Mr. TUCKER. That is right. Mr. WITCOVER. And he is just as loyal to his duties and to his country. Mr. TUCKER. That is true; we admit that. Mr. WITCOVER. Yes. Mr. TUCKER. Now, at last it is not a question of whether education is a good thing; we all believe in that. I spent two years of my life, giving up everything else, to canvass my State of Virginia to see that every child, white and black, in the State had at least a commonschool education, and with the idea, also, there should be at least one high school in every administrational district in the State. I have lived to realize that. But the Constitution leaves this whole question of education to the States. Now, if this bill tends to take that obligation away from the States and bring it here to Washington, do you think that is a desirable thing? Mr. WITCOVER. Well, how about the public roads? Was that desirable? Was there any more than encouragement? Mr. WELSH. The Constitution makes its own provision for that. Mr. TUCKER. There is no trouble about that on the constitutional question; none in the world. Mr. WITCOVER. Yes. Mr. TUCKER. And where the Constitution permits a thing, we are in favor of giving it a free course and letting it be glorified." Mr. WITCOVER. Yes. Mr. TUCKER. But where it does not, how could we vote for it? Mr. WITCOVER. It would seem I might answer that by saying there is a statement that wherever there is a will there is a way. [Laughter.] Mr. TUCKER. Yes; and that has put some people in the penitentiary. Mr. WITCOVER. Oh, yes. Mr. TUCKER. And put others out of the Cabinet. Mr. WITCOVER. Oh, yes. [Laughter.) Some through design; some through lack of design. Mr. TUCKER. It might put some out of Congress, and we do not want it to do that. Mr. WITCOVER. This bill, as I understand, does not make any appropriation; it makes permissive an appropriation; it determines certain conditions upon which the States may acquire this financial assistance. The details of the operation and of the fund that is made permissible as an appropriation, are, after all, details. The life of the bill, I do not understand, hinges upon whether or not seven and a half millions or double that amount are appropriated for the new department of education; but, after all, that is a mere detail to the general purpose of the bill, which is for the establishment of a department of education. All else you take up is an incident to that. Mr. BLACK. What investigation, if any, did your organization make as to the need of this bill? Mr. WITCOVER. Its general knowledge of illiteracy as disclosed during the war, for instance, and other general and common knowledge known to everyone. Mr. BLACK. Did it enter into the consideration of whether the States could take care of the situation? Mr. WITCOVER. That is a matter of common knowledge. We know there is no State, county, or municipality that can afford money enough for the purpose of education to pay their teachers, to build an adequate number of schoolhouses, or to conduct a sufficient number. Mr. BLACK. Of course, you realize the Chamber of Commerce of the United States has reported adversely? Mr. WITCOVER. No; I did not know that. The CHAIRMAN. Do you think the Federal Government ought to furnish the money to build schoolhouses? Mr. WITCOVER. No; I do not. The CHAIRMAN. Or to pay teachers? Mr. WITCOVER. I think that the Federal Government ought to assist in these things. The Federal Government is not doing these things, I mean, as proposed in this bill; but is rendering assistance to the States, in their own individual efforts. In other words, “The Lord helps him who helps himself." The State must help itself before it can assume to ask assistance from the Federal Government. Mr. WELSH. I understood you to say there was no school district in the United States that could afford to carry on education as it should be carried on? Mr. WITCOVER. That is a general statement. Mr. WELSH. You did not mean that? Mr. WITCOVER. I did not mean that literally, no; I mean as a general proposition that is so. Mr. BLACK. That is principally so in your jurisdiction? Mr. WITCOVER. That is principally so; yes. Mr. WELSH. But it is not so in all parts of the country. Mr. WITCOVER. That is a statistical situation that is open to argument. Mr. WELSH. I do know this, that there is a continual protest by the local taxpayers against the tax rate which would permit the State to carry out education along the lines that it ought to be carried out. Mr. WITCOVER. Yes. Mr. WELSH. And they would be very glad to pass an obligation up to some central authority when it won't pinch themselves; I have no doubt about that. Mr. TUCKER. Has not the imperial State of Georgia greatly increased its appropriation for schools in the last 10 or 15 years? Mr. WITCOVER. Yes; it has followed the example of the illustrious State of Virginia in that respect. Mr. TUCKER. Yes. Mr. WITCOVER. I am