted. Not long after the beginning of work, Mr. Cameron withdrew from the firm and his partner Harry C. Ashenfelter continued to the end. He was the victim of a tragedy just after the work was drawing to a close. While tarring the interior of the water tank (now Chimes Tower) the tar caught fire and he was burned to death.
The building was to be a very substantial one three stories high, of sandstone walls, terra-cotta trimming, slate roof, copper gutters and plate-glass windows. When the foundation work had progressed far enough to justify the placing of the official cornerstone in the northeast corner, July 4, 1894, was chosen as an appropriate date. As many of the state officers, Regents, members of the Faculty, Contractor Ashenfelter and other active workers were Masons, it was decided to request the customary cornerstone ceremonies of that Order under the leadership of the Grand Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons of Washington. It was an elaborate occasion. A special train brought many participants and citizens. Among the outstanding pioneers present were Rev. Daniel Bagley, affectionately called "Father of the University,” and Arthur A. Denny, donor of the major part of the old campus. Their brief remarks were considered most
auspicious. It was recalled that similar ceremonies attended the laying of the corner-stone of the old main building in 1861. That old corner-stone was opened and its historic contents, with many other documents, were carefully sealed in the new and larger corner-stone with patriotic and sentimental fervor.
The sandstone specified was from Pittsburg Querry, in the neighborhood of Enumclaw, Washington. Court trouble of the owners made necessary for Contractor Ashenfelter to make arrangements with the Receiver to quarry the stone and freight it to the new carpus for dressing. This left on hand a surplus of stone when the main building was finished. That stone was utilized in the construction of the first portion of the Astronomical Observatory. Professor J. M. Taylor had secured a fine telescope for which he had helped to build a small Observatory on the old campus. The accidental surplusage of sandstone thus became a matter of good fortune for the Department of Astronomy.
Similarly the new campus was given a large wooden gymnasium and drill hall before those first building operations ceased. Second Lieutenant John L. Hayden, First Artillery, United States Army, had been a student in the Territorial University of Washington, before going to the Military Academy at West Point. He had secured appointment as Professor of Military Science and Tactics and Assistant in Mathematics in the State University where his father was President of the board of Regents. When he learned that there was an unexpended balance in the 1895 appropriation, he had little difficulty in translating his enthusiasm into results by causing the construction of the gymnasium and drill hall. The floor was counted the largest in the State of Washington at that time.
For purposes of securing heat and water a power house was constructed on the shore of Lake Washington from which pipes were extended to the water-tank and the main building.
That completed the first work of construction on the new campus. When the contract was let for the main building, it was stipulated that the work on it would be completed by March 1, 1895. For many reasons that was found to be impossible. In fact workmen were finishing tasks on the building when it was opened for academic work
on Wednesday, September 4, 1895. In was called Administration Building. The rear wing was constructed for an auditorium. Over its entrance from the main floor was painted in large gold letters ’’Denny Hall.” It was a gracious tribute to Arthur A. Denny while he still lived. Those golden letters still remain, although the auditorium has been changed into offices and recitation rooms. The whole building has long since been known as Demy Hall, a sentimental center in the midst of many newer structures.
The State Constitution provides that all State appropriations are for two years only and balances unexpended at the end of the biennial period lapse into the State Treasury. The fourth biennial session of the Legislature assembled at Olympia on Monday, January 14, 1895. Several University problems would come before that session including the handling, for the first time, of an unexpended balance of a biennial
The members of the Legislature were fully aware of the University problems through the Regents’ Report and through the knowledge that the work of construction on the new carpus was under full headway. The bills to solve these problems were all passed near adjournment as they were approved by the Governor within the Constitutional limit of ten days after adjournment. The unexpended balance of 039,00.0 from the 1893 appropriation of 8150,000 was handled in a separate law approved March 21, 1895. The item for two years of maintenance, 090,000, was included in the general appropriation law, approved on March 21. An extra appropriation law, providing a power house, a heating, ventilating and water plant, furniture and other needs was approved on March 26. In the ’’Deficiency Appropriations” law, approved on March 26, were three University items: two for the expenditures by the Board of University Land and Building Commissioners amounting to 020,365.55 and interest, 06,226.83; and one for C. B. Bagley to pay for his
making copies of his father’s records of the old grant of landj-0500 and interest,
As before, these appropriations carried promises that the moneys would be repaid by the sale of University lands. One of the three additional laws of that session sought to provide a way for a speedy repayment of the appropriations. This wqs a law, approved March 13, to bond the University lands for the sum of 0225,000, proceeds from
the sale of the bonds to revert into the State Treasury. Another law prohibited the sale of intoxicating liquors on the University grounds or "within two miles thereof."
The third law, approved March 20, related to the Board of Regents. Sections of Hillfs Annotated Statutes and Codes of the State of Washington were altered so as to conform with the Constitution in having Regents appointed by the Governor, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. That legally abolished the provision for ex-officio Regents. There were to be seven Regents for terms of six years, four to constitute
a quorum. They were to receive no compensation.other than their traveling expenses.
Students and Faculty were keenly alive to the reorganization work that followed the legislation of 1893. It was clear that continuance of activities on the old campus would be of short duration. In preparing the Catalogue that appeared in the summer of 1893, the Faculty published therein from Hillfs Code the sections of Territorial laws still in force. They included the so-called "Herren Law" of 1890 in full. The law creating the University Land and Building Commission was omitted, the Faculty saying it "is not given here, as the following act virtually repeals the act of March 7, 1891." There then followed the full text of the law approved on March 14, 1893. This was complete recognition on the part of the institution that the time of its reorganization had arrived.
Two additions to the Faculty were announced in this Catalogue: Charles Hill,
Professor of Chemistry and Physics and Second Lieutenant John L. Hayden, Military Science and Tactics. A more significant recognition of the approaching reorganization was the division of the work into "Coordinate Colleges." Most of this work was listed under the College of Literature, Science and Arts. An extensive expansion was made under the heading "Normal College of the University of Washington." Normal degrees had been given for ten years but this is the most elaborate announcement of a Normal College. Professor J. M. Taylor is published as Principal. Three years of work is outlined, with an advanced course, or post-graduate year, being added. The Department of Military Science and Tactics is outlined and the Conservatory of Music is continued with Miss Julia L. Chamberlin as Director. The Faculty was carrying on as best they could. There was no
direct statement about a prospective removal to a new campus.
During the service of that Catalogue, and before the succeeding one was issued in the summer of 1894, rapid changes progressed. Membership in the Board of Regents and the Faculty remained practically the same. In the organization of the Board of Regents, David Kellogg was Chairman of the Committee on Buildings and Grounds. After the plans of the new building had been accepted, it became necessary to choose the location. An official group visited the new campus and Regent Kellogg stuck his umbrella into the ground where they decided the corner-stone should be. Fortunately, Architect Saunders took careful bearings of that fine location for it was only logged-off land and some fellow stole the umbrella.
