conditions stipulated that Bishop McTyeire should be president of the board of trustees of the Vanderbilt, and Tulane suggested that General Gibson be chairman or president of the Tulane University. And how modest and sympathetic alike they were regarding the subjects of their benefactions. Referring to his gift Commodore Vanderbilt, in a letter to Bishop McTyeire, concludes:

And if it shall through its influence contribute, even in the smallest degree, to strengthening the ties which should exist between all geographical sections of our common country, I shall feel that it has accomplished one of the objects that led me to take an interest in it.

The account of the Tulane endowment, as given by General Gibson, is thus stated in Mr. Fay's History of Education in Louisiana:

On March 3, 1881, Mr. George O. Vanderbilt, private secretary to Mr. Tulane, accompanied by Senator Theodore Randolph, of New Jersey, who was formerly a resident of Vicksburg, Miss., called upon me in the House of Representatives. Mr. Vanderbilt said that he had come to Washington on behalf of Mr. Tulane to bear an invitation to me to visit him at Princeton. He did not know for what purpose Mr. Tulane desired to hold the interview, but imagined that it had something to do with education in Louisiana. It was not until April 18 that engagements in Washington and Louisiana permitted me to visit Princeton. Upon presenting myself, Mr. Tulane observed that my father had been his esteemed friend in early times in Louisiana, and that my father-in-law, Mr. R. W. Montgomery, had been the best friend he had ever had. He invited me into the library and told me he desired to do something for the education of the youth of Louisiana. Taking from his drawer a list of properties in New Orleans, he said: "I desire to leave this property to you to be devoted to education in Louisiana." I replied that I could not consent to accept a bequest, as the relations between us did not justify such a trust, and it might be embarrassing, especially as I was in public life. Mr. Tulane observed that he would as willingly give me the property as to will it for this purpose. Thereupon I said that I would accept the trust. The next day I sailed for Europe, and while at Carlsbad, Germany, projected a plan by which the donation was to be put into effect. This plan was submitted to Mr. Tulane and met his approval. Accompanying this plan was a letter, which, with some additions, was accepted by Mr. Tulane. It was not until November 30, 1881, that the plan and paper were sent to Dr. T. G. Richardson, with the request that he would call into consultation Judge Charles E. Fenner, Judge E. D. White, and Mr. James McConnell, who had been designated as administrators by Mr. Tulane, and put the whole matter into shape according to the laws of Louisiana.

The letter of Mr. Paul Tulane donating his property in New Orleans to education expresses his views and purposes and makes suggestions as to the management of the property. The letter is dated at Princeton, N. J., May 2, 1882, and is addressed to Messrs. Randall L. Gibson, Charles. E. Fenner, James McConnell, T. G. Richardson, M. D., Edward D. White, E. H. Farrar, P. N. Strong, B. M. Palmer, D. D., Hugh Miller Thompson, D. D., Charles A. Whitney, Samuel H. Kennedy, Walter R. Stauffer, Cartwright Eustis, Henry Ginder, John T. Hardie, R. M. Walmsley, and William O. Rogers. It begins thus:

A resident of New Orleans for many years of my active life, having formed many friendships and associations dear to me, and deeply sympathizing with its people in

whatever misfortunes or disasters may have befallen them, as well as being sincerely desirous of contributing to their moral and intellectual welfare, I do hereby express to you my intention to donate to you, by an act of donation inter vivos, all the real estate I own and am possessed of in the said city of New Orleans, State of Louisiana, for the promotion and encouragement of intellectual, moral, and industrial education among the white young persons in the city of New Orleans, State of Louisiana, and for the advancement of learning and letters, the arts and sciences therein, my intention being that the benefits shall be applied and expended in the city of New Orleans. And fervently concludes as follows:

With devout gratitude to our Heavenly Father for enabling us to form these plans, and invoking His divine blessing upon you and your counsels and upon the good work proposed among the present and future generations of our beloved Crescent City, I remain, with great respect, your friend and humble servant.