very glad to claim kinship with you in that particular. Mr. TUCKER. Fifteen years ago, we appropriated for schools in Virginia an average of $600,000 a year; and last year it went to $10,000,000. Mr. WITCOVER. Yes, sir. The need is so great that the appropriations, large as they are, are altogether inadequate. Mr. WELSH. And they will be, even if this bill becomes a law. Mr. WELSH. We never can keep up with the demand for education, but we are going to do our best. Mr. WITCOVER. That is all that can be done; that is all that can be asked. That is our hope. Mr. TUCKER. Do you see any reason why we should levy taxes down in Georgia, large income taxes and others, bring them up to Washington and then send them back to Georgia, for education or any other purpose? If I am permitted to make such a suggestion or analogy of course it is impossible, but suppose you had 10 barrels of whisky down in Georgia Mr. WITCOVER. Confiscation would develop at once. [Laughter.] Mr. TUCKER (continuing). And you sent it up here to the Treasury, to stay for six months, and then sent it back; you know it would leak. [Laughter.] Mr. WITCOVER. Well, according to the reports, if it were properly contained, it would improve. [Laughter.] Mr. TUCKER. There would be less of it. Mr. WITCOVER. But it will have increased its value. [Laughter.] Mr. TUCKER. Is it not technically just the same thing? We go and levy these heavy Federal taxes on the States, gather the money and bring it up here, with all of the expense of levying those taxes in the States, bringing them up here and then sending them back? Mr. WITCOVER. Yes. Mr. TUCKER. For purposes which the Federal Government has no power to administer, why not keep them at home? Mr. WITCOVER. I am not competent to discuss the question of the power of the Federal Government, of course. Mr. TUCKER. That is at the bottom of this, my friend. Mr. WITCOVER. Georgia has long been a prohibition State, and is not qualified to pass judgment on such hypothetical questions as you have suggested. [Laughter.] So we likewise disclaim ability to discuss some of these other matters. Mr. TUCKER. There are a great many men from Georgia here who can. Mr. LOWREY. I make a point of order, that these people are getting away from the point now, about those 10 barrels of whisky being sent from Georgia here to Washington. Mr. WITCOVER. Gentlemen, 10 barrels of whisky in Georgia would perhaps never reach Washington. [Laughter.] Miss WILLIAMS. At this time, I would like to call on the representative of the National Federation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs, which is represented here by Miss Mary Stewart. STATEMENT OF MISS MARY STEWART, NATIONAL CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL FEDERATION OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL WOMENS' CLUBS, NEW YORK Miss STEWART. I am the national legislative chairman of the National Federation of Business and Professsional Women's Clubs. with headquarters in New York. I live in Washington. The National Federation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs is one of the newer women's organizations. It is now in its sixth year. It represents approximately 33,000 business and professional women in every State in the United States. That is a conservative estimate. The exact roster is available. We have a paid membership, so that we know exactly how many women are enrolled. That is about the last report I have. At our last convention, in Portland, Oreg., in July, 1923, the delegate body unanimously indorsed this bill. I beg pardon; I will correct that. The delegate body unanimously indorsed the general principles of this bill, not the specific bill, but it did indorse the bill that preceded it. I wish to submit, later, if I may, the statement of the exact facts. The resolution, which I have not at hand, indorsed the principle of a department of education, with a Secretary in the President's Cabinet, Federal aid, and the other general provisions of this bill. We pass resolutions in this manner: The legislative committee first discusses them and decides whether there is sufficient interest in the measure to bring it before the convention. Many of these, of course, have been discussed in the local clubs and State federations before coming to the convention. Then these measures are discussed in what is called a round-table convention. Delegates come to this round-table meeting and sometimes several other committees join with the legislative committee and, particularly if it is a matter such as this was, it brings the whole delegate body to the discussion. It is a very lively discussion on both sides of the question. This matter, I may say, came up at other conventions before the legislative committee, but was not then brought forth. There was opposition, which has recently been withdrawn. Then the legislative committee makes a report to the resolutions