each township was set aside for public-school purposes and one township was set aside for the founding of a university.

Mr. FENN. Those were public lands?

Doctor KEITH. Yes, sir.

Mr. FENN. Not State lands?

Doctor KEITH. No, sir.

Mr. FENN. They could have been set aside for the purposes of public works?

Doctor KEITH. Yes; the Federal Government had a right to dispose of those lands. The question is sometimes raised, why did not the Federal Government set aside more land in the States and in those original colonies? The fact is that the Federal Government did not have a foot of land in the State of Pennsylvania or in the State of New York or in the State of Massachusetts. The control of those lands within those States was in the States themselves. and some of those States did set aside land for the encouragement of academies, and so on.

Mr. FENN. Connecticut had land in Ohio?

Doctor KEITH. Yes.

Mr. FENN. And in the western reserve too?

Doctor KEITH. Yes; and it sold that land in the western reserve and made a permanent school fund out of it and began distributing the interest on that school fund to the several districts.

Mr. FENN. Yes; and they do that to-day. It has about $3,000,000

now.

Doctor KEITH. Yes. These new States began to build up school funds with the proceeds of the sale of these lands, and this gave the States funds for the support of common schools, and with it the necessity of distributing the income from these lands to the separate districts and counties of the several States, and that process has been going on; and it has been a complicated one, too.

This policy continued until 1848, after Wisconsin had been admitted, when two townships, lots 18 and 36, were set aside for school purposes in all States that were admitted after that.

Then four townships were set aside in 1889; and then there are grants, and you will find the totals of all those grants in the several States here in this volume.

Very early the Federal Government began to make allotments of salt lands and swamp lands to these States as they were admitted to the Union; and disposal of these salt lands in most cases is left to the States, and in some cases it was specified that they should go for the support of education.

Then the swamp lands were also put in. The normal schools of Wisconsin were founded, one half on the product of the sale of swamp lands in that State. You will find in this book the total of swamp lands allotted to the States, and their disposal. Most of them went for the support of education.

Then another thing was that the Federal Government used the State as its agent for the disposal of its own lands within the borders of the State, and it gave to the State a certain per cent on the sale of these lands and made the condition that the lands when sold should not be taxed for five years. This percentage granted to the several States, as you can readily see, amounted to vast sums of money. In some cases the Federal Government required that a

certain percentage of these percentage funds should be used for educational purposes. Therefore, you have a clear setting aside of a certain sum which otherwise would belong to a State, which should belong to the Federal Government for educational purposes, practically.

Then in 1806 and 1807 the United States was, for once, prosperous and they had a lot of surplus money in the Treasury, and that surplus money was distributed. I call your attention to it, because it was loaned to the States on call, and those loans have never been called from that day to this. That money still remains a call loan; and most of the States used that money coming from the surplus revenue distribution for education. You will find a table in this volume showing how they used their funds in the different States.

Then there was the distributive act of 1841. We had prospered and had more money than we knew what to do with, so, for one year at least, the Federal Government distributed its surplus revenue back to the several States, and some of those States used that money directly for education. The District of Columbia used the little that it got in that way under the direction of Congress, and the pattern set by Congress in that matter was followed by many of the States.

Then there are the forest reserve funds. I need not tell you what those funds are. The proceeds go into the educational fund. Then there are the mineral royalty acts, with which you are dealing more or less down here at the present time. I think, on the whole, it would be a pretty good plan to get education a little bit separated from oil." The next really significant thing after this matter of the Federal grants for the support of public schools all over this new domain, was an agitation on the part of people who believed that education ought to be made more practical and brought to the people more closely. There had been, of course, a State university established in every State on the basis of the Federal Land Grant, but they still thought that education was not quite practical enough, and in the fifties, led by Jonathan Turner, of Illinois, and other people, a bill was introduced in Congress providing for the distribution of each State of public lands or scrip for public lands on the basis of their representation in Congress, and with the idea of building, with the proceeds of the sale of this scrip, colleges of agriculture and mechanic arts. That bill was vetoed by President Buchanan on two grounds, the second of which was that it was unconstitutional.

