a seminary of learning. This land was set apart in portions of the land now known as the Louisiana purchase.

I quote the following from a work by John Cleaves Henderson entitled Thomas Jefferson's Views on Education: "During the time Jefferson was President of the United States Monsieur Dupont visited America. At Jefferson's request Dupont wrote and published a plan of national education for the United States. In the preface of his work he states that he had prepared and published the work at the instance of, or to use his polite French expression, 'at the command of Thomas Jefferson.' Dupont dwells interestingly upon the wish that the President of the United States add to his Cabinet a secretary of education."

I quote from the second annual message of Madison: "Whilst it is admitted that a well-instructed people alone can be permanently a free people and while it is evident that the means of diffusing and improving useful knowledge from so small a proportion of the expenditures for national purposes, I can not presume it to be unseasonable to invite your attention to the advantages of superadding to the means of education provided by the several States, a seminary of learning instituted by the National Legislature within the limits of their exclusive jurisdiction, the expense of which might be defrayed or reimbursed out of the vacant grounds which have accrued to the Nation within those limits.'

Madison again voiced the same sentiment in his seventh annual message to Congress.

Monroe in his first inaugural address said: "Such, then, being the highly favored condition of our country, it is the interest of every citizen to maintain it. What are the dangers which menace us? If any exist they ought to be ascertained and guarded against.

"In explaining my sentiments on this subject it may be asked, What raised us to the present happy state? How did we accomplish the Revolution? How remedy the defects of the first instrument of our Union, by infusing into the National Government sufficient power for national purposes, without impairing the just rights of the States or affecting those of individuals? How sustain and pass with glory through the late war? The Government has been in the hands of the people. To the people, therefore, and to the faithful and able depositaries of their trust is the credit due. Had the people of the United States been educated in different principles, had they been less intelligent, less independent, or less virtuous, can it be believed that we should have maintained the same steady and consistent career or been blessed with the same success? While, then, the constituent body retains its present sound and healthful state everything will be safe. They will choose competent and faithful representatives for every department. It is only when the people become ignorant and corrupt, when they degenerate into a populace, that they are incapable of exercising the Sovereignty. Usurpation is then an easy attainment, and an usurper soon found. The people themselves become the willing instruments of their own debasement and ruin. Let us, then, look to the great cause and endeavor to preserve it in full force. Let us by all-wise and constitutional measures promote intelligence among the people as the best means of preserving our liberties." Having presented the views of the first five Presidents as to the position which the Federal Government should take in the promotion of education or in the words of Madison "superadding to the means of education provided by the several States," I will close my reply to the allegation that the Curtis-Reed bill is unconstitutional with the following observations:

Washington was a delegate to the Continental Congress. He was also President of the Constitutional Convention and took an occasion to remind the House of Representatives on March 30, 1796, in no uncertain terms that "having been a member of the general convention he knew the principles on which the Constitution was framed."

Adams was a lawyer, a member of the Massachusetts Legislature, a member of the Continental Congress, and adviser of the Declaration of Independence, a member of the convention that framed the constitution of Massachusetts, Vice President of the United States for two terms, and President for one term. It may be fairly presumed, therefore, that he too "knew the principles upon which the Constitution was framed."

Jefferson was a lawyer, a member of the House of Burgesses of Virginia, a delegate to the Continental Congress, drafter of the Declaration of Independence, a member of the Virginia Legislature, governor of Virginia, first secretary of State under the Constitution, Vice President for four years and President for eight years. May it not be presumed that he also "knew the principles upon which the Constitution was framed?"

Madison was a graduate of Princeton, a lawyer by profession, a member of the general assembly of Virginia, a member of the executive council of that state, a Delegate to the Continental Congress for four years, a delegate to the Constitutional Convention, a member of the convention of his State which met to ratify the Federal Constitution, a member of the House of Representatives in the first Congress and throughout both of Washington's terms as President, a member of Jefferson's Cabinet as Secretary of State and for eight years President of the United States. We may safely presume that he, too, "knew the principles upon which the Constitution was framed."

