In analyzing the international situation and comparing the evolution in Europe with that in the United States, one thing emerges with great distinctness, and that is the different attitude toward Socialism assumed by organized labor in the United States from that which it assumed in Europe. From the beginning of the labor union movement in the United States the attempt was made by Socialist elements to get possession of the new organizations. These attempts, often repeated, were as often thwarted. Union labor in the United States was, therefore, considered by European labor as extremely conservative, even reactionary. A result of this difference of attitude, of the fact that union labor was very little contaminated with Socialism, was that American organized labor, as typified particularly by the American Federation of Labor, outlined for itself a policy of political non-intervention. It declined to form a separate party. It declined to take part in any political campaign directed by socialist forces. It refused the various suggestions made by European associations for a change of this policy. This policy, initiated in 1881, has continued consistently to the present time. It has been one reason for continual attempts on the part of the revolutionary element in labor to obtain influence in the direction of the Federation. The lack of success in this direction has led to various attempts to organize Socialist labor parties of quasi-political character.

These attempts have never enlisted any considerable element of organized labor. They have been overwhelmingly non-labor in their management. One of the results has been that European Socialism has shown favor to the movements in American labor that were distinctly different from or opposed to the Federation. This is particularly true of the I. W. W. movement; and the conflict between the I. W. W. representative and the representative of the Federation at the International Congress at Budapest in 1911, when each fought for recognition as representing the labor of the United States, is typical of the entire situation. At that time the I. W. W., although supported by France, lost the fight.

Another result of this difference of policy and purpose has been to intensify the opposition of the Federation of Labor to every form of revolutionary activity and to show this opposition in connection with the various international congresses that have taken place both before, during and after the war.

It is especially important to compare the different attitudes

of American union labor and of British union labor at the present time, as these two branches of Anglo-Saxon labor have naturally very much in common and interact upon each other more than is the case with any other two groups.

A study of the situation in Great Britain will show us better than any other study of circumstances outside the United States how imminent is the danger in this country and what the situation might be with us if our organized labor took the same view of its relation to Socialism and to the government as British labor is doing.

Seeing the situation as we do, as something transcending not only the State but the nation, and as reaching down to the fundamentals of man's nature and of the organization of society, the Committee feels that it must appeal in the strongest way to every member of the Legislature, to every man who holds any position of authority or of influence, to take every possible step, not only to understand the cardinal facts of the situation but to devote his thoughts and his acts to a crusade in support of every agency, every policy, that will counteract and defeat this movement. Only complete knowledge will give us the leadership that is absolutely necessary, a leadership that will be based on clear conviction and a feeling for the necessity of action: a leadership that will understand that there must be a revival of religious and moral standards as the basis of any political and economic program. The community must be appealed to, must be given the facts, must be made to see the causes and the remedies, must be made to hand itself together as a civic force in every center of the State in action that shall not be the action of individuals, the sporadic, ineffectual duplicating action that will lead us nowhere. If American ideals of individual freedom and initiative are to be maintained, every citizen must be militant in their defense.

But the very fact of organizing for social defense and for social offense against those who are attacking our life is in itself dangerous, because unless we are keen of insight, these very organizations are going to be, as they have been in the past, taken possession of by astute, hardworking, clearheaded revolutionists, and turned from the purposes of reconstruction to purposes of

contamination.

As much energy and organized thought and action must be put by our leading men into the solution of economic and sociological problems as they have given to the solution of their own business

problems. They must show as much altruistic energy in the defense as the radical leaders have been showing in the attack. The disjointed, unprincipled, unpractical or sentimental altruism which is doing so much harm as practiced in university, in church, in philanthropic and in social circles must be shown up or made to understand the realities and dangers of its efforts, and be led, by this new insight, to shift to the camp of constructive action.

The re-education of the educators and of the educated class must go hand in hand with the reorganization and extension of our educational system. We cannot give the right point of view to our foreign population and to our children unless it is clearly and firmly ingrained in all of us. Knowledge and convictions based on knowledge must be gained by the whole nation. This report aims to give this knowledge as far as it was humanly possible to do in the spheres it undertook to investigate. This Committee feels that it has only begun the work that the country as a whole must take up and carry on, heart and soul, beginning with the renovation and elevation of our school system, based on a generous and wise understanding of its financial needs. It therefore backed with all its influence the legislation granting increased salaries to public school teachers. Party differences, local claims, appropriations not fundamentally necessary, should be set aside until more than living wage is secured for those on whose teaching the spiritual and material prosperity of this country so largely depends.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EDUCATIONAL LEGISLATION

At the close of the Committee's investigation into various organizations engaged in seditious activities and those calculated to encourage such a movement, and after making just as careful a study of all the activities of constructive agencies seeking to counteract these influences, the Committee was confronted with the problem of making recommendations for legislative action. This was extremely difficult. The scope of the investigation is so broad, the problems presented of such great magnitude and importance, that the Committee has hesitated to make many or extensive recommendations.

I

After a thorough review of the educational facilities offered not only by the State and municipalities and school districts, but also by religious and philanthropic institutions, the Committee felt impelled to make certain very definite suggestions. It must be observed that no matter how imposing are the school buildings, how elaborate the curricula, how sound the text books, the success of the school system depends in the last analysis upon the character and viewpoint of the teachers and instructors who carry out the program, and who influence the pupils with whom they come in contact. It is apparent that these teachers must be acquainted with the forces at play upon public opinion. They must recognize the influences which seek to undermine the confidence and respect which their pupils or students should have for the government and laws of this commonwealth. They should be trained and eager to combat those influences, and, in order that they may do this, it is essential that they themselves shall be in full accord and sympathy with our form of government and the system of society under which we live. There is a further element which has been overlooked in the selection of teachers, and that is character. In the main, the teachers in our public schools and private and philanthropic institutions have been chosen because of their academic and pedagogical attainments. In other fields it has been found necessary to scrutinize the character of persons seeking to enter them, before they are granted special privileges. For instance, admission to the bar is not alone granted for legal knowledge, but the applicant must submit to a rigid and thorough investigation as to his character. If there exists a fiduciary relationship between the attorney and his client, there is even a greater reposing of trust on the part of the public in the teacher.

Having these considerations in mind, the Committee has recommended that a law be placed upon the statute books of this State which shall require the teachers in public schools to secure, before the first of January, 1921, a special certificate certifying that they are persons of good character and that they are loyal to the institutions of the State and Nation.

II

In another portion of this report descriptions are given