Mr. ROBSION. Well, you say if we were all like Massachusetts it would not be necessary to consider immigration. Mr. WARREN. They might be against it for other reasons. There are a great many reasons for being against unrestricted immigration. Mr. ROBSION. But you stated that Congress would not be occupied with these immigration laws. Mr. WARREN. I said a great many questions, not merely immigration. Mr. BLACK. Have you given thought to the arguments advanced by those who support this bill, that this department can carry on extensive and necessary research and get practical results? Mr. WARREN. I have read that argument, but I do not follow it. Of course the commissioner can carry on investigations if the Congress gives him money enough to carry them on. You asked about public opinion in Massachusetts on this particular bill, and the only place where I know an effort has been made to obtain it and I give you this for what it may be worth-was by the women's branch of the National Civic Federation. That body is simply the women's part of it. They had two sessions of their committee from all over the State, representatives from the committees. One was held in the afternoon for such women as could attend in the afternoon, and the other was held in the evening for women who were employed, and whose occupation prevented them from attending the afternoon session. Both meetings were addressed by one advocate of the Department of Education-this bill-and by one who was opposed to it. I happened to be the one who was opposed to it. The one who advocated it was a lady high up in the educational organization. I have forgotten what her name is. I think the women feel that they were well represented. The vote which they took I heard from the secretary of the women's branch was as follows: At the meeting of the day committee 130 voted in favor of the department and 291 against it. Thirty-seven did not vote. At the meeting of the evening committee, which was made up, as I have said, of women in some occupations who could not attend the meeting in the afternoon, 82 voted in favor of the department, and 197 vote against the department, while 16 did not vote at all. The combined vote was 212 in favor of the department and 488 against it. Mr. LEATHERWOOD. May I ask a question there? Mr. WARREN. Yes. Mr. LEATHERWOOD. From what walks of life came the women who voted at the afternoon meeting? Mr. WARREN. I should say, as I looked at the audience, and remember it, that they came from-well, I would not say the leisure class, exactly, but from those classes the women members of which were not working women. Mr. LEATHERWOOD. And I take it the evening vote was from women who were largely in industry. Mr. WARREN. That is what I understood. Mr. LEATHERWOOD. What is the name of this organization? Mr. WARREN. It is the women's department of the National Civic Federation, Massachusetts section. Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Who is the head of it in Massachusetts? Mr. WARREN. Mrs. Barrett Wendel. Mr. LEATHERWOOD. And who is the national head of it? Mr. WARREN. That I do not know, because all I know about it is what this letterhead indicates. Its executive committee appears to be made up of representatives of various Massachusetts organizations. I see here the president of the League of Jewish Women's organizations. Mr. LEATHERWOOD. I beg your pardon; is this civic federation made up of groups from other organizations? Mr. WARREN. I should judge so from this letterhead. Mr. LEATHERWOOD. I would be very much interested to know what the organizations are that are amalgamated into this. Mr. WARREN. I do not think they are amalgamated into it. Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Well, from which the membership is taken. Mr. WARREN. I will give you what information I have. Mrs. Ely Feebleman, president of the League of Jewish Women's Organizations; Mrs. Hyman Freeman, president, Boston section, National Council of Jewish Women; Mrs. Robert T. Herrick, chairman, Prison and Protective Social Measures Committee; Mrs. Lewis Kennedy Morse, president, Women's Education Association; Mrs. Arthur D. Potter, president, Massachusetts State Federation of Women's Clubs; Mrs. Frances E. Slattery, president, League of Catholic Women; Mrs. Richard P. Strong, chairman, Committee on Public Health; Mrs. W. D. Tudor, president, Women's Municipal League of Boston; Mrs. Richard S. Warner, chairman, Household Economics Committee; Mrs. Eva W. White, head, Walker Elizabeth Peabody House. Those are some of the members of the executive committee. There are others, but there is nothing to indicate what they represent. Mr. FLETCHER. Do you know of any other organizations that have taken a vote on the proposition in your State? Mr. WARREN. I do not. That is the only one I know of, and that is one that makes a practice of taking up Federal measures, or State measures, and having them discussed at these winter meetings, and taking a vote on how to regard them. Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Is this organization described as the State Federation of Women's Clubs of Massachusetts affiliated with the National Federation of Women's Clubs? Mr. WARREN. It is not. The entire letterhead is as follows: "Women's Department, National Civic Federation.” Mr. LEATHERWOOD. I think you misunderstood me. I referred just to one organization that you read, the State Federation of Women's Clubs in Massachusetts. Is that affiliated with and part of the General Federation of Women's Clubs? Mr. WARREN. Mr. Leatherwood, I am sure I do not know. Mr. LEATHERWOOD. I do not either. I am interested to know whether it is. Mr. WARREN. I imagine it is, from its name; yes, I should say it was-president, Massachusetts State Federation of Women's Clubs. I should suppose it was the Massachusetts portion of the Federated Women's Clubs. Mr. LEATHERWOOD. I would, too; and I was conjecturing whether they were running counter to the general federation or not. Mr. WARREN. If they are, it is one of the few instances in which the local women's organization has had a chance to express itself. Mr. BLACK. The idea that you bring here is that in Massachusetts during the referendum on the child-labor proposition, Federal intervention in education was an issue, and there was a tremendous vote against the child-labor amendment, based to a large extent on that suggestion. Mr. WARREN. Based to some extent on it. Mr. BLACK. Based to some extent on it. Mr. WARREN. That was one of the arguments against it. Mr. FLETCHER. Did the opponents of it in Massachusetts regard it as Federal interference? Mr. WARREN. As far as I can see, the way I presented it was that the sphere of an enlargement of Federal jurisdiction Mr. FLETCHER. Then the people really who voted on this would vote, if that propaganda should be carried out or that idea should be carried out, on the supposition that the bill means Federal interference? Mr. WARREN. Clearly, yes. Mr. FLETCHER. They would not understand the bill as I understand it, having for its object securing facilities for fact-finding. Mr. WARREN. Yes. Mr. ROBSION. Mr. Warren agrees there is nothing harmful in this particular bill. Mr. WARREN. It is not harmful, but I think it is bad policy. Mr. ROBSION. Is not the bill designed to secure additional information that it is not possible to secure under present methods? Mr. WARREN. No. I think most of it has already been consummated. Mr. ROBSION. You do? You do not think the educators are justified in their contention, then, that the information is not secured? Mr. WARREN. No. I have been a trustee of Williams College for 26 years, and in that capacity I have had to deal with the alumnæ very largely, and very often the alumnæ proceed to criticize the administration of the college; and whenever I meet a body of the alumnæ, and discuss it with them, I have asked them if they have read the president's report, or the dean's report, or the treasurer's report, or the report of the committee on admission, or various other publications which are sent to every alumnus of the college, and usually nobody had ever read any of them. I sometimes suggested to them that they could criticize more intelligently if they knew what they were talking about. Mr. ROBSION. That is true, too. But, in this instance, some of the leading educators of the country have made a careful study of what the Bureau of Education is doing, and they show clearly, it seems to me, that the Bureau of Education is not securing this information. Mr. WARREN. Has the Bureau of Education the appropriations necessary to procure it? Mr. ROBSION. No; it has not, because you say that it ought not to have them, and you oppose them having any more; and that is the way people who are opposing the bill feel about it. Mr. WARREN. My opinion is not going to control, fortunately or unfortunately, the action of Congress. Mr. FLETCHER. Do you really object to the bureau having sufficient appropriations to assist it? Mr. WARREN. No; I do not at all, if there is a real need for information which is not at present available. It is quite proper. Mr. ROBSION. But did you not say you did not believe in the Bureau of Education? Mr. WARREN. I do not believe in it because I do not think it is necessary. Mr. ROBSION. Did you not further say that you would oppose, so far as you are concerned, any increase of money being given to the Bureau of Education? Mr. WARREN. I do, so far as I am concerned. You must bear in mind I speak only with such knowledge as I have. Mr. ROBSION. I know, but you are here speaking against this bill. Mr. WARREN. I am speaking against this bill, and the principle which this bill represents, which I think is a very dangerous principle to our Government. Mr. ROBSION. But some of those who would circumvent this bill and defeat it undertake to pacify those who feel that sufficient effort is not made for the cause of popular education by the Federal Government by proposing to give the Bureau of Education more money; and when you speak of the Bureau of Education you are right on the point at issue in this