committee, which is given to the convention and the delegate body votes on the resolution. That is the method by which this was passed. The interest we have in this bill, as business and professional women, is primarily to enlarge the opportunities for training women in the world of work and to raise the standards of that training, I think there is no need of discussion, as one of your members said today, about the desirability of education. Practically, as a people, we are committed to it, to a degree perhaps, that no nation was ever committed to public education at public expense. We all feel that the welfare of the country is protected as we promote sound education in many directions. We feel that certain opportunities are very inadequate and that certain standards are absent, and that national direction will stimulate those. A noted example is the tremendous growth in the opportunities for vocational education, through the work of the Federal Board for Vocational Education. That is a very good answer as to what Federal stimulation will do for local effort. This is not the time to discuss the modern trend in education, but that is a very important phase of the whole education problem. One of the gentlemen stated a moment ago that $20,000,000, or about three times as much, was proposed in this bill for physical education as for the removal of illiteracy, and asked the gentleman speaking if he thought it was three times as important. It might be a matter of personal opinion, but I should say, as a matter of national health, it is as far as that is concerned; that it is much more important that we have as citizens those who, first of all, know how to keep themselves fit physically. That is one of the most important things. I cite that only to make this thought, that better oppor tunities and higher standards of training-I speak specifically now for our organization-for women to go into the business and professional world, are going to be greater now, and national stimulation, national aid, that comes from a department that coordinates the educational agencies already operated by our Government, and expands and stimulates them, we believe, will promote this thing. The exact measures of this bill our resolution wisely did not comprehend, for this reason: Committing ourselves to the end and to the general means by which that end may be arrived at, we trust to our Representatives in Congress and in the Senate to find the right ways. It is entirely too intricate and complex to discuss even in a committee of the convention, much less on the convention floor, in the four or five days usually given to that meeting; so just how much money for each thing, or just what way it shall be done, or as to whether or not it is constitutional, we feel it legitimate to leave to the Members of the Congress. But they definitely stand by the principle of a department of education that is nationally fostering better educational opportunities and standards and Federal aid to that end. We wish to make clear, as business and professional women, with our feet on the ground and with our eyes ahead, as all good citizens will, that we mean to stand by that principle and, working with you, and listening to your judgment as we hope you will listen to ours or, rather, may I say, our hopes and ideals, we wish to stand by better educational opportunities, nationally fostered, in the best way you can give them to us. Mr. BLACK. Are there many educators in your association? Miss STEWART. There are a goodly number. I could not say offhand, but by no means would I say there are more than a fifth, if that number. They are lawyers, doctors, nurses, and business women. It is a general group of business and professional women. Mr. TUCKER. I understand that your organization indorses the principle of a department of education. Miss STEWART. Yes. Mr. TUCKER. And Federal aid? Miss STEWART. Yes. Mr. TUCKER. Has your organization had any meeting since the President delivered his last message to Congress? Miss STEWART. When was that date? Mr. TUCKER. In December. Miss STEWART. Yes; we had a board meeting the last of February, a national board meeting-that is, the officers-but we had no general meeting. Mr. TUCKER. Did you discuss reversing your indorsement of Federal aid? Miss STEWART. We did not discuss any details. We had watched the progress of Federal aid, and the national board Mr. TUCKER. I was just wondering whether you had changed your position about it, after the President had come out so strongly against Federal aid for schools? t Miss STEWART. No; we did not change our position in that matter. That was not brought up for discussion. I think we do appreciate the problem you have in regard to Federal aid, very definitely, and we realize the waste that goes into Federal aid very often; we realize he dangers of a long-removed administration of a central government |