« AnteriorContinuar »
spoken in behalf of the Curtis-Reed bill. Mr. Cadwalader mentioned particularly. Harvard, Columbia, and the University of Chicago as being especially against a department of education. I wonder if he knows that Dr. Charles H. Judd, director of the school of education at the University of Chicago, was here and spoke for an hour and a half in behalf of the bill. Dr. George D. Strayer, professor of educational administration at teachers college, Columbia University, was unable to attend, but his statement was read. Dr. Henry W. Holmes, dean of the graduate school of education at Harvard University, likewise was unable to attend, but filed a statement in strong support of the bill. Arguments for a department of education were presented here by Dr. S. P. Capen, chancellor of the University of Buffalo; by Dr. C. R. Mann, director of the American Council on Education; by Dr. John H. MacCracken, chairman of the committee on Federal legislation of the American Council on Education and formerly president of Lafayette University; and by Dr. Cloyd H. Marvin, president of George Washington University.
All these men represent privately endowed institutions, yet they, along with many other educators throughout the country in both private and public schools, are strong supporters of the Curtis-Reed bill.
I have here a telegram of W. Carson Ryan, of Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, Pa., which reads as follows:
SWARTHMORE, Pa., April 24, 1928. Mrs. F. P. BAGLEY, Care Department of Education Committee, National Educational Association,
1201 Sixteenth Street, Washington, D. C.: Regret exceedingly can not be in Washington this week to speak on education bill. Please record me as believing more strongly than ever in this measuure. My survey experience of past months has convinced me of the great need for a Federal department of education with Cabinet rank as necessity for educational leadership in America. I regard opposition as largely due to misunderstandings of the bill and lack of knowledge of historical developments of education in United States. Sincerest wishes for success in your effort.
W. CARSON RYAN,
Swarthmore College. I gave to the National Education Association committee other telegrams which have come to me. One I have here is from Jennie Loitman Barron, who is a member of the Boston school committee. She made a very powerful address which I think has been placed in the hands of your committee. (The telegram referred to is as follows:)
Boston, Mass., April 27, 1928. Mrs. GRACE BAGLEY, Care National Education Association,
1201 Sixteenth Street, Washington, D.C.: Heartiest congratulations upon your election. Regret important criminal case prevented me from going to Washington. Best wishes.
JENNIE LOITMAN BARRON. The CHAIRMAN. Proceed.
Mrs. BAGLEY. I shall be very glad, if you care to know, to give you the members of my organization. "I will file that with the committee and will be glad to have you look them over.
(Following is the list referred to:)
The national committee for a department of education when organized included the following persons. Two or three of these people have since died:
Alice Archibald, New York, N. Y.
Walter S. Athearn, director, school of religious education, Boston University, Boston, Mass.
Mrs. Frederick P. Bagley, Boston, Mass.
Geo. W. Coleman, president Babson Institute; president Open Forum National Council, Wellesley, Mass.
Edwin T. Coman, State senator, Washington.
Miss Helen Hart, secretary, Delaware Americanization Committee, Wilmington, Del.
L. 0. Hartman, editor Zion's Herald, Boston.
Layton S. Hawkins, director, department of education, United Typothetae o 1 America, Chicago.
Mary Garrett Hay, president, Women's City Club, New York City.
Mrs. W. S. Jennings, vice president, General Federation of Women's Clubs, Jacksonville, Fla.
R. E. Kennington, president, Kennington Co., Jackson, Mo.
George Platt Knox, superintendent of education, International Sunday School Association, Chicago.
Esther Everett Lape, chairman American citizenship committee, New York State League of Women Voters.
Lucy Lewis, chairman American citizenship committee, Philadelphia League of Women Voters.
Sam A. Lewisohn, banker, New York City. McIlyar H. Lichliter, clergyman, Columbus, Ohio. Mrs. N. H. Lieber, Winnetka, Ill. Mrs. Arthur L. Livermore, honorary president, Women's National Republican Club, New York City.
Robert Newton Lynch, vice president and manager, San Francisco Chamber of Commerce.
Emily C. McDougald, Atlanta, Ga.
Mrs. Angus McMahon, chairman American citizenship committee, Toledo League of Women Voters.
V. Everett Macy, banker, New York.
Hugh S. Magill, general secretary International Sunday School Council of Religious Education, Chicago, Ill.
Carl D. Milliken, former Governor of Maine, Augusta.
Mrs. Percy Pennybacker, president, Chautauqua Clubs, Women's Club, Austin, Tex.
Mrs. Gifford Pinchot, Milford, Pa. John Poole, president, Federal National Bank, Washington, D. C. Mrs. Isaac K. E. Praeger, director, National Council of Jewish Women, Boston. William C. Redfield, Banker, former secretary of commerce, New York City. Nina Maud Richardson, Los Angeles, Calif. Lee M. Russell, Governor of Mississippi. W. Carson Ryan, jr., head of department of education, Swarthmore College. Mrs. John D. Sherman, president, General Federation of Women's Clubs. Frank W. Simmons, field secretary, Chamber of Commerce of United States, New York office.
Hoke Smith, lawyer, former Senator for Georgia.
Paul Moore Strayer, clergyman, Rochester, N. Y.
Mrs. Elizabeth Tilton, chairman, legislative committee, National Congress of Parents and Teachers, Cambridge, Mass.
Frank Vanderlip, banker, New York City. Mrs. William Wadhams, New York City. Perry Winslow Weidner, banker, Los Angeles, Calif. Sidney Weston, editor, Congregational Publishing Society, Boston. Mrs. Edward Franklin White, vice president, General Federation of Women's Clubs.
