Can anyone explain how or why aggie ever made it a point to make anything "to do" about The University of Texas.
Basically, who the hell came up with that, and why. Why would anyone associated with A&M give a flying rat's behind about UT?
Waste a single minute of their life over it?
UT was established in Feb 1858, aggy in April 1871. The act that established aggy mandated it would be subject to the 1858 act that established the university, so aggy was subordinate to the university starting before they opened their doors. Art 7, Sec 10 of the Texas Constitution directs a "university of the first class" to be established and for it to be styled "The University of Texas." It also directs the university to have an agricultural and mechanical department. The word "department" had a slightly different meaning then than it has today. In the notes of the 1875 constitutional convention there are mentions of an executive department, legislative department and judicial department, so by "department" the constitution is understood to mean the agricultural and mechanical college would be separate and distinct from the university.
The real problem arise from Art 7, Sc 13 of the constitution when it directs the ag college to be established as a branch of the university. Jim Nicar explains that the state interests had been treated rather shabbily by the reconstructionist government and by 1875, Texans had had enough of northern crap. Nicar explains the legislature made the ag college a branch of the university as a snub because the ag college was not "of and by Texans" but rather endowed by the federal government through the Morrill Act grant. It was founded with yankee money and was not the equal of the university.
The state's finances were a mess following the civil war. In 1850 the state had settled its western border with the federal government and for giving up claims to Worth County (present day New Mexico), the state was given $10 million. Of that sum, $100,000 was set aside as the PUF (along with land along the railroads being built in the state) for the university. When the Civil War came around, the legislature borrowed all the money in the PUF for military spending (the cash in the PUF at the end of the Civil War was $0.57). By the 1870s, the money the state owed the university was still not settled, partly because the state was forced by the federal government to repudiate all confederate war debt and the money taken from the PUF was exchanged for some of the confederate war debt issued by the state. Because the federal government funded the endowment for the ag college, it had the money to open its doors earlier than the university. Plus, the Morrill Act mandated time restrictions on the state to open the doors of the ag college.
In opening the ag college, there was no set curriculum, no course schedule, no list of degrees to be conferred. Nothing. because the state did not have a classical public university the ag college decided to start teaching languages, math, physics, literature and the like. By 1880, people who sent their kids to the ag college were pissed because they were learning anything but agriculture. When the university opened its doors in 1881, the university started teaching math, physics, literature and there were calls to shut down the ag college and move its operations to the site of the main university. That caused some friction between the board of directors of the ag college and the Board of Regents of the university. By 1886, the Regents were sick and tired of the ag branch college begging for money from the PUF. As a branch they were nominally entitled to participate in PUF income, but since they had a separate endowment of their own, the Regents were "frugal"with their allocations to the ag branch college. In 1886, the ag college was forced to (for the now second time) reform its curriculum and the Regents called for a constitutional amendment to end the ag branch college's status as a branch of the university. The ag branch college directors fought this because it would mean they would be shut off from any future PUF funding. This is when Sul Ross left the Governor's Mansion and took over administration of the ag college. They lowered their entrance age from 16 to 15. Actually, one had to only "show the attributes of a 15 year old", so 13 and 14 year old farm boys were what the culture of the branch ag college was designed to appeal to. Because not all of the state's rural high schools were academically rigorous, many of the 13-15 year old old showing up to attend the farm school were prepared for higher education. Also, there were sever discipline issues as adolescent middle school aged boys from farm towns tend to be a bit incorrigible. In essence, the ag branch college was a reform school for adolescent farm buys wanting to learn to fix farm machinery. The stated goal of the branch ag college was to teach without the use of books. The model school of the university was the University of Virginia (Fefferson's university). The model for the ag college was Michigan State. The university has always been wealthier, more elite, more prestigious and more academically rigorous than the ag school, the ag school has always felt the need to try to be the equal of the university. The aggy 'burnt orange yardstick" they measure themselves against started from the first days of the school.
The Regents running the university saw their mission having nothing to do with that of the ag branch college and wanted nothing to do with them. They repeatedly called for the ag school to be shut down and tried twice (1915, 1919) to get a constitutional amendment to end the ag college's status as a branch of the university. Voters rejected the proposed amendments, in no small part because to fund the ag college, the state wanted to impose a new ad valorem tax on the people. The directors of the ag college fought the regents at every turn because they wanted access to the PUF. From the 1890s to the 1920s, the farm interests in the legislature were strong and protected the ag college. When Santa Rita 1 hit in 1923, there was more than enough money in the PUF for both institutions. In 1931, the legislature mandated the Regents give 1/3 pf the PUF income (the AUF) to the ag college. With the Regents ignoring the ag college and money not an issue, things settled down.
While things settled down on the political side, the ag college directors had a lot of ill will toward the university Regents due to the Regents' past efforts to close the school down and the refusal of the Regents to offer the ag college sufficient funding. The ag college directors (and alumni) felt they were looked down on by the university regents (they were) and at every opportunity, they wanted to "stick it" to the university. Combine that with the adolescent, all boys culture of the ag school and you have the beginnings of the aggy hatred for the university. The ag college never was intended to be the equal of the university and that is the reason it isn't today the equal of the university. Its isn't by accident the annual operating budget of UT Austin is roughly twice the budget of TAMU College Station (The UT System operating budget is more than four times that of the TAMU System) and why Regents Rule 80303 mandates UT Austin by itself receives AUF funding equal to that of what is allocated to the entire TAMU system.
In 1947, in response to a hazing scandal, the ag college directors felt the school was getting too complex for one person to oversee by himself, so they created the A&M System to relieve the college president from worrying about anything but the College Station campus. The voters still had not approved a constitutional amendment to end the ag college's status as a branch of the university. In 1950, the UT System was created and in dedicating the various operating units of the university as components of the UT System (med school, etc), they failed to mention the status of the ag college as a branch of the university. In 1963, the legislature changed the name of the ag college to "Texas A&M University." In 1967, The University of Texas changed its name to "The University of Texas at Austin." Technically, The entire TAMU System (yes, including TAMU College Station) is a branch of The University of Texas at Austin. There is only one university fund (the PUF) because there is technically only one university. In 1975 the ag college directors changed their name from Board of Directors to Board of Regents, to match the structure of the university. Today, the TAMU Regents are scared to death of the possibility of another proposed amendment to and TAMU's status as a branch of the university because it would be humiliating for them to have to admit they still are "little brother" and a branch of their great rival.
Does that explain aggy's obsession with UT?