As their Secretary, the present writer was able to render an appreciated service to the Regents while they were struggling with the reorganization, as a boy he had contacted David Starr Jordan in 1880 while he was visiting Puget Sound working on fishes
for the Census Report of that year. Then, while Secretary of the Young Naturalists, he arranged a series of lectures in Puget Sound cities for the eminent educator who had become President of Stanford University. Naturally, a friendship had developed. He wrote to President'Jordan to see if he could meet in conference with the Board of Regents. His reply stated that he was going to Yellowstone Park, via Portland, and if the Regents wanted to divert his journey that much he would gladly meet with them in Seattle. The glow of approval on the faces of the Regents when that letter was read to them is remembered to this day. President Jordan came. It is difficult to measure the extent of his helpfulness at that critical time. He discussed the aims and purposes of a university of the modern type. He answered unnumbered questions. He pointed out the departments of instruction that might well be stressed in the University of a new and ambitious State and praised the elective system of Stanford University where the students could choose the departments and courses that would best prepare them for the lives they were planning to lead.
The Regents were contemplating an early expansion of the instructional staff. To their questions along these lines, President Jordan named a number of desirable men and women with a discussion of their preparation and capacity. Notes were kept of these for
future use. One of then deserves consideration here. He thought that geology certainly needed early attention in the University of Washington. He knew a young geologist then in Rockland, Maine, who had been doing fine geological survey work.
His name was Henry Landes. He had had the good fortune of marrying Mrs. Jordan’s sister. If it were not for that family relationship, he would have been added to the Faculty of Stanford University. Within a year Professor Landes became a member of the Faculty of the University of Washington where he has remained as Professor, Dean and Acting President for the year 1914-1915.
One of the instant results of that conference with President Jordan was an order by the Board of Regents that their Secretary take the Catalogue of Stanford University and use it as a model while he prepared copy for the next issue of the Catalogue of the University of Washington.
two other unexpected services of the Secretary of the Board should be mentioned here even at the risk of accusations of egotism. Regent A. ?. Mitten, being a physician had been appointed a committee of one to report on the feasibility of a college of medicine. Just before the expiration of his terra as a Regent, hd rendered his report advising against the undertaking of such work at that time. Regent Frank Allyn thereupon excused himself for not being ready to report as the committee of one on a plan for a college of law. After adjournment the Secretary volunteered to Regent Allyn to prepare the report for him. Though a difficult tadi , it was ready for the next meeting of the Board. Judge Allyn accepted it. With his signature attached, it was adopted by the Board. The foundation was then complete for that Lav; School that was to become effective a few years later. A. B. Stewart, founder of the Stewart & Holmes Drug Company, was President of the Washington State Pharmaceutical Association. In his annual address of 1S94, he called attention to the educational need in pharmacy. He helped to gather catalogues of other schools and on July 10, 1894, the Secretary presented a report and outline of courses. This was promptly adopted by the Board of Regents. The Department, afterwards School, of Pharmacy, becaoB a part of the University of Washington.
The Catalogue of 1894, prepared on the Stanford model, was the last one to be
used on the old campus. The changes from the previous one were quite marked, practically no changes were recorded in the membership of Board of Regents or faculty but the curriculum was arranged as Departments of Instruction under the general head of Faculty of Literature, Science and Arts. What had been the Normal College here became the Department of Pedagogy. There were nine such Departments in the following order: Philosophy, Greek, Latin, Mathematics and Astronomy, Natural
Science, Physical Science, Modern Languages, English and History, and Pedagogy. Three Special Departments included Military Science and Tactics, Conservatory of Music, and Department of Art. This organization continued for a few years when the division into Colleges and Schools was resumed.
The other phase from that Stanford model - system of free electives - was not so completely adopted. What was chosen was a system of electives within limits. The announcement was: "A student may elect as his major the courses of any one of these departments, and after he has chosen his major subject no change will be permitted without consent of the Faculty.” That was a distinct departure from the former specified and outlined courses leading to a degree.
The degrees were increased in number, becoming, in reality, a part of the elective system. Those who elected a major in Philosophy would be in line for the degree of Bachelor of Philosophy; Greek or Latin, Bachelor of Arts; Mathematics or Science, Bachelor of Science; Modern Languages or English and History; Bachelor of Letters; Pedagogy, Bachelor of Pedagogy. This number of degrees did not survive beyond the departmental system.
There is abundant evidence that this last Catalogue of the old campus was preparing the way for work on the new one. As frontispiece, is published a picture of Architect Saunders’ design for the new main building, or Demy Hall. Outline plans of the three floors and basement were also published. Under the heading "General Information,” a brief history of the University closed with a description of the new campus and the statement that the institution had been re-located. It should be added that members of the Faculty began to seek residences near the new campus.
The Board of Regents had not only assumed full legal responsibilities as to lands and buildings, including the new structures, but it was also thoroughly alive as to the academic needs and progress of the institution. Frequent meetings were held for the consideration of the proposed addition and expansion of departments and improvement of the instructional staff. President Gatch was aware that those discussions included the desire for a new executive. On April 30, 1895, he tendered his resignation as President of the University. However, he was persuaded by the Regents to continue his service until a new President could be selected. At the same time he was chosen for the chair of Political and Social Science. His former chair of Mental and Moral Science was transferred to an available veteran, Edward John Hamilton, D.D., S.T.D., who had been a professor in those fields in Hanover College, Indiana;
College of New Jersey, Princeton; and Hamilton College, New York. Another veteran engaged was Adolph Frederic Bechdolt, Ph.D., who had had an extensive educational career in Pennsylvania, Minnesota and North Dakota. He was to start his .work in the University of Washington in the chair of History and Anglo-Saxon. William Franklin Edwards, who had been for ten years a Laboratory Assistant and Instructor in the University of Michigan, was engaged to be Professor of Physics. Charles Francis Reeves was the new Instructor in German. He had been a member of the faculty of the State College of Pennsylvania for eleven years. George Millard Davison was to be the new Instructor in Latin and Greek. He came directly from the Seattle High School after having graduated from Cornell and a year of teaching in the Ithaca High School. Charles W. Vender Veer was engaged as Instructor in Physical Culture and Hygiene.
These new members of the Faculty were engaged in time for inclusion in the Catalogue printed in the summer of 1895 for use after removal to the new campus. But between that printing and the beginning of the next academic year on Wednesday, September 4, 1895, other additions were made to the Faculty. The Regents had elected Mark Walrod Harrington, A.M., LL.D., as the new President of the University. He had just finished his work as Chief of the United States Weather Bureau and previously had been Professor of Meteorology at the University of Michigan. Henry Landes, A.M., was
; -h ' * •* \V-.
■ ■ ■ - : ■; ^ ":T-" •—
added to the Faculty as Professor of Geology and Mineralogy. Henry Havelock Hindshaw, B.S., was elected Curator of the Museum, and Trevor Kincaid as Laboratory Assistant, Department of Biology and Physiology.