When Abraham Lincoln became President the bill was promptly passed again, and on July 2, 1862, Abraham Lincoln signed that bill. Pennsylvania got 780,000 acres of land, or scrip for that amount of land, and sold it for 624 cents an acre, and with the proceeds built what is now the State College. They had had formerly a high school there, and on that foundation they elaborated, and the old main building still stands there that was put up with money derived from the sale of this land.

In every other State of the Union the same thing went on, and they now have colleges of agriculture and the mechanic arts dating from the first Morrill Act of 1862.

Now, see what was involved in that. The States were given amounts in proportion to their representation in Congress, so much for each Representative in Congress. New York was fortunate.

Under Ezra Cornell's influence, who was himself a lumberman, those lands were located to great advantage, white pine lands in Wisconsin, and while many of the States realized very little from the sale of their lands, Ezra Cornell so managed this matter that a fund of more than $5,000,000 was created for the Commonwealth of New York, and in gratitude to him for his labors in that connection, the college of agriculture and mechanic arts in the State of New York is known as Cornell University.

Now, it was the bounty of the Federal Government that made that type of education possible.

That still was not practical enough, and there came the Hatch Act of 1887, establishing experimental stations in agriculture in every one of these States, and Congress gave money directly to the States for support of these agricultural experiment stations. That sum now has reached $30,000 for each State for agricultural experiment purposes.

Then came the second Morrill Act of 1890, which gave $25,000 from the Federal Government annually to each college of agriculture and mechanic arts; and then that was modified by the Nelson Act, which increased from $25,000 to $50,000 annually the appropriation for each college of agriculture and mechanic arts; and then the Adams Act of 1906 increased the appropriation for each experiment station' to $30,000 a year.

So that now the Federal Government is giving to each State for the purposes of maintaining a college of agriculture and mechanic arts and for maintaining an agricultural experiment station a minimum of $80,000 a year. Under certain conditions this may be increased, so that the annual appropriation of Congress for this purpose is $2,550,000.

Now, certainly the Federal Government has gone further than the mere giving of public lands in support of education in the States.

Then came the Smith-Hughes law of 1914 for agricultural extension and farmers' institutes, giving more money directly to the States for carrying forward agricultural extension and for conducting farmers' institutes in every one of those States.

Then came the act of 1917, the vocational education act, under which Congress is now spending more than $3,000,000 annually, under the authorization of which it may spend $7,000,000 for this purpose.

Then came the act of 1917 for the vocational rehabilitation of soldiers and sailors, and the act for the rehabilitation of persons injured in industry, giving under these acts money directly to the States for educational purposes. Rehabilitation is a matter of education, you understand. The Federal Government is therefore committed, by the acts that are on the statute books now, to the principle of Federal aid for education. The right of the Federal Government to give money in support and aid of education stands unquestioned by any adverse court decision. You have a long line of it. Some people are bothered by this, because the control can not go with the aid: The control of education is the power that makes it conform or do what people want it to do. Unfortunately in this country—or fortunately, depending entirely upon your point of view-the tenth amendment and the accidents of the birth of this country have placed the supreme power to control and direct education and to administer

it with the several States; and yet, on the other hand, the Constitution guarantees freedom of movement of people from one State to another. There is no protection against the un-Americanized person, except to Americanize him, to afford opportunity for him; and frankly, if he will not avail himself of this opportunity, we can not show him the front door or the back door to get rid of him.

Now, the development that has come about since the days when our country was first established along industrial lines and along lines of communication have constantly more and more made us one and indivisible. We have still State lines, and shall have for many, many generations and centuries to come; and yet there are certain things regarding which more and more State lines count less and less. I am not advocating extreme centralization of authority and power in the Federal Government or anything of that sort. I am simply pointing out the fact that in order to act in the interest of all the people we sometimes have to forget the fact that State lines exist and recognize the unity and solidarity of our people instead of merely the divisions of State lines.

