RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY SOUTH DAKOTA BRANCH OF THE NATIONAL CONGRESS OF PARENTS AND TEACHERS AT PIERRE, S. DAK., 1927 * * * Be it resolved, That in pursuance of the policy of the National Congress of Parents and Teachers we reaffirm our indorsement of the Children's Bureau and the maternity and infancy act and we ardently support and work for the pasaage of a bill creating a department of education of the National Government and we further recommend to all parent-teacher associations of our State that they devote at least one program of the year to the consideration of these humanwelfare measures. RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE CONVENTION OF TEXAS CONGRESS OF MOTHERS AND PARENT-TEACHER ASSOCIATIONS AT HOUSTON, TEX., IN NOVEMBER, 1927 Indorsement was given the following: "F. Public schools. The education bill calling for a separate department of education with a secretary in the Cabinet. This bill calls for a small appropria tion but does not call for any Federal aid to the States." RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH, FEBRUARY 4, 1926 Whereas there is now pending in the Congress of the United States a bill providing for the establishment of a department of education in the Government with a secretary of education in the President's Cabinet; and Whereas the passage of this measure would give the same recognition to education as has been given to agriculture, labor, and commerce which its importance so richly deserves: Therefore, Resolved, That the board of education of the Methodist Episcopal Church urges the passage of this bill providing for a department of education with a secretary of education in the President's Cabinet. RESOLUTION PASSED BY THE WOMAN'S MISSIONARY COUNCIL, METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH, SOUTH, MARCH, 1928, AT NASHVILLE, TENN. We recommend the indorsement of the Curtis-Reed education bill, which provides for the establishment of a Federal department of education and for a more adequate support of scientific research in education under the direction of a secretary of education. RESOLUTION PASSED BY THE PACIFIC CONFERENCE OF THE WOMAN'S MISSIONARY COUNCIL OF THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH, SOUTH, APRIL 20, 1928 We recommend the indorsement of the Curtis-Reed education bill, which provides for the establishment of a Federal department of education and for a more adequate support of scientific research in education under the direction of a secretary of education. (Thereupon, at 5 o'clock p. m., the committee adjourned until to-morrow, Friday, April 27, 1928, at 10.30 o'clock a. m.) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, The committee was called to order by the chairman at 10.30 o'clock a. m. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Douglass, I am forced to be absent for a while. I will ask you to take the chair in my absence, if you will, please. (Thereupon Mr. Douglass took the chair.) The ACTING CHAIRMAN. I understand the opponents of the bill are to be heard this morning. Is there anyone here who has charge of the program? The CLERK. Yes; Mr. Peckham has charge of the program for the opponents. Mr. PECKHAM. Mr. Chairman, I want to call first Mr. Bentley W. Warren, of Boston, Mass. STATEMENT OF BENTLEY W. WARREN, FORMER PRESIDENT, SENTINELS OF THE REPUBLIC, BOSTON, MASS. Mr. WARREN. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I appear with some diffidence before a committee which for the last 10 or 12 years, I believe, has been listening to proponents and opponents of this general measure. At the same time, my interest in the question is so great-and when I say "my interest" I mean the interest of the people of my State, Massachusetts-is, I believe, so great that being in Washington I felt it was only fair that as one citizen I should come before your committee and try to say something in behalf of the great silent mass of our people in the United States who rarely, I think, have an opportunity to be heard before congressional committees, except perhaps through selfappointed organizations who say that they represent from one to twenty-five or fifty million, or the whole hundred and ten million. I make no such claim as that. I believe, however, that I do represent the opinion of a great majority of the people, probably, of the country. As your committee knows better than I do, the proposition involved here is no new one. Even President Jefferson suggested the desirability of the Federal Government doing something for education; but there are two rather significant features of his recommendation which was embodied in a message to Congress. One was that it applied only to conducting such phases of higher education as could not, in his judgment, be successfully conducted by the States with their resources at that time, and still less by privately endowed institutions. What he had in mind was the highest and most difficult and intricate scientific research and examinations and investigations. The other significant phase of his recommendation was