Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1921-03-16

Mr.. BARwISE of Bangor: Mr..
Speaker, / rise to oppose the motion.
of the gentleman from Perham, Mr.
Bragdon. This bill is purely and
simply an educational bill, and it
seems to me that it is not necessary
at this time for me to go into any ex-
tended analysis of the bill. Let me
say briefly that this bill provides for
a distribution of school money by
the Federal government in somewhat
the same way that we do here in the
State of Maine. That is. we take
from the rich towns and distribute to
the poorer towns. This bill takes
from the ellto-do states and dis
tributes to the poorer states. Under
the provisions of this bill, we in the
State of Maine shall receive about
$4,000 year, one-half of which is
TO be expended in levelling up the ed
ucational opportunities in the rural
districts, in the increasing of the sal
aries of teachers in the rural dis
trlcts so that the best teachers will
not be drained from the rural dis
trlcts into the cities. The object of
this bill is to raise the standard of
education in the different states. We
90 not have to change our policy
mars breadth; in order to come I'M
der the provisions of this bill, we do
not have to raise an extra dollar,
we DO not have to change our educa-
tional machinery in the slightest de-
gree. Another feature of this bill is
that it teaches the illiterates above
the age of IA years, whether for
eign or native born We have in
the State of Maine something like
$4,000 illiterates. In every way this
bill is an educational bill; there is
nothing in it that departs from the
traditional policy of the Federal
government except in the matter of
aiding education in the different
states.
There is no new policy involved
as seems to be intimated by the
gentleman from Perham. The medi-
cal question which he objected to,
and which was in the bill formerly, l
should have objected to, and that
has been cut out by the educational
committee of Congress, and this is
reduced merely to what we already
teach in all our public schools, under
the ordinary courses in physiology,
! matters of public health. The gov
eminent from the earliest times has
assumed the same careful attitude
! toward the states that it assumes in
this bill; there is no new policy of
departure.
When we were functioning under
the articles of Confederation in
1885. the Federal government in the
northwestern territory set apart a
lot of land in each town for public
school in the territories and states to
be hereafter created; in 1925, VIXEN
we were doing the same thing for
the Jefferson and the Louisiana pur-
chase, the same provision was ap-
piled. In 1S4S, when the Oregon
purchase was being surveyed, two
ll'lots of land in each township were
set aside. In 1853, under the first
Morrill, Act we set aside a very large
tract of land for each of the State
colleges, and they We're known as
Land Grant Colleges. Under the
second Morrill, Act in 1890, we set
aside $4,000 a year for each of the
Land Grant Colleges and under the
Lever Act OF 1914 and 1917 we still
extended Federal aid TO the states
This bill is in principle, and /
submit, Mr.. Speaker, that it should
go TO the committee on Education.
Mr.. GARDINER of Gardiner: Mr.
Speaker. I wish to oppose the mo-
! tioH as made proposing n joint
reference of this measure. ! do not
mean to indicate that / think the
Judiciary committee is not aware of
the Importance of this matter, but ]
have examined the provisions of the
Smith Towner bill and l do not find
anything therein that | believe can
not be properly heard and considered
by the committee on education
alone. 1t is becoming late in the
session, and all members Of this
House are familiar WITH the difficult
ties connected with arrangements for
Il joint session Of two committees.
This particular matter has been
upon the table in this branch since
March 9th, and I think it would be
better to have the matter heard and
determined by the committee on Ed
ucation alone.
Mr. BRAGDON: Mr.. Speaker. I
understand the objections that have
been raised by the gentleman from
Gardiner (Mr. Gardiner) to this
reference, and if every member of
the Judiciary Committee had ex-
amined this bill, as the gentleman
from Gardiner appears to have
done, L certainly would have no OBJ
lection to taking their judgment at
the present time. l do not claim to
be able to speak whether this makes
any changes in our educational sys-
tenn or not. but l would feel "a great
deal better about the matter if it
were referred to the upper legal
committee in this House, or in this
Legislature. and l feel that if it were
so referred, the members of this
House would feel easier in allowing
it to go along on its passage. For
myself, l would like to have the
judgment of that committee as to
whether or not this makes any
changes in the management of our
educational system.
The SPEAKER: e. The pending
question is on the motion made by
the gentleman from Perham, Mr.
Bragdon--
Mr.. BUZZELL of Belfast: Mr..
Speaker. it does not seem to me as
if this is a matter that should dis
turb us very much. AS near as I