Monroe studied law under the direction of Jefferson, then Governor of Virginia. He was a member of the Virginia Assembly, a member of the executive council, a delegate to the Continental Congress from 1783 to 1786, a member of the State Legislature of Virginia, a delegate to the convention to consider the Federal Constitution, Senator from Virginia for four years, Secretary of State, and for a time Secretary of War under Madison, and President of the United States for two terms. I am sure that we are perfectly safe in assuming that he too “knew the principles upon which the Constitution was framed."

Madison was the leading member of the Constitutional Convention and one of the most prolific and lucid writers on our Constitution, his papers appearing along with those of Jay and Hamilton in the Federalist. Jefferson bore the distinction of being the foremost anti-Federalist and the staunch advocate of State rights, that sound fundamental democratic doctrine. Here we find two outstanding leaders of both schools of political philosophy of the time, the Federalist and the anti-Federalist, in agreement as to the duty of the Federal Government to encourage education, or quoting Madison, "superadding to the means of education provided by the several States."

Beginning with Jefferson's administration millions of acres of land have been granted out of the public domain for educational purposes. More than a billion dollars have been appropriated by the National Government directly to educa tional purposes, nearly two-thirds of which was for the rehabilitation of the World War veterans. Federal expenditures and appropriations for educational work in 1926 were administered by the following Federal agencies: United States Veterans' Bureau, for vocational rehabilitation; Federal Board for Vocational Education; Department of Agriculture, for experiment stations, Arizona and New Mexico school funds and cooperative extension work; Department of the Interior, for the Bureau of Education, education of the natives of Alaska, colleges of agriculture and mechanic arts, public schools (Alaska fund), support of Indian schools, Columbia Institution for the Deaf, Howard University, and the civilization of the Sioux Indians; Department of Justice, for National Training School for Boys, National Training School for Girls, and Federal Industrial Institute for Women; Department of Labor, for the Childrens' Bureau, Library of Congress, Botanic Garden, and the Smithsonian Institution.

We do not take into account here the educational activities of the War and Navy Departments for the reason that these come within the enumerated grants to Congress to provide for the common defense, to raise money for the support of the Army and the Navy, etc. The constitutionality of the civic activities of the Federal Government in education have been favorably passed upon by distinguished constitutional lawyers in Congress and such noted constitutional lawyers as Lincoln, Benjamin Harrison, Cleveland, McKinley, and Woodrow Wilson, all of whom, as President, signed bills of appropriations to maintain this activity. Both Mr. Harding and Mr. Coolidge have gone farther and have respectively recommended the creation of a department of education and welfare and a department of education and relief.

Another objection frequently voiced against the Curtis-Reed bill is: "The creation of a department of education will bring the school-teachers into politics 'up to their ears.'" An examination of this statement will reveal that it has no foundation in the experiences of the several bureaus which are carrying on educational work or out in the States where the school-teachers, as citizens, take a part in the various political matters, many of them being elected to office in their profession as county superintendents and State superintendents.

Many of the city officials, county officials, State officials, have come from the ranks of the school-teaching profession. Adams, the second President of the United States, and a number of other Presidents, started their careers as teachers. Many of the candidates for other offices were school-teachers, and this fact, fortunately, will always exist. The candidacy for such places has not brought school-teachers into politics "up to their ears in support of candidates of their profession for any public office or any group action unless it be for a department

of education. The latter of course is proper for they are in a position to know what the schools of the Nation need. It is even more groundless to assume that the appointment (not election) of a secretary of education to the President's Cabinet will bring the teachers into politics or corrupt the school-teaching profession in this country, when at most there will be hardly more than 25 secretaries appointed in a century on the basis of 4-year elective terms of the President. Of course, it is a well-known fact that nearly all of the Federal employees are under the classified service, which would be true of the department of education, and are not permitted to participate in politics.

Another of the stereotyped objections found in the studied propaganda above referred to is: "We want no more bureaucracy in government.' It will be noted that this is one of the more lucid assaults on the Curtis-Reed bill. Just what is this vague, nondescript hobgoblin called "bureaucracy?" I say "hobgoblin" because of the apparent motive of the propagandist to frighten and not enlighten. I say 66 vague and nondescript" because the propagandist does not attempt to define its meaning.

(a) Does he mean that we already have an excessive multiplication of bureaus? If so, why does he begin reducing the excess with education, the foundation of every civilization? What profound reason in this respect has he for opposing the opinion and action of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, the great leaders in Congress, and the Presidents since Lincoln?