.ambition was the key-note in that time of transition. Professor Edwards had been chosen as Professor of Physics and Chemistry. As the work of arranging the
laboratories and courses progressed it was found that such work should be divided.
The Catalogue published him as Professor of Physics. However, there was published an outline of studies in the Department of chemistry with this note attached: "A professor for this department was not elected when this outline of instruction for the Department of Chemistry was prepared, and it will necessarily be enlarged for the collegiate year of 1895-96.” Henry-Coffinberry Myers, Ph.D., E.C.S., was elected and became the first Professor of Chemistry. The proposed work of Professor Edwards was thus reduced but he was expected to begin the work also in Electrical Engineering, a new department announced for 1895-96.
The Regents shared the popular feeling that the development of mining would hasten recovery from the depression of 1893. In the Catalogue published in the summer of 1894 is found the announcement of a School of Mining with tentative courses of instruction, the opening paragraph being: "A school of mining has been added to the University by the Board of Regents, and a special instructor will be secured to take charge of this department. The following outline of courses of study in the school of mining is here presented.” That promise was delayed in its fulfilment. The next year’s catalogue continued the promise as well as a preliminary outline for the Department of Geology and Mineralogy. Professor Henry Landes, as stated above, joined the faculty and in the Catalogue published in 1896 are his enlarged courses for the Department of Geology. In that announcement is found this statement: ”It is the expectation that there will be established very soon in the University a school of mines. In that event, the majority of the courses offered in geology will be required work for those who enter this school.” This explains the delay in the final establishment of the School of Mines and shows also that Professor Landes was the first instructor for that School.
•The College of Pharmacy also shared in that period of ambitious expansion.
In the first Catalogue (1895) for the new campus, Charles Hill is listed as Professor of Biology and Physiology and Acting Dean of Department of Pharmacy. In the rather elaborate announcement of the new department he is listed among the corps of instructors as Acting Dean and Professor of Chemistry, Botany and Microscopy. Y/ith him were included Oscar I. Smith, Ph.C., Fharmacopoeial Preparations and Pharmacognosy;
W. H. T. Barnes, Lecturer in Pharmacy; Emil Bories, M.D., Practical Pharmacognosy and Toxicology. An advisory board comprised five officers and members of the Washington State Board of Pharmacy. That Board and the Washington State Pharmaceutical Association adopted resolutions in September, 1894, voicing complete cooperation with the projected work of instruction. That elaborate organization did not endure. The next Catalogue (1896) listed Dr. H. C. Myers as Professor of Chemistry and Dean of the Department of Pharmacy, He conducted all the instructional work of both departments. The statement preceding the courses in Pharmacy declared: "Hereafter the pharmaceutic degree will be given only as post graduate to the baccalaureate degree of E.3."
There followed an interim of decline before the College of Pharmacy would emerge again on a durable foundation.
There were numerous other evidences of ambition during the period here considered. Lieutenant John L. Hayden, Professor of Military Science and Tactics, was given additional work as Assistant Professor of Mathematics under Professor J. M. Taylor. This allowed those two to begin the Department of Civil Engineering. The addition of Charles W. Vander Veer to the faculty initiated the Department of Physical Culture and Hygiene. While he became a wonderful coach of athletics, he was much more than that. He had been Professor of Physical Culture at Union College, 1876-92; Young Men's Christian Association of Schenectady, N.Y., 1879-89; Catholic Union, Albany, N.Y., 1890-92; Case School of Applied Science, 1893; Seattle Athletic Club, 1894-95. In the same line he was to impress himself indellibly upon the student activities of the University of Washington, as in the cases of Pharmacy and Mining, promises were made of work to begin in Pedagogy, Law and Medicine. Work was offered in Pedagogy during the following year but the name was changed to Paideutics and the courses were
conducted by R©v. Edward John Hamilton , Professor of Mental and Moral Science,
Paideutics and Oratory. There was to be further delay in the case of Law and a resolution was adopted by the Board of Regents on June 5, 1895, saying that work in a Department of Medicine would begin when "conditions relating thereto shall justify that step.” The Regents also declared that they would retain the buildings on the old campus for possible use by such departments as Law, Medicine and Music. The Conservatory of Music and the Art Department ended as such on the old campus. The Directors resigned and the promise was published that the work in each case would probably be revived later.
Two notable forward steps were taken in the initiation of the Museum and the
Arboretum. The Museum had its real beginnings in the natural history work of Mrs.
Anderson and Professor 0. B. Johnson and the collections of the Young Naturalists.
At the close of the World’s Columbian Exposition at Chicago, more than a carload of
specimens contributed by many exhibitors were brought to the University. Mr. Henry
H. Hindshaw was engaged as the new Curator of the Museum after years of work at that
Exposition. He brought quantities of geological specimens as an addition to the
Museum. Remarkable growth has attended this unit of the University, culminating in a
law approved on March 6, 1899, declaring it to be the State Museum of Washington.
The Arboretum, from its nature, is less comprehensible as a unit. It is spread all over the campus. Mr. Hindshaw had worked on landscaping in Chicago and was given the additional title of Curator of the Arboretum^ He began the work of saving good specimens of native trees and of planting trees from other climes. Many of these trees are labelled and are continually studied by those interested. There is a particular obligation resting upon the University for the maintenance of the Arboretum. When the great law of 1893 was being enacted, there were several Senators and Representatives who did not understand why the limits of the new campus, 160 acres in the law of 1891, were being enlarged to embrace the entire fractional section (355.19 acres). To all these it was explained that eventually there would be great need of buildings and
playfields and in addition the whole campus was to serve as an arboretum. These
" . . ‘ • • ' ••
. ' ’ • • • r . • i 1 •
statements satisfied all but one conscientious Representative who got excited as the vote drew near. He sought a conference with the writer, saying:
”1 want to do my duty to the State and its University. I have read this bill and have listened to all the arguments for enlarging the new campus, but, Meany, tell me, what in hell is an arboretum?”
He was reminded that this was a timber region and in the arboretum would be gathered living specimens of all kinds of trees that would thrive here, for the guidance of future generations in perpetuating timber resources. He expressed gratitude and promised to vote for the bill. That helps to explain the practically unanimous vote and certainly establishes the duty of maintaining the arboretum.
The students came from the old campus to the new one with the beginnings of activities that were to expand with rapidity. Before 1865 they had organized literary societies, with debating as a feature. They had a baseball diamond, a set of boxing gloves, parallel and horizontal bars and one football. This they kicked for distance and height. Many a time that football reached the roof of the old building, necessitating a clamber up the numerous stairs when the rescuer would give the ball a wonderful kick to the boys waiting down below. During the decade that followed they organized teams and began contests in the premier collegiate sport. Such contests were managed by the Athletic Association. The first Catalogue for the campus (1895-96) announced: ”The Athletic Association i3 an organization of students. Its aim is to encourage all healthful and legitimate sports. This association receives
every possible assistance from Mr. Vander Veer, who is at the head of the department
This announcement is followed by another:
of Physical Culture and Hygiene.” "The Women’s Athletic Association has for its object the encouragement of physical culture among the women students.”