Mrs. Alice Bradford Wiles, honorary president, National United States Daughters of 1812, Chicago.
Charl Ormond Williams, field secretary, National Education Association,
Mrs. F. N. Williams, Hartford, Mich.
Mrs. BAGLEY. In coming before you I am taking a rather unusual course and have taken a great deal of pains to consult not only those who are supporting this bill, but those who are against it. I might have advised with the representatives of the 31 great national organizations who are indorsing it, but I did not do so. I could have been schooled by that great body of educational experts, the National Education Association, the largest organization of edacators in the world, or I might have appealed to the long list of eminent individuals who believe we should have a department of education, but I did not do that. I did not come to you, even by consulting such an unquestioned authority on Federal affairs as Calvin Coolidge, the President of the United States, although in his last message to Congress, he said:
While the subject of education is strictly a State and local function, it should continue to have the encouragement of the National Government. I am still of the opinion that much good can be accomplished through the establishment
of a department of education and relief, into which would be gathered all of these functions under one directing member of the Cabinet.
I have not even fortified myself by learning the point of view of the platform makers of the party to which I am pledged, which included in the national platform adopted in Cleveland, June 11, 1924, a plank approving the suggestion for the creation of a Cabinet post on education and relief. The Republican Party stands for that now, according to its platform.
Instead of these, I have met in friendly conference those who are opposing this bill, selecting those who were most outspoken in their opposition and inviting their frank criticism. Invariably the first objection I met was the fear of the trend toward bureaucracy.
These objectors did not know that one of the strongest arguments for the education bill is that it will do away with bureaucracy. I told them and may I impress upon you that education is functioning
I now in more than 30 places in the Federal Government with a duplication and overlapping of effort which is not only inefficient but inordinately extravagant. For example, at the present time educational work costing several millions of dollars a year is scattered among a number of Federal departments. Below are listed the educational activities of the Federal Government with the yearly cost of each, as shown by the 1926 digest of appropriations. These would be immediately coordinated and placed in the new department under the terms of the bill: District of Columbia-
$222, 800 Educational work in Alaska..
489, 593 Federal Board for Vocational Education...
8, 227,000 Colleges of_agriculture and mechanical arts.
2, 550, 000 Columbia Institute for the Deaf..
113, 000 Howard University--
591, 000 Total.---
12, 193, 393 Surely the coordination of educational functions scattered among the various Federal departments amounting to $12,193,393 would be a step away from bureaucracy, and, of course, this is not nearly all that would be included.
When once the American taxpayer knows the true situation he will be in no mood to pay for useless
expenditures which will be eliminated when all of these allied activities are gathered into the proposed new department.
The second objection I met was that education is a State and not a Federal function. Everybody knows that and nobody wants it to be anything else. We do not want Federal control. Nobody wants Federal control.
My work for the past seven years has been that of director of the political department of one of the largest and most important political organization in this country.
My own reason for believing that education is not only a State affair but also is a part of our Federal responsibility is that, although I live in Massachusetts, the men and women in Congress who determine our national policies on war, on money questions, on immigration, and on all these issues which reach into the vital places of our lives do not come only from Massachusetts but from all the States of the Union. Education is needed to vote intelligently on this question.
Mr. FLETCHER. What is the name of the political organization to which you refer?
Mrs. BAGLEY. The Women's Republican Club of Massachusetts. We have 5,000 members and we have recently carried on a school of political education in which we had 500 enrolled members attending three sessions a day.
Mr. FLETCHER. Have they voted on this subject?
Mrs. BAGLEY. No, they have not. It has not been presen nted to them. It is purely a Republican affair. It has not been presented to them.
This is what makes education the business of the Federal as well as the State Government. Education is an elemental need because we of the United States have a universal franchise and ignorant people have no business with the vote-even the educated, hundreds of thousands, have their ballots thrown out because they do not understand how to mark them. Even in cultured Massachusetts we have to keep some one at the telephone all the time to answer questions. We need education and enlightenment, because we are a representative people.
The late Mr. Louis Coolidge told me the following story: He was in a certain State at election time and he was shown a ballot to be used by the white population. The colored population were not permitted to vote in that section. The ballots were made out by the use of symbols opposite the man's name. That is, John Smith would have an anvil opposite his name, indicating that John Smith, being a blacksmith, his symbol was an anvil; Thomas Jones, would have a saw opposite his name, Thomas Jones being a carpenter, etc. This was because there were so many poeple who could not read the name John Smith or Thomas Jones; yet they were going to vote. One must come to America to see illiterates casting their ballots at elections.
Mr. FLETCHER. What State was this in? Mrs. BagLEY. It was not in Massachusetts. It was Georgia. Men could not read the name John Smith or Thomas Jones, yet they were going to vote. Is it not true that legislation is influenced in Washington by the people back home? How can we have good government unless we have people who can read the newspapers?
Mr. FLETCHER. How many Congressmen have had demands from the people back home in favor of this legislation?
Mrs. BAGLEY. I have no idea. I think there have been many, although I am not in a position to know. I would like to have you gentlemen just bring this out into the open and bring it up in Congress and see what would happen. We are perfectly willing any minute to have that done and you will find that you will get a response from millions all over this country. I know it.
Mr. FLETCHER. How do you know it?
Mrs. BAGLEY. Because I am in touch with these great organizations that are for this bill and year after year are going on record in favor of it.
Mr. FLETCHER. What real demand is there for it from your own State outside of these organizations in favor of it?
Mrs. BAGLEY. As far as the people of my own State are concerned I think the demand is very strong, but perhaps small, because I