(b) Does our propagandist mean that there is concentration of power under the United States bureaus? If so he is probably right for two reasons: First, because bureaus, used here as a generic term, are the only means thus far evolved to administer organized government. The reverse of organized government is anarchy, and desiring to be fair to this propagandist I do not want to think of him as an anarchist, however destructive and misguiding such assertions are when not temperately defined. Second, the Federal Government has certain enumerated and certain implied powers. Of course, these powers are concentrated as they should

be within the National Government because they are functions of the National Government just as the powers reserved by the States are concentrated within their respective governments. But what application has this possible meaning of our propagandist to the Curtis-Reed bill? Certainly none at all, for there is no attempt in any of the Federal education legislation to usurp the rights of the States to control and administer education. It is known to every sound reasoner on the constitutional powers of the Federal Government and those reserved to the States, that Federal control can be obtained only by an amendment to the Constitution. The most enthusiastic advocate of a department of education would not involve the National Government in any such controversy.

(c) Does the propagandist who "wants no more bueaucracy in government" mean by this term that our Federal Government is extending its powers too much in the direction of official interference with private property? If so, what has this to do with the passage of the Curtis-Reed bill? Certainly none, for there is nothing in it which interferes in the slightest degree with private schools. Is it not well known that education has been a public function generally in this country for over 100 years and in some localities for nearly 200 years?

(d) Lastly, does our propagandist mean by this omnious, sententious expression of finality, that the heads of the bureaus of our Federal Government have become corrupt, officious and arrogant, and that, therefore, the heads of a department of education would become so? If this is what he means by "bureaucracy,' I can not agree with him, the Teapot Dome situation to the contrary. "One swallow maketh not summer.' (John Heywood.) The great souls who founded our Government were scholars. They knew that no institution created by man, whether it be a religious hierarchy with a pretended vicar of God on its throne, or an absolutism by a pretention of divine right, or even a representative government founded on the consent of the governed, was free from the taint of venality and corruption. The crux of the matter which I quoted from the pens of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe was a warning against just this thing. Their preventative against and their remedy for such social ills was based on education to the end that the conscience and understanding of our citizens might be kept above sordid, avaricious, and corrupt tendencies and thus maintain a clean, wholesome body politic.

In concluding my statement may I not add that if we love the vision of the fathers of our country, their broad, enlightened and magnanimous policy, their desire to protect the unborn millions which were to follow them, from such national enemies as the spirit of theocracy, the spirit of abolutism, "the spirit sophistry, the spirit of intrigue, the spirit of profligacy" and the spirit of corruption, officiousness and arrogance, which may creep into the administrative

bureaus of our governments, whether they be municipal, State, or Federal, let us establish as a monument to their glory and practical ideals of government, a Department of Education with a secretary in the President's Cabinet.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee for the opportunity which has been afforded me to present this statement to you.

Doctor DAVIDSON. I would now like to introduce Mrs. Arthur C. Watkins, Executive Secretary of the National Congress of Parents and Teachers.

STATEMENT OF MRS. ARTHURIC. WATKINS, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, NATIONAL CONGRESS OF PARENTS AND TEACHERS, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Mrs. WATKINS. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, may I read first a statement from our National President, Mrs. A. H. Reeve, of Ambler, Pa., and then one from one national legislative chairman, Mrs. William Tilton?

STATEMENT OF MRS. A. H. REEVE, PRESIDENT NATIONAL CONGRESS OF PARENTS AND TEACHERS, AMBLER, PA.

The National Congress of Parents and Teachers, an organization of more than 1,250,000 men and women in every State in the Union, has as two of its major objectives "to bring into closer relation the home and the school, that parents and teachers may cooperate intelligently in the training of the child; and to develop between educators and the general public such united efforts as will secure to every child the highest advantages in physical, mental, moral, and spiritual education."

After more than 30 years of careful study and observation, this organization is convinced that it is impossible to place education too high in the public regard, and that the failure of the people as a whole to appreciate adequately the great opportunities offered by our free public schools, as well as those offered by the private educational systems, is partly if not entirely due to the fact that our Government itself does not appear to value them fully or to give them sufficient recognition.