These two associations were destined to merge into the larger organization known as the Associated Students of the University of Washington, almost always referred to as the A.S.U.W. In fact that same Catalogue foretold that subsequent merger in the following statement;” The entire body of students is organized into a student assembly, which decides on all questions relating to the students and
■V* > \
arising among them, and to which the administration refers some of the problems usually decided by the Faculty. The executive body of the Student Assembly is the Representative Council, consisting of the President of the University ex_ officio and ten students selected by vote from the several classes. The ten members for the session 1895-96 were: John Haan (vice chairman), George M. Allen, Harry F. Giles, from the Senior Class; James E. Gould, John Jackol, from the Junior Class; Albert D. Durham, Edward McMahon, from the Sophomore Class; Emma B. Roll (secretary), Sherman W. Foote, from the Freshman Class.” The tenth member was, of course, the ex officio one.
The Oratorical Association had gone far enough to secure from the King County Bar Association an annual prize of §100 to be competed for by seniors in the institutions of highest grade in Washington, Oregon arid Idaho. 5hwo clubs sought to promote good fellowship among the students of Latin and Greek. The Young Men's
Christian Association and the Young Women's Christian Association each maintained active branches within the University. The students also maintained a monthly newspaper, The Pacific Wave, which at this time was officered as follows: Editor, George H. Allen; business manager, Sam J. Miller; associate editors, M. M. Moss and Maud E. Harmon; society editor, H. F. Giles; athletic editor, Tom M. Alderson; exchange editor, Maud Barrows.
The students with these and other organizations among themselves were well equipped to enter upon the new era, but there was one prompt action that revealed still further their academic alertness. Sensing the need of instruction in mechanical and freehand drawing, and knowing that the Department of Art had been discontinued, they organized the T-Square Club. ‘They elected Professor Charles Hill as President and filled the other offices from their own ranks: Warner M.
Karshner, vice president; Marion Edwards, secretary; Janes S. Sheafe, treasurer; which officers, with Sylvester Bethel, Charles de Q. Whittle and Trevor C. D. Kincaid, comprised the board of directors. They consulted the Washington Chapter of the American Institute of Architects and followed the advice obtained by
securing as their instructor Mr. A. J. Russell of Tacoma, a graduate of the National School of Fine Arts, of Paris. Later this volunteer work was absorbed by the University in its regular curriculum.
Mark Walrod Harrington was President of the University during its first year on the new campus. One significant change was the naming of William Franklin Edwards, Professor of Physics, as Dean of the Faculty. This was the first appearance of that office which was to have an elaborate development in the years that followed. President Harrington retained the departmental organisation of the collegiate work and added thereto Department XV - Terrestrial Physics and Geography. He had sought a conference with the present writer and said: MThe President and the Registrar are not expected to give collegiate courses but I wish you to join me in volunteer work. You have been studying and writing in the fields of local history and forestry and my field is meteorology. Let us combine and offer these elective courses during the coming year."
For one of us that was the beginning of a career of teaching in the University of Washington that has continued to the present time.
There were no premonitions that before the academic year of L896-L897 should end the University would he thrown into a turmoil. It is true that the State was in the midst of a strenuous political campaign. The formerly dominant Republican Party was combatting the Fusion Party, comprising the Democratic, Populist and Free Silver Republican Parties. Even after it was known that the Fusion Party had succeeded in electing its ticket of State officers and a majority of the Legislature, friends of the University still hoped that it would not be disturbed. This hope was soon shattered.
The new Governor, John R. Rogers, had served as a Populist member of the Legislature before his nomination for the Governorship. Three recess, or between-sessions, appointments of Regents George Hyde Preston of King County, R-E.M. Strickland of Spokane County and Charles A. Riddle of King County by Governor JPfea E. McGraw came regularly - from the Secretary of State's office to the Senate on January 14, 1897. They were then pending, with other such recess appointments for ratification by the Senate. On February 4, Governor Rogers surprised the Senate with this brief message: "Gentlemen - I have
the honor to withdraw all the nominations submitted to the Senate during the pending 143
”Can he do that?" exclaimed Senator Warburton.
"I guess he has done it,” was a reply.
Governor Rogers smiled when he was told of that colloquy and remarked: "Tell them to read up on Andrew Jackson.”
From that surprise action, Governor Rogers was in a position to select three new Regents for the University, to which number another was soon added by the expiration of the term of Regent John F. Gowey, of Olympia. He did so by appointing four prominent Seattle men who had been associated with him in the Fusion Party or "Free Silver" campaign. The four new Regents were John Wiley, John P. Fay, George H. King and Rev. Clark Davis. Mr. Wiley became President of the new Board and Mr. Davis, Secretary, but Mr. Wiley died on July 13, 1897, and Mr. Fay was elected to succeed him as President. Other changes occurred through resignations and removals until the Board of Regents destined to serve through the administration of Governor Rogers comprised the following: George H. King, Seattle, President; Alden J. Blethen, Seattle; Charles M. Easterday, Tacoma; Tames Z. Moore, Spokane; Lincoln D. Godshall, Everett; Richard Winsor, Seattle; and John P. Hoyt, Seattle.
It should be here recorded that, in spite of the above evidences of partisan politics, Governor Rogers won distinct favor. He was the only State officer of his party re-elected in 1900. He had demonstrated a rugged honesty. He forgave the member of the faculty against whom his main antagonism had been aimed, while the Regents he selected were successful in protecting and building up the institution. He was reinaugurated in January, 1901, but died soon thereafter, being succeeded by Lieutenant Governor Henry McBride, Republican. The Board of Regents was not disturbed and in that way the wholesome influence of John R. Rogers was continued.
That early political disturbance in the Board of Regents was bound to be reflected in the Faculty and in the student body. President Harrington resigned on March 24, 1897, when Dean William Franklin Edwards was elected to the Presidency. Charles Francis
' . • -V
Reeves, Professor of German, became Dean of the College of Liberal Arts. President Edwards was esteemed as an expert in science, especially in the field of physics, but he was not cordial or successful in dealing with men. One of his first lines of attach was against Edward John Hamilton, Doctor of Divinity, who was Professor of Mental and Moral Science, and Oratory. His term was made to end as of July 31, 1898. That created something of a religious war. The newspapers reported that President Edwards had declared that he himself was an agnostic. Ministers, parents and students became excited. The student body reached a low ebb of 164 but recovered somewhat before the year ended and evidences of change appeared. President Edwards was dismissed on October 1, 1897. He had transferred Professor
Harrington-* ^ work to Thaddeus Lincoln Bolton, Professor of Philosophy and Education, whose tern was also brief ending on July 31, 1898, after which Frederick Welton Colegrove, another Doctor of Divinity, was installed as Professor of Philosophy. The religious war was ended.