matter. Mr. WARREN. Of course you do not expect the opponents of a measure to agree on all phases of that measure. If there is real need of information that is not available, I think it is well within the province of Congress to provide for the gathering and dissemination of such information. Mr. BLACK. The argument of those who favor the bill is based upon the fact that the Bureau of Education has not available the research facilities that these educators seem to think necessary. The argument advanced by the opponents of the bill is that they are in favor of the Bureau of Education, and if further research is needed why do you not give the bureau the money. The argument has proceeded from the opponents of the bill that the bureau should have the money; but the argument is advanced by them to those who support the bill that if the research is necessary why do you not get the bureau the money? That has been the trend of the discussion on that point. Mr. WARREN. Why do not the opponents get the money? Mr. WARREN. Well, why don't they? It seems to me that there is a great deal of haziness about this investigation and gathering of information that is desired. I have read what I can see about it, and I have not discovered just what it is that they desire to know that they either do not know or can not easily find out; and I think that is true in a great many fields of knowledge, Mr. BLACK. The main things they have advanced are financial problems in schools, the cost of school buildings, or data on that so they can give certain information to localities that are thinking of erecting a school with limited resources; and the other main topic of investigation they suggest is the secondary school problem. For those two specific problems this department is requested. The other problem has not come to light yet. Mr. WARREN. So far as the construction of school buildings is concerned, I will return to my original answer. I would not ap propriate any money for a Federal bureau to investigate the construction of schoolhouses. Over $4,000,000,000 has been spent in this country on schoolhouses, and if the various State officials chargeable with the construction of schoolhouses, after spending that amount of money, do not know, and can not find out within the borders of their own State, something about school construction, I do not believe they would profit very much by a Federal department of education. Mr. ROBSION. We are spending a vast amount of money making a study of the boll weevil, the corn borer, the twig borer, and the tobacco worm, You would not favor that, would you? Mr. WARREN. I should if you found the remedy for some of them. Mr. ROBSION. We will not find the remedy unless we seek it, will we? Mr. WARREN. No, I do not think you will. I do not criticize those investigations at all, but I do not think the construction of a schoolhouse is such a difficult problem that it requires a department of the Federal Government to tell the people of a city or town how to build schoolhouses. Mr. ROBSION. Do you know that the Federal Government is spending several times as much money trying to eradicate the barberry bush as it is spending to promote education; and the Federal Government is spending three or four times as much money taking care of reindeer in Alaska as it is in promoting education in this country? Mr. WARREN. I could never accept as a sound supporting argument for a proposition that, because so much money was spent for one thing and so much for a second thing, a certain amount should be spent for a third thing. Mr. ROBSION. We are spending several million dollars a year looking after sheep, the propagation of hogs, etc. Should we not spend a little money to look after the greatest asset of this country, the children, in promoting their welfare? Mr. WARREN. I suppose you are spending the other money for the same general purpose. You are spending it indirectly for the health and welfare of the people of the country, including the children. Mr. BLACK. The Alaskan reindeer have not yet acquired State rights, either, you know. Mr. WARREN. No, they are in the only Territory we have, I believe. Mr. SEARS. A moment ago you referred to haziness. I presume one basic thought is that the common-school system will be a part of our life for a long time, and everyone should want it to be as efficient as possible; and I think the belief is that it is of such importance that if a department, properly carried out, would have a beneficial influence, without invading local rights, then we ought to give such help as we can; and if a department of education, being of enough importance, could add to that efficiency without such an invasion, then it ought to be favorably considered. Do you not think that is true on the basis I have laid down? Mr. WARREN. Yes, I think it is. Mr. SEARS. I say if it can be. Mr. WARREN. If it could; but, of course, I do not believe it can; and so far as it can perform a useful function within the Constitution it can do it without being erected into an executive department. I 105682-28-18 |