Mr. Tulane, it seems, was never married, and although he possessed a large estate in the North besides his New Orleans property, he is said to have estimated his losses during the war at over $1,000,000. Truly in the face of such losses his great benefactions are a noble sacrificial offering of his sympathy for the Southern people. The accumulations of such men, effected generally at great personal sacrifices, are never miserly or selfish, and instead of their fortunes being founded on injustice the world is better off for them, as without their sacrifices to acquire them we would not have the benefit of their noble purposes and accomplishment of their great humanitarian efforts. Those who seek to study the lives of such benefactors and the history of their benefactions will find a beautifully written sketch of Mr. Tulane and the university he so graciously endowed in Mr. Fay's History of Education in Louisiana, in an article contributed to it by Col. William Preston Johnston, president of the university, who writes, as but few men can, so graphically and philosophically.

Another great philanthropist who founded his charities while living so as to realize and enjoy their fruits during his lifetime, and whose example forcibly illustrates the wisdom of such benefactions, is Peter Cooper, who founded the Cooper Institute in New York by donations to the amount of about $1,750,000.

Few men [says a sketch of him in a popular magazine] have ever become more universally respected and widely beloved in their own lifetime than the venerable philanthropist, Peter Cooper. Born in comparative poverty, deprived in his youth of all the advantages of education and spending his life in the midst of a community in which the accumulation of wealth is regarded as the noblest aim in life, he became famous merely by his benefactions, and was one of the few to set the example of that kind of munificence for which the rich of America have since become famous.

In this connection it appears that heretofore great gifts to universities, particularly State universities, have been generally confined to Northern institutions-the University of Virginia; the Tulane, of Louisiana; the Vanderbilt, of Tennessee, and the Johns Hopkins, of Maryland, being the main Southern recipients of any considerable

favors of that character, the case of the Virginia University being doubtless due to the well-established prestige of that old and popular institution. And it is remarkable with what prescience and circumspection of detail great millionaires, and even moderate givers, comprehend alike every condition and plan the success of public enterprises the same as in their private business. The purposes of Regent Brackenridge and other donors to the University of Texas have been as circumspect as they are beneficent. The Brackenridge gifts were especially wise and delicately planned to meet new necessities; those of the Sealys coupled the university with the charity of hospital work; Swenson's were aimed for ethnological illustration and instruction; and the Palm library, some 20,000 volumes, the careful accumulation of a long life, came as a voluntary contribution which had been sought elsewhere, but which the donor preferred should repose for its better preservation in the halls of the university.

TEXAS UNIVERSITY AS AN OBJECT FOR BENEFACTIONS.

It is to be hoped now that hostilities between the North and the South have so long subsided that the generous tide of Northern wealth will be more freely turned toward the South. Such an institution as the University of Texas affords a worthy object for the liberality of some great philanthropist to attach his or her name to the grand roll of "educational benefactors" such as, it is gratifying to cite, are Cooper, Girard, Case, Rich, Lick, Peabody, Green, Pratt, Fayerweather, Mills, Morgan, Low, Loomis, Packer, Cornell, Hopkins, Vanderbilt, Stanford, Tulane, Seney, Armour, Brown, O'Brien, Rice, Purdue, Carnegie, Drew, Drexell, Rose, De Pauw, Clark, Childs, Vassar, Rockefeller, Yerkes, White, Colgate, Sage, Astor, Lennox, Tilden, Corcoran, McDonogh, Creer, an unknown donor of $600,000 for the Princeton library; and on the roll of benefactresses, Miss Caldwell, Miss Thompson, Miss Garrett, Miss Gould, Mrs. Bradley, Mrs. Fogg, Baroness De Hirsch, and lately, most original and perhaps most munificent in design in the distinguished record, Mrs. Phoebe Hearst, of California.

It was doubtless to excite liberality in the Texas legislature, besides prompting to individual action like his own in others, as well as to enjoy the noble pleasure of giving, that induced Regent Brackenridge to make his donations to the University of Texas of the mess hall at Austin and the fine dormitory for the college at Galveston. Like consideration probably largely influenced the gifts of the Sealy hospital, the Swenson collections, and the Palm library. As further evidence of the influence of State liberality in such matters, Regent Brackenridge, who is one of the wealthiest men in the State, and most punctilious in his promises, intimated that if the legislature