The only Catalogue bearing the name of President Edwards as the executive of the institution is that for the year of 1896-97, carrying the announcements for 1897-98.
Its outstanding contribution lies in the abandonment of Departments as units of organization and the adoption of six College units as follows: College of Literature, Science
and the Liberal Arts, College of Engineering, College of Mines and Mining, College of Chemistry, College of Medicine and Surgery, College of Law and the Department of Military Science and Tactics. Of course the first named College embraced most of the former Departments and the main instructional work of the institution. The other Colleges as outlined were largely expressions of hope. The election of Almon H. Fuller, August 1, 1898, as Professor of Engineering may be taken as the beginning of the College of Engineering. The work of Professor Landes in Geology and Mineralogy continued to lay foundations for a College of Mines and Mining. Similarly, the work of Professor Myers would be considered the start for a College of Chemistry, although the formerly announced College of Pharmacy was entirely omitted. No instructors were announced for the College of Medicine and Surgery or for the College of Law. The organization with colleges as units has been continuously followed with numerous expansions and amendments.
That Catalogue of 1896-97 also announced the acquisition of Janes Allen Smith, Ph.D., who served with unusual distinction as Professor of Political Science and finally as the first Dean of the Graduate School. Those services continued until his death, on January 30, 1926. However, he resigned the Deanship of the Graduate School
on February 1, 1920. In that position he was succeeded by Dean Frederick Morgan
Padelford who has administered the office since that date. ...
when the Regents terminated the Presidency of William Franklin Edwards they selected Dean Charles Francis, Reeves as Acting President and entered upon a wide search for a new and permanent President. Their choice fell upon Frank Pierrepont Graves then j President of the University of Wyoming. His service as President of the University of Washington was to begin on August 1, 1898. At the time of his election much publicity was given to the fact that he had succeeded John Hustin Finley in the title of youngest college president in America, lip. Finley had begun his seven year term as President of Knox College in 1892 at the early age of twenty-nine years. Mr, Graves
had begun his two-year terra as President of the University in 1896 while only twenty-
seven years old. After years of successful work Doctor Graves was elevated to the
premier educational position in the United States - President of the University of the State of New York and Commissioner of Education for that State - in 1921. By a singular coincidence he succeeded in that position the same President John Hustin Finley.
Economic conditions had changed materially when President Graves began his service
at the University on August 1, 1898. The long drawn-out depression of 1893 had suddenly
ended. The "treasure-ship" Portland had arrived in Seattle on July 17, 1897, bringing
a ton of Klondike gold from Alaska, "a stampede unequalled in history was on."
Students and professors become excited as did the people in all walks of life. "Hard times in the State of Washington vanished in a day. The good news was electrical. Orders were telegraphed for miners* supplies of every kind. People talked of nothing else, but in addition to hopeful talking they began active work, preparing to secure in
V * j
Another cause for excitement and change was President McKinley’s call on April 25,
1S98, for one hundred and twenty-five thousand men to serve in the Spanish-American War. Only one regiment of infantry was allotted to the State of Washington. In answer to instant clamor, Governor Rogers sought for the allottment of a second regiment, hut all in vain. He then selected Lieutenant John H. Wholley to serve as Colonel of the First Washington Volunteer Infantry, This took him from his work at the University.
Light students were able to join him because of their enlistment in the national Guards. Those students were Walter V. Cotchett, Edwin Fredlund, George H. Gaches, Garfield McGlinn, Ohauncey B. Rathbun , William W. Reinhart, Tames Willis Sayre, and Frank W. Smith. The University followed with interest all reports of battles in the Philippines.
President Graves plunged into his work with surprising energy and effectiveness.
He attended county institutes and other educational meetings throughout the State to arouse the people’s interest in their University. The institution was just emerging from a season of political and financial disturbances. He had no hand in preparing the Catalogue under which he did his first year’s work. It was published in the spring of 1898 while he was finishing his work as President of the University of Wyoming. That Catalogue giving the announcements for the academic year, 1898-1899, tells a sad story with its footnotes of changes in the faculty and the blank lines after courses for which instructors had not been obtained. Outlines were continued for the expected College of Engineering, the College of Mining and Metallurgy, and the College of Chemistry. This new announcement appeared in the statements of Student Associations:
"The Stevens Debating Club is a student’s organization for the improvement of its
members in the art of public speaking. The club is named in honor of Isaac Ingalls
Stevens, the first Governor of Washington Territory." Rebates had been part of the work in the American history class but the officers of that group had joined the troops going to the Philippines whereupon Charles McCann organized the new club and started it on a long and successful career.
President Graves made a practical transformation of the University of Washington in the first year of his administration. Vacant places on the faculty were filled. College units that had been vaguely outlined and hoped for were given solid foundations
and set to work, And the intellectual power of the institution was given new fields of activity.
The School of law, after five years of discussion and planning, W3S definitely organized in May, 1899, when John Thomas Condon was elected by the Board of Regents to be its first Dean. Immediate preparations were made to begin the instructional work during the academic year of 1899-1900. Most of that burden would fall upon Dean Condon who had the additional title of Professor of Law. Two members of the general faculty were also listed in the faculty of the Law School, - J. Allen Smith as Professor of Comparative Constitutional Law and Arthur R. Priest as Professor of Oratory and Forensics, a group of the States most prominent lawyers were selected to assist as follows: Hon. Cornelius H. Hanford, Judge of the United States District Court, to
be Lecturer on Federal Jurisprudence; Hon. John B. Allen, Ex-United States Senator,
Lecturer on Constitutional Law; Hon. Thomas Burke, LL.D., Ex-Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Washington, and Ex-Judge of the United States District Court, Lecturer on Inter-State Commerce Law; Hon. George Turner, United States Senator, Lecturer on Law of Mines and Mining; and Regent John P. Hoyt, Ex-Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Washington, Lecturer on the Law of Bankruptcy.
Dean Condon was highly esteemed from the beginning. He was born at Port Gamble, Washington, on September 20, 1865. He was a student in the Territorial University of Washington, transferred to the University of Michigan, obtaining there the Bachelor of Laws degree in 1891, and then earned the Master of Laws degree at Northwestern University where he also served as Assistant in Evidence. After that excellent training, he practiced his profession in Seattle for seven years before his election as Dean of the Law School. The balance of his life was devoted most effectively to the building and managing of the University of Washington Law School. He died on January 5, 1926. The funeral, held in the University Auditorium, witnessed a remarkable assembly of faculty, students, alumni and citizens of all walks of life. A short time before his death,
* - • ’ ‘ * i-4» • •,> * I
•• • . • ‘ "i
or on September 15, 1925, Dean Condon, while in a reminiscent mood, wrote the record of the unusual location-buffeting experienced by the Law School as follows:
"The Law School was started in the old University building on what is known as the Metropolitan Tract. We continued there until the Public library of Seattle, then located where the court house now is, was destroyed by fire and in order to accommodate the Public Library, the Board of Regents leased the old University building for the Public Library of Seattle, and the Law School moved therefrom to a smaller building, known as North Hall. This building made an acceptable home to us for two years, after which we moved to the attic in Denny Hall in the fall of 1903. From there we moved for part of one year to the basement of what was then known as the Boys* Dormitory and is now Lewis Hall in the fall of 1907. Later in the same year we were moved to the first floor of the building that was built by the Alaska-Yukon-Pacific Fair as an administration building. We stayed there until the conclusion of the fair, after which we were moved to the basement of Meany Hall. We stayed there until the fall of 1910 when we were moved into the Oregon Building, a relic of the fair. We stayed there for several years until Commerce Hall was built and moved into that building in the fall of 1918, occupying the third floor where we are now rather comfortably located."