While labor, commerce, and agriculture, have representation directly in the President's Cabinet and an honored position in the official world, the great force of education, to which these other national activities must look for intelligent support, is but one of eight issues in a department concerned also with territorial administration, the conservation of our national resources, the development of our public parks and other matters which, while essential to public welfare, are certainly unrelated to the schools and to the children of the Nation.

Believing that the United States should stand second to no other nation in its care for and development of its future citizens, we urge that the recognition given by other nations to education be given also by this country, and that the CurtisReed bill which provides for the creation of a department of education with a secretary in the President's Cabinet be favorably reported and passed with the least possible delay.

This bill has been considered by our State branches for several years, and this action is requested, not by a small executive group speaking for a vast organization, but by the members in each State in convention assembled, as well as by State delegates in our national convention, as one which will serve to coordinate the educational activities already existing in the Federal Government, to make available to State and local officials the findings on much needed, extended educational research, and to give to education the official recognition demanded by a fundamental activity of Federal and State administration.

The bill before you for consideration is so carefully drawn that it leaves the control of education entirely in the States, where it rightfully belongs; does not in any way interfere with the conduct of private or sectarian schools, and offers no Federal aid to the States, thus absolutely avoiding all the objections which in the past have been raised to the creation of such a department.

STATEMENT OF MRS. WILLIAM TILTON, NATIONAL CHAIRMAN OF LEGISLATION, NATIONAL CONGRESS OF PARENTS AND TEACHERS, CAMBRIDGE, MASS.

The National Congress of Parents and Teachers stands, as it always has, solidly for the education bill. It is not necessary to discuss its merits for I take it for granted that this committee knows the merits of this education bill. A Harvard professor has computed that 98 per cent of the work done by Congress relates purely to business. According to this estimate, therefore, 98 per cent of the work done by Congress has behind it the persistent push of men who wish to make money. The education bill lacks this particular push. It gives no jobs to the many hungry applicants out over the country. Therefore, it is in the class of the 2 per cent of the bills that move hard, because they do not carry behind them the pounding urge of business.

However, a good thing does come to its own in time.

This bill is a good thing. I appeal to your sense of fair play to give it a chance to come out of committee and be voted on in the House. I ask you, gentlemen, if you had been in committee as long as this bill has, don't you think it would be only fair play to send you out into the House for a little airing and a little change of scene?

In short, we ask you to let this bill come out of committee and go on the floor of the House. We do not feel that this is asking very much and we expect you to grant our very modest request.

Doctor DAVIDSON. At this point I would like to have appear in the record some statements approving the creation of a department of education, with a secretary in the President's Cabinet, from a number of State Superintendents or State Commissioners of Education in the United States, and also similar statements from some of the leading educators of the country:

STATEMENT OF R. E. TIDWELL, STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, ALABAMA

I favor the bill providing for a department of education with a secretary in the President's Cabinet. Briefly stated, my reasons for favoring this measure are as follows:

1. There is great and pressing need of a central agency of research, information, and cooperation to serve as an educational clearing house for the several States and Territories in gathering and disseminating valuable information. Such an agency would prevent or materially minimize unnecessary and costly duplication in educational administration throughout the country.

2. The numerous educational activities of the various departments, boards, and bureaus at Washington should be placed under one responsible directing head whose authority, rank, and prestige are on a par with those of the heads of the other departments. In no other way can those activities of the several executive branches of the Government be effectively coordinated and administered.

3. The bill provides specifically that the proposed department shall so function as not in any way to infringe upon the constitutional rights of the States to control, administer, and supervise their own schools. Hence it is thoroughly American in principle and is in harmony with the historical development of other Federal activities.

STATEMENT OF FRANK W. BALLOU, SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLs, District OF COLUMBIA

The need for adequate national recognition of education was early apparent to those who founded this Republic. In 1795, George Washington said, "The time is therefore come, when a plan of universal education ought to be adopted in the United States." In the same year, Thomas Jefferson wrote, "I do most anxiously wish to see education given to all so that they may read and understand what is going on in the world, and keep their part of it going on right."

In 1866, the National Association of School Superintendents appointed a committee to memorialize Congress on the establishment of a national bureau of education. Legislation for this purpose was sponsored by James A. Garfield and resulted in the establishment of the present Bureau of Education.