that, as, of course, it was unconstitutional for the Federal Government to engage in any such activity, he was calling it thus promptly to the attention of the Congress in order that if the recommendation met with their approval they might submit such an amendment to the Constitution as would make possible the execution of his recommendation. Nothing, of course, came of that, as we all know. Following the Civil War, General (afterwards President) Garfield was interested in the same movement, as, of course, has appeared to you. The interesting thing about his activity for it was through his efforts that the office of the Commissioner of Education was established-was that he became apprehensive that he had started something that was going too far; and, without going into the history of his relation to the measure, I was interested-all of which can be found in the recent Life of Garfield, by Professor Smith, the professor of history at Williams College-I was interested in one or two expressions from his speeches and letters. 105682-28-17 In 1871, only three or four years after the office was established, he said: We have at last conquered in the first stage of the fight in favor of national recognition of education. Only a small vote can now be mustered for abolishing the bureau and we shall be able to increase the appropriation a little each year, I think, but a new question confronts us and for its solution all the wisdom of our best educators is needed. The bureau receives the enthusiastic support of nearly all the southern Members, but I suspect that their support is largely based their expectations of heavy appropriations to the South for the support of schools in some form. My memory is not very accurate on dates, but I think that was during the carpet-bag administration in the South. Mr. SEARS. Was that before or after he was President? Mr. WARREN. That was before. Mr. SEARS. Not afterwards of course I do not mean that. Mr. WARREN. No, it was while he was in the House; it was in 1871. Shortly afterwards an effort was made to get a very elaborate extension of the project of the Government in education, and he decided to oppose that bill. He said, in announcing his decision: The genius of our Government, of the spirit of our people, requires that the spirit of voluntary effort shall not be repressed, and especially that centralism shall not be applied to our educational processes. The next year he did support a bill to distribute among the States the proceeds from the sale of certain public lands. Of his speech on that bill, he said-and this is the last statement I remember from him to Dr. Parke Godwin-he said the following: I have felt a deep anxiety in view of the manifest tendency, on the part of many of our public men, in the direction of centralized authority, and nothing, it seems to me, could be more dangerous than the assumption of power on the part of Congress of the control of education in the States. There is no midway ground between an abstract assertion of that right and the assumption of power to dictate textbooks, schoolhouses, teachers, and every minutia of the work of education. The opinions I cited in the speech were of the highest importance. My part of the speech is of little consequence compared with the authorities referred to. I call your particular attention and hope you will pay special attention to this sentence, for what it may be worth as being his view: There is no midway ground between an abstract assertion of that right and the assumption of power to dictate textbooks, school houses, teachers, and every minutia of the work of education. Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Is that criticism directed at this bill? Mr. WARREN. No, sir; that was directed at a bill, as I stated before you came in, in 1872. It was a criticism by Garfield, who was the person who created this office of Commissioner of Education and had it established. Mr. SEARS. No one who has appeared for the bill seems to have gone as far as the views expressed there. Mr. WARREN. No one who has appeared for the bill? Mr. SEARS. Yes. Mr. WARREN. I should not expect they would. Mr. SEARS. No. Mr. WARREN. But it seems to me anybody who has studied our history and our tendencies must be apprehensive of the result. The whole history of our Federal activities-and I am not appearing here only as a critic or opponent of the Federal Government, because we are all parts of it, but the very fact that we love the Union, and believe in it, and believe in our system of government, makes it, to my mind, highly essential that we should prevent destroying it by loading it with activities which it can not possibly maintain and discharge in a proper way. Mr. LEATHERWOOD. I do not want to interrupt you if it bothers you. Mr. WARREN. It does not bother me at all. Mr. LEATHERWOOD. But I would like to make an inquiry as to whether or not you consider that we have any unnecessary Cabinet officers at the present time. Mr. WARREN. I think you have all that are necessary. As for myself, I have always doubted the necessity of the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Labor; but that is a personal opinion. They are established. Mr. LEATHERWOOD. I am glad to have you say that, because I intended to ask you whether you considered that the Department of Agriculture was an unnecessary department. Mr. WARREN. Of course, Alexander Hamilton said that the Federal Government had nothing more to do with agriculture-I have forgotten what his comparison was, but it was something Mr. SEARS. Would you put the Department of Commerce along with the other two? Mr. WARREN. I should not; no. I should not. Mr. LEATHERWOOD. I would like to finish this point first. Mr. WARREN. Certainly. Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Alexander Hamilton has gone on some time ago. As I understand, you are appearing in opposition to this bill. Mr. WARREN. Yes. Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Do you think the Department of Agriculture is unnecessary? Mr. WARREN. Do I think so? Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Yes. Mr. WARREN. Yes; I do. I think the functions of the department were perfectly well performed when it was presided over by a Commissioner of Agriculture. Mr. LEATHERWOOD. And you would make the same criticism against the Department of Labor? Mr. WARREN. I should. I think it has unnecessarily swelled the Cabinet, without contributing any real value to the work of the Cabinet. Mr. Sears: What would you say would be the criterion we should look to in attempting to establish a Cabinet office? Mr. WARREN. As a rough rule of thumb, which I might want to modify if I were in a position of responsibility such as you gentlemen are who have to pass on the question, but as a rough rule of thumb I should say that you ought not to establish a Cabinet department with respect to a field of activity over which the Federal Government has, any, only an advisory jurisdiction. if Mr. SEARS. Would you say that where a matter is of great importance, but the activity was to be confined only to advisory matterswould you say that it then might arrive at the importance of Cabinet dignity? Mr. WARREN. I should not say so. It seems to me that a department with a Cabinet officer at its head ought to occupy a field where it can do something. Those departments are executive departments. They are part of the executive branch of the Government. If you propose to create a department with a Cabinet officer at its head in a field where there is nothing to execute, at least constitutionally, it seems to me that you are going along a road that has no end. Mr. KVALE. Is it not the intention and purpose of those sponsoring this bill that the Cabinet member in charge of this department shall actually do something? Mr. WARREN. I have no doubt it is. Mr. KVALE. And it is not their intention for him to be there merely in an advisory capacity. That is what those of us who are opposed to it very much fear-that he will do more than we want done by the Federal Government, not merely along educational lines but along other lines as well. Mr. WARREN. That is what we fear up in Massachusetts. Mr. ROBSION. I am somewhat amazed that in this twentieth century, with agriculture and its problems looming larger all the time, and labor also, that anyone should now appear and say these two great departments that touch so intimately the vital welfare of the Nation were unnecessary. Mr. WARREN. Unnecessary as executive departments. Mr. ROBSION. I understand; but the most of us think that agriculture and labor are just as intimately connected with national defense and the welfare of this country as the Army and Navy; and I do not think the criticism is well taken that the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Labor are merely advisory. They are quite as executive as any other department of the Government. Mr. WARREN. Well, I speak with due deference. Mr. ROBSION. Just before we get through I would like to ask you if you place your opposition to a department of education on the same ground and the same basis as that to a Department of Agriculture and Department of Labor? Mr. WARREN. No; not at all. I base my opposition to the proposed department of education on the ground that it is unnecessary, that it has no constitutional field to occupy; that if we can judge the future by the past it will increase in expense, in activity, and in more or less-probably more rather than less-interference and attempted control of the States in their conduct of education within their respective territories. Mr. ROBSION. In what way would you have the Federal Government express its activity and interest in the great subject of popular education, education generally? Mr. WARREN. Letting well enough alone I should let them express it as it had been heretofore, through the Commissioner of Education. If he needs to express it with a larger investigation let them increase the appropriation for that work. Mr. ROBSION. But you do not believe even in the Bureau of Education do you? Mr. WARREN. I have no opposition to a Bureau of Education. Mr. ROBSION. I know, but do you believe in it at all? |