Although he hoped, he probably could not have dreamed that so soon after penning that paragraph, or in 1932, the Law School would move once more and this time into a magnificent building of its own to be called Condon Hall. He was succeeded in the Deanship by Wilfred John Schweppe (1926-1930) and Harold Shepherd (1930-) . In the interims Professor Clark Prescott Bissett and Professor Leslie Janes ayer served in the capacity of Acting Dean. Many men of prominence had served as Professors and Lecturers. The Law Librarian, Arthur Sydney Beardsley, has achieved commendable success. In one of the numerous novings mentioned the law library was transported in two wheelbarrow loads. But when that library was moved from Commerce Hall to the new Condon Hall in 1932 it required two weeks by a good sized crew to make the transfer. There are now 72,000 volumes in that library, now rated one of the best west of the Mississippi River. Most of that growth has been achieved under the management of Librarian Beardsley.
—- • •>. - ■ • , . 1 . 7” ; :
The College of engineering was also given a durable foundation at this time.
Almon H. Fuller began work in the fall of 1898 and the next year he was made Dean of the
College of engineering, Many well established and appropriate courses were segregated
and new ones were added to round out these four curricula: Civil Engineering, Mechanical
Engineering, electrical Engineering and Mining engineering, The course in Mining Engineering was soon organised into the College of Mines, while the College of Engineering has continued without interruption.
Instruction leading to the Normal Diploma had been a part of the work in Territorial days. Under departments of differing names it had been continued with occasional lapses.
A promotion was now evident in the organisation of the School of Pedagogy with Alexaidler ±s. Coffey as Dean. The courses segregated for the new School were from other departments. No new instructors were needed at that time.
It was found necessary to add the Preparatory School. The Report of the State superintendent of Public Instruction had indicated that only nine high schools in the State were giving complete preparation for college entrance. There was a clear need for a Preparatory School..
At the other extreme the Graduate School makes its first appearance at this time.
The Faculty comprised President Craves, Dean Reeves, Dean Fuller, Dean Coffey and Professors Bechdolt, Byers, and Colegrove. Requirements for the Master’s degree were simple enough for all departments - one year of graduate work plus an acceptable thesis. Ore at safeguards were thrown about the Doctor of Philosophy degree and that highest degree was available only for graduate students in the departments of pedagogy and philosophy.
That the intellectual power of the institution was given wider manifestation is shown by two achievements, one within and the other outside of the University. The former was a series of frequent student assemblies, before which addresses were given by prominent citizens and visitors to the campus as well as by members of the Faculty. In recording the series the Catalogue said: "By this means the work of the class-room is supplemented and the students obtain a broader outlook upon life through the light of practical experience." The latter form was a fine cooperation with Teachers’ Institutes.
■ • 102
At that time it was customary for the County Superintendents of schools to invite speakers from different parts of the country, frequently at great expense. Members of the University Faculty were often invited to augment the corps of speakers. President Graves persuaded the Faculty to tender their services free of cost to the Institutes, except for actual traveling and hotel expenses. Lectures to the number of thirty-three were announced in that first offer* That cooperation Continued for several years to the mutual advantage of the schools and the University. During the first year one hundred lectures and addresses were delivered by members of the Faculty. Saturday morning classes were scheduled for the benefit of school teachers who were near enough to the campus to attend. This is looked upon as a beginning of the University Extension work.
Student activities responded to this year of unusual transformation. They maintained their associations and added to them such new ones as the Geological Society, the Chemical Journal Club, the Physico-Mathematical Club, the Dramatic Club, the University Orchestra (seven members at first), and Sigma Nu, first of the Greek letter fraternities.
Further evidence that the depression had disappeared was revealed by the Legislative Session of 1899. The biennial maintenance appropriation of 0100 >000 was the largest up to that date. In addition the appropriations by that Session included ('50,000 for two dormitories, $5,000 for their furnishings, and $5,000 for a sewage plant. Two other appropriations: $8,494.10 for interest on the purchase price of the new site and $3,397.14 for the current interest on the same, remind us of the fact that the principal of that purchase price of those school lands had not been paid. A clause attached to the second of these appropriations provided for its repayment from the sale of University lands.
The present writer compiled from original souvenirs all the appropriations made by the Legislature for the University up to and including 1899 and published the record in the students* paper. In Territorial days, from 1871 to 1888 the total was $34,468 and
since Statehood, 1889 to 1899, the total was $655,043.17, a grand total of $689,468.77. Four of the appropriations, amounting to $293,397.64, carried clauses for repayment from the sale of University lands.
; :—~- .. ■,/ -
.'•I- / ./ '.??*. Yi
That repayment idea developed particularly around the old ten-acre campus. It was desirable real estate as the business portion of the city was crowding toward its margins. The reorganization laws of 1891 and 1893 contained provisions for the sale of that land. The northwestern corner, 64 by 240 feet, was actually sold. The Federal Government was seeking an adequate site for a structure that would house the Post Office, the United States District Court and other governmental agencies. The Regents knew that such a building would greatly enhance the value of their remaining tract. The corner was appraised at $25,000 and sold at that price to the United States. One of the old University buildings was used as a temporary home of the Law School, while the old main building was rented for a time to Seattle School District No. 1 and later to the Seattle Public Library when its own structure had been destroyed by fire. These experiences and the fluctuations of realty values convinced the Regents that it was wiser to hold the tract for leasings and for permanent revenue.
Although the first attempt to lease the remaining tract proved futile, it served to develop a policy, and it led to important court decisions. The Regents advertised in newspapers of Seattle, Tacoma and Spokane. One of the offers, a thirty-year lease at $32,500 rental and $452,500 of substantial improvements to become' the property of the State, was attempted when the State Land Commission intervened. They claimed that by the laws of 1893, 1895 and 1897 the right to handle such lands was vested solely in them. The Regents objected and promptly brought suit by one of their Board, Richard Winsor, against S. A. Calvert, State Commissioner of Public Lands. The case was won in the Superior Court of King County. On appeal, the State Supreme Court, on November 27, 1901, sustained the decision, giving to the Regents final control over that valuable tract.
The Regents and friends of the University, from this impulse, went before the next
session of the Legislature and on March 14, 1903, secured the approval of an important 147
and durable law. The Commissioner of Public Lands was required to make a list of
all lands granted and selected for the University of Washington and to file a
, ‘ —
certified copy of such list with the Board of Regents. The law closes as follows:
"such lands shall he known as the University Lands, and shall never be sold, encumbered, or otherwise disposed of, except by and with the consent of the Board of Regents of the University of Washington.” That law remains. No other public lands are so protected in the State of Washington.
That such protection was needed became painfully manifest by a transaction at that
time. The bill passed the House on March 5, 1903. On the day before the Commissioner
of Public Lands quietly sold a piece of University land to Henry Bucey, who in turn
disposed of it to the Hewitt Land Company of Tacoma. The tract thus sold comprised 315
acres of the old Thomas Chambers Donation Land Claim between Tacoma and Steilacoom. The
Territorial Board of Regents had loaned $5000 to Mr. Chambers. The rate of interest at
that tine was one percent a month. Finding that he could not pay the debt or the
interest, he deeded the 315 acres to the University. Fierce County tried to tax the
property but was estopped because of that public ownership. When the land was sold to
Mr. Bucey the price was at the minimum rate of $10 an acre, soon thereafter a right-
of-way strip was sola to the Northern Pacific Railroad for $20,000. A great gravel
development showed additional values. Efforts by the Regents to set aside that sale
failed. Ten days after that sale the law was approved to prevent any other such sale 148
of University lands.
After the Supreme Court had overruled the objections of the State Commissioner of Public Lands, the Board of Regents, on December 23, 1902, leased the old campus to the University Site Improvement Company. The terms included a valuation of $300,000 on which a cash rental was to be paid of two percent per year for the first five years, three percent for the second five years. This rate was to continue on valuations to be appraised each ten-year period. The buildings to be of brick or stone were to become immediately the property of the State. Another requirement was the expenditure of $100,000 in grading, paving and other such improvements. These terms with some slight modifications were destined to persist. However, they were beyond the capacity of the University Site Improvement Company, whose lease was declared forfeited on October 1,
1904. In one month, or on November 1, 1904, a new lease was granted to James A. Moore, of Seattle, for a period of fifty years. The terms were made somewhat easier for the beginning: $6,000 rent per year for the first three years, $9,000 per year for the next five years, after which decennial appraisals were to fix the rentals at three percent per year for ten years, four percent for the next decade and six percent per year for the last twenty-two years. In i.907, Mr. Moore was succeeded by the Metropolitan Building Company. The lease was to run for the forty-seven years remaining of the original fifty-year term. The rentals were based on appraisals made in advance as shown by the following table:
The permanent improvements, now the property of the State but under the management of the Metropolitan Building Company include the Hotel Olympic, Metropolitan Theater, Stuart Building, Henry Building, Uhite Building, Douglas Building, Cobb Building, Stimson Building, Skinner Building. Such abundant use of the old campus has established the wisdom of maintaining it as an effective element of endowment for the institution.
Pathos and sentiment are involved in another financial adjustment that should be recorded here. Samuel Goodlove Cosgrove was greatly interested in the University. He gave the Commencement Address upon the graduation of his son, Howard G. Cosgrove in 1902 and in 1907, while serving as a Regent, he was made President of the Board for a day in order that he might sign the diploma of his daughter Myr^Cosgrove (Kinnear) , a member of that year’s class. In the State's first general primary, 1908, he won the nomination for the Governorship but at severe cost to his health. He went to Paso Robles, California in a vain effort to gain strength. In a special car he returned to
Olympia for a memorable inauguration on January 27, 1909. He was Governor of the
State of Washington for that single day, returning immediately to the California
retreat where he died on March 28. In that same year of 1909, Lieutenant Governor Marion E. Kay, becoming Governor, appointed Howard G. Cosgrove a Regent of the University, the position surrendered by the father when he entered the race for the Governorship. .Among the tasks assumed by the younger Regent Cosgrove was that of perfecting the title to the new campus. This was finally achieved by the enactment of a law approved on March 6, 1913, appropriating from the general fund £51,000 "0r as much thereof as shall be necessary to pay the balance of the principal and interest due on the purchase of fractional section 16 in township 25 north, range 4 east Willamette Meridian.” The original transaction of 1893 was approved and now the Commissioner of
Public Lands was instructed to execute a deed to be delivered to the Board of Regents 150
of the University. Regent Cosgrove also sought, but this time in vain, to recover through court action that Chambers Donation Land Claim tract sold by the Commissioner of Public Lands in 1903 just two weeks before the approval of the law preventing such sales. The lapsed ten years apparently prevented that recovery.
During the first year on the new campus, Trevor Charles Digby Kincaid, while still a student, was listed as "Laboratory Assistant, Department of Biology and Physiology."
He graduated in the Class of 1899 and was immediately appointed Assistant Professor of Biology. Two years later he was promoted to the position of Professor of Zoology .
In that position he has continued to date, his research work and publications bringing him national distinction. Rev. Clark Davis had been appointed Registrar and Librarian but in 1899 he relinquished the Librarianship and was succeeded by Harry Canby Coffman of the Class of 1899, who had been serving as Assistant Librarian. An innovation that
should be noticed was the appointment of Martha Lois Hansee as the first Dean of Women. She was also Assistant Professor of Greek at that time.
Dorsey Alfred Lyon was promoted from an Instructor ship to be Assistant Professor of Mining Engineering and Instructor in Chemistry beginning in 1899. Information of labor-
For a brief but effective survey of that contention, see William Macdonald’s
Documentary Source Book of American History, 1906-1898 (Macmillan, 1908), pp. 397-405.
U. S. Statutes at Large, 10, Chapter 84, Section 4 (p. 305). The Congressional Globe, Vol. xxxlll., gives the record of the bill except the votes by which it was passed.
Columbian, October 2, 1852.
Council Journal, 1854-1855, p. 21.
House Journal, 1854-1855, p, 28.
Ibid., p. 32.
Council Journal, 1854-1855, pp. 30-33.
Ibid., p. 35.
Ibid., p. 41.
House Journal, 1854-1855, p. 48.
pp, 62-63. p. 89. p. 98.
pp. 102-104. pp. 114-116.
Council Journal, 1854-1855, pp. 126-129.
Both laws are found in Laws of Washington, 1854-55,
Laws of Washington, 1856-57, pp. 73-74.
Ibid., 1857-58, p. 40.
Council Journal, 1857-58, pp. 151-152.
Laws of Washington, 1859-60, pp. 293-294.
Ibid., pp. 422-423.
-Vs'fc* « *V-: ' if. * . •
Ibid., p. 427.
Ibid., p. 514.
Ibid., pp. 446-447.
Laws of Washington, 1859-60, pp. 468-469.
House Journal, 1860-61, p. 64.
Laws of Washington, 1360-61, p. 4.
