I am

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. 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?

Doctor KEITH. Because in New York State you have great wealth, evidences of wealth, yielding income.

Mr. Fenn. But which is the greatest source of income? To be fair, would you not think that the industries within the State constitute the greater source of wealth within the State?

Doctor KEITH. Yes; the larger portion of it comes from within the State.

Mr. ROBsion. That is true as to any State, is it not?
Doctor KEITH. I should think so.

Mr. Robson. New York has the greatest percentage of illiteracy, you say. You mean of the foreign-born element?

Doctor KEITH. Yes.

Mr. Black. New York has a fairly efficient system of public education ?

Doctor KEITH. Yes.
Mr. BLACK. As compared with the rest of the States?
Doctor KEITH. Yes.

Mr. BLACK. You would not want to see that system of education broken down?

Doctor KEITH. No, sir.

Mr. BLACK. There would be a consequent breakdown in the State and the city because we were called upon to make a contribution under this bill to the Federal Treasury.

Doctor KEITH. That is assuming, of course, that the enactment of this bill would demand that there should be an increased rate of taxation to enable New York to pay its share. Now, I do not know if that is a clearly determined matter.

Mr. Rossion. If you look at the larger picture, is it not true of the whole country?

Mr. BLACK. You are anxious to cure, of course, illiteracy, particularly of the foreign born?

Doctor KEITH. Yes.

Mr. BLACK. If we are called upon to make a larger contribution to the Federal Government and as a necessary consequence our resources are depleted to that extent, our own efficiency is broken down.

Doctor Keith. Yes; I understand that; and legislation is pending that will decrease what New York has to pay.

Mr. BLACK. In view of that bill and its possible passage, what chance has a bill like this?

Dcotor Keith. The question of how we are going to get this money is an entirely separate question from the one I was called upon to discuss. I am, however, willing to discuss it with you at any length. The money that the Federal Government raises by taxation goes into a fund known as the general fund. The minute it gets into that fund, no track is kept of it at all as to its sources. It is all our money the minute it gets in there.

Now, it is the business of Congress in its wisdom to decide how money shall be collected to go into this common pocket or treasury of ours. Our position is that out of this common treasury of ours it is right and proper and desirable that the Federal Government shall appropriate some money to stimulate the States along the five lines indicated in this bill.


The question of any particular means of raising revenue for the support of the activities of the Federal Government stands, of course, on its own merits. For instance, the lighthouses all along the Atlantic coast are maintained out of this common treasury of ours. There are people in western Pennsylvania, and all through the middle western part of this country who never saw a lighthouse in their lives, who pay for them, from the day they are born to the day they die.

Mr. Fenn. Do you not think that lighthouses are for the benefit of those people?

Doctor KEITH. Yes; for they are for the common good. But the minute you talk about providing money for the support of education and the removal of illiteracy, someone rises to say that there ought to be some return from that. Why should there be?

Mr. BLACK. The State of New York is doing pretty well by itself. Why should it go further?

Mr. FENN. Yes; it should go further than that.

Mr. BLACK. It should do more if it does not require the depletion of its own funds in the process. What would be actually gained by the breaking down of New York's system for the scattered benefit of the rest of the country? What would the country gain by that?

Doctor KEITH. It would not gain, so far as New York is concerned.

Mr. BLACK. Why would the country gain by breaking down New York?

Doctor KEITH. I do not know.

Mr. REED. Is there any evidence here that it would break down New York?

Doctor KEITH. I do not know of any.

Mr. REED. If the illiterates of New York were educated, as they should be, would it not increase their value to the State, and would it not result in increased products and increased earning power?

Doctor Keith. Yes. "The removal of the ignorance and illiteracy of these people would actually result in increased production.

Mr. BLACK. You regard the education of these illiterates as of paramount importance along the lines laid out in this bill?

Doctor KEITH. Yes; and nothing in this bill should be so interpreted as to mean that it would break down the fundamental public school system.

Mr. BLACK. Will not the diversion of funds to these purposes have the tendency to break down the ordinary public school system of education ?

Doctor KEITH. No; on the contrary, I think it will stimulate it. Mr. BLACK. Why.

Doctor KEITH. I think it will stimulate it because of the drawing of the attention of the people to the value of education at every level and of every kind, it will bring them to a consciousness that what they are investing in public education, after all is bringing them generous returns.

Mr. Robson. You would not favor it if it did not help the public schools

Doctor KEITH. No; certainly not.

Mr. BLACK. Do you think that these other States are in a position to do better, or are they unwilling to do better?

Doctor KEITH. For the most part they are taxing themselves now much more heavily in proportion to their wealth and in proportion

to their income than are these States that are doing so much better. The ability to support education is an economic state. Now, it acts both ways, certainly; and the States have generously put money into education and stand economically well; they put it in 15 or 25 years ago and they stand economically well to-day, but they can not put it in if they do not have it.

Mr. BLACK. Do you not think that you would probably make a better appeal to everybody in the country by suggesting more aid to the good-roads proposition, with their incidental education proposition, by permitting the children to go to central schools, than by this proposition?

Doctor KEITH. I do not think so. I think the good-roads proposition has been pretty well sold to this country, and the States are rising to this in a magnificent way. Pennsylvania last fall authorized $50,000,000 to pay for the building of good roads. I think the goodroads proposition has been sold, and I think that if the Federal Government is justified in appropriating money for the building of good roads, the primary purpose of which is an economic one, it certainly would be justified in getting some good schools on those roads. You know one-half of this total amount of $50,000,000 is set aside, in the judgment of those who have been responsible for the framing of this bill, for the equalization of educational opportunity, to be spent in inducing the States to promote better schools for those poorer communities, for those backward communities.

Mr. Fenn. Do you mean better school buildings?

Doctor KEITH. No, I mean better schools. Let the State take care of its own buildings. The Federal Government should not take any part in that at all, for buildings become property; but half of this entire sum, in the judgment of those who are responsible for this measure, should be spent as an inducement to the several States to build up and better these small, inefficient schools. Why? For the same reason that we ask for Federal participation in this, so far as the States are concerned; that even States themselves, those poorer communities, may be stimulated and brought up nearer to the standard.

Mr. FENN. I am very much interested in Americanization; I am very much interested in the matter, and I am very favorable to it; but I see you have here $7,500,000 for Americanization. It is not the amount that strikes me so, but how did you arrive at that amount? I know that in Massachusetts and my own State we have made every endeavor to get these foreigners into the schools. They are mostly adults. By what means or methods can you, I will not say force, but can you induce those adults who come here, and of whom there are such large numbers in Massachusetts and my own State, to go to school? How are you going to do it; and upon what is that figure, $7,500,000, based? I do not know how much Connecticut has spent in its night and day schools for the education of aliens, I do not know how much Massachusetts has spent, but I would like to know something about what that $7,500,000 is based on, and what you are going to do with it when you get the money. If you can not get these people to go to school-and you can not pass a law to make an adult go to school-you will simply give him an opportunity, and if be embraces the opportunity it would be a good thing; but what are you going to do with that amount of $7,500,000?

« ForrigeFortsett »