Therefore, if this bill passes, the Federal Government can not dictate absolutely what shall be done in each and every State in regard to these things, but there is no reason to believe that in this matter of education there can be anything but the best of faith between the Federal Government and the States. In all that the Federal Government has thus far done in support of education, not a single case of maluse or misuse of funds has come about.

Mr. BLACK. Would you state that as to the original land grants, and the way in which the States have disposed of them?

Doctor KEITH. They disposed of the original land grants that came to the States as best they could. Sometimes in the States there were people who had axes to grind and who succeeded in grinding them on the matter of public lands that had been given to the State for public education. But that was not any fault at all of the educational administration. It was a thing done under the authority of legislation. The selling of public lands given in support of education has been jobbed, there is no question about that. It is history, and nobody can be proud of it in any way. And yet, on the whole, those land grants, jobbed although some of them were, have accomplished for this Government, in the development of public schools, something that I do not know how else we would have accomplished.

Mr. BLACK. Was there not also a diversion of funds given to the States under the administration of President Jackson?

Doctor KEITH. Yes; some of them did very strange things with them. You will find a table in this book showing what each State did with them. Some of those things could not be defended. For instance, when the surplus was distributed to the States, some of the States took that money and distributed it back to the taxpayers at so much per head. That was a use of the money that could not be defended at all. And yet the Federal Government felt that it was giving this money back to the States, to let the States handle it as they would. Any money appropriated for education is not appropriated in that way at all. The type of grant that we are seeking here is, if you will, the type of grant, so far as safeguards are concerned, that Congress has been making to colleges of agriculture and mechanic arts, and in regard to that there has never been the faintest

question or taint of suspicion. Here, then, you have this history of Federal aid outlined in very brief form. It is a question not of principle, not of the right of the Federal Government to give money for this purpose named in this bill, but a question of expediency; a question of whether or not we can get rid of illiteracy without Federal aid; whether or not this foreign-born population can have proper opportunity for Americanization without the stimulus of Federal aid; whether or not the States can be induced to equalize educational opportunities within their borders without the stimulus of Federal aid; whether or not the States can be urged to the point of themselves providing an adequate number of properly educated teachers without the stimulus of Federal aid; whether or not without the stimulus of Federal aid a proper program of physical and health education can be established in the States. Is the result that will be attained through Federal participation in these things worth what it will cost, in wellbeing to this country of ours? In times of stress and strain we realize more than we do in times of peace and plenty the fundamental dependence of all of us upon each of us.

Mr. BLACK. Are not the States that are in better position to support education the States that are more afflicted by foreign-born residents? Doctor KEITH. Yes.

Mr. BLACK. And the States that are less able to bear the burden of education are the States that are afflicted with native-born illiteracy?

Doctor KEITH. Yes; and yet on that same question, you will remember that during the war 250,000 illiterate blacks came from the South into Pennsylvania, and Pennsylvania has had to cope with that problem. No State is safe so long as they are here, because they can go wherever they will. The Federal Government has some responsibility there, I take it, clearly.

I am not attempting to present in detail any of these special phases or special cases. My business was to set up here this matter of Federal aid in rather bold relief so that you might not have all those questionings in your minds as to whether or not the Federal Government had ever done anything of the kind.

Mr. BLACK. Would you not say that the State of New York if left alone was better able to cope with the troublesome features you are explaining here than if it was called upon to make a greater contribution to the United States for the sake of the rest of the country? Doctor KEITH. No; I would not. I think New York has a responsibility other than to her own citizens, because New York is still a part of the United States; and while she has this wealth, not only that wealth was wrought out within the State of New York, but many people have their income in the State of New York practically entirely derived from industries and enterprises conducted entirely outside of the State of New York.

Mr. ROBSION. Much of the wealth of New York is drawn from the whole United States.

Mr. FENN. Is not New York a great industrial State?

Doctor KEITH. Oh, yes.

Mr. BACON. Is it not the largest industrial State?

Doctor KEITH. Yes.

Mr. FENN. Why does not the greater portion of her wealth come from within her own borders?