House Journal, 1860-61, pp. 176-177, and Council Journal, pp. 126-127*
House Journal, 1860-61, p. 25.
"History of the University" in The Washington Alumnus, October and November, 1920.
House Journal, 1860-61, p. 38.
Ibid., p. 88.
Council Journal, 1860-61, pp. 150-151. L.
House Journal, 1360-61, pp. 210 and 220-221.
Ibid., pp. 280-231.
Council Journal, 1860-61, p. 226.
Ibid., p. 247; and House Journal, p. 322.
Ibid., pp. 302, 306, 308.
Laws of Washington, 1860-61, pp. 16-18.
if rank McCaffrey.: Car.ipus lienories, 1955, pp. 94 and 97.
Clarence B. Barley: History of Seattle, Vol. I.,, p. 136-137.
Port Townsend TTorth-Yfest, October 10, 1861.
Victor j. H&rrar, "History of the University," in The Washington Alumnus for December, 1920.
House Journal, 1361-62, Appendix, p. 67.
Ibid., Appendix, p. 20.
Ibid., Appendix, pp. 2-1-47.
"History of the University" in The Washington Alumnus for December, 1920.
House Journal, 1861-62, p. 60.
Laws of Washington, 1861-62, p. 155.
Council Journal, 1861-62, p. 231.
laws of Washington, 1861-62, pp. 43-46, and 60-61.
Clarence B. Bagley, History of Seattle (1916), Vol. I., p. 139.
Olympia Washington Standard, Oct. 4, 186*2.
Victor T. Farrar, "History of the University” in The Washington Alumnus for February, 1921.
5S. Washington Alumnus for November, 1920.
Clarence B. Earley, ’’The Mercer Immigration: Two Cargoes of Maidens for the Sound Country,” in the Oregon Historical Quarterly for March, 1904, pp. 1-24; same author, History of Seattle (1916), Vol. I., pp. 407-418; Flora A. P. Engle, "The Story of the Mercer Expeditions,” in the Washington Historical Quarterly, October, 1515, pp. 225-237; Edmond S. Me any, History of Washington, pp. 261-262.
Reproduced in the Washington Historical quarterly, April 1917, p. 116.
Victor J. Farrar "History of the University,” in the Washington Alumnus for March, 1921.
Seattle Gazette, September 30, 1865, and Seattle Puget-Sound Semi-Weekly,
April 19, 1856.
House Journal, 1862-63, Appendix, pp. iv-xi.
Laws of Washington, 1853-64, pp. 54-55.
House Journal, 1864-65, pp. 105-107.
Laws of Washington, 1864-65, p. 175.
House Journal, 1864-65, pp. 151-155.
Ibid., p. 211.
Ibid., 1865-66, pp. 100-103.
Ibid., pp. 112-116.
Council Journal, 1865-66, pp. 184, 208, 234.
Victor J. Farrar, "History of the University” in the Washington Alumnus for March, 1921.
Record of the Regents, 1862-1890, p. 29.
Ibid., pp. 41-42.
Victor J. Farrar, "History of the University" in the Washington Alumnus
for April, 1921.
Laws of Washington, 1866-1867, pp. 114-118.
Ibid., p. 6.
Victor J. Farrar, "History of the University” in the Washington Alumnus for April, 1921.
History of Seattle, Vol. I., p. 141.
House Journal, 1867-1868, pp. 76-109, and 187-202.
~ . ' ;
Laws of Washington, 1867-1868, pp. 73 and 204.
Victor J. Farrar, "History of the University" in the Washington Alumnus for April, 1921.
House Journal, 1869, pp. 23-24.
Ibid., PP* 149-153.
Council Journal, 1869, pp. 99-100.
Victor J. Farrar, "History of the University" in the Washington Alumnus for May, 1921.
Council Journal, 1873, Appendix, p. 14.
Laws of Washington, 1873, p. 616.
Council Journal, 1873, pp. 140-141.
C. B. Bagley, History of Seattle, Vol. I., p. 143.
Laws of Washington, 1875, pp. 103-104, 230-232 and 328.
House Journal, 1875, p. 100.
Victor J. Farrar, "History of the University" in the Washington Alurnnus for Hove Liber, 1921.
Ibid., for January, 1922; Clarence B. Bagley’s History of Seattle, Vol. I., p. 143; H. K. Hines’ History of Washington, p. 591; Post-Intelligencer, March 16, 1903; and manuscript letter from Prof. Louis F. Anderson, February 20, 1932.
Laws of Washington, 1877, pp. 241-243, and 331.
House Journal, 1877, pp. 89, 226, 285; and Council Journal, 1877, pp. 73, 159.
Council Journal, 1877, pp. 244-245.
Record of the Regents, 1862-1890, p. 90.
Council Journal, 1879, pp. 175, 177.
Laws of Washington, 1879, pp. 138-139.
Council Journal, 1879, p. 129.
Record of the Regents, 1862-1890, p. 111.
Ibid., p. 118.
Laws of Washington, 1881, p. 23.
Seattle Daily Chronicle, November 11 and 23, December 1, 1881.
Laws of Washington, 1881, p. 257.
Records of the Regents, 1862-1890, p. 135.
Frederic Jaraes Grant, History of Seattle, pp. 168-172; Edmond s. Meany, History of Washington, pp. 271-274.
House Journal, 1883, pp. 23-24.
Laws of Washington, 1883, pp. 105-106.
Ibid., pp. 68-69.
Ibid., p. 4.
114- Records of the Regents, 1862-1890, pp. 148-149.
Ibid., p. 167.
Victor J. Earrar, "History of the University" in the Washington Alumnus for February, 1922.
Laws of Washington, 1885-1886, pp. 149-150.
C. B. Bagley, History of Seattle, Vol. I., p. 144.
Rev. H. K. Hines, History of Washington, pp. 849-850.
Council Journal, 1887-1888, pp. 238-239.
Laws of Washington, 1887-1888, pp. 232-233, and p. 287.
Victor J. Farrar, "History of the University" in the Washington Alumnus for February, 1922.
Catalogue, 1894, p. 92.
Victor J. Farrar, "History of the University” in the Washington Alumnus for February, 1922.
Barton’s Legislative Hand-Book and Manual of the State of Washington, 1889-1890 p. 119.
Laws of Washington, 1889-1890, pp. 395-399; 448-450; and 794-795.
House Journal, 1889-1890, p. 131.
Senate Journal, 1889-1890, p. 615.
Ibid., 1891, p. 292.
Laws of Y/Washington, 1891, pp. 229-255.
House Journal, 1891, pp. 371-372; and Senate Journal, 1891, pp.' 356-358.
Clarence B. Bagley, History of Seattle, Vol. I., p. 149; and
Victor J. Farrar, "History of the University" in the Washington Alumnus for March, 1922.
House Journal, 1891, Appendix A, pp. 7-8.
Ibid., 1893, pp. 31-45.
Ibid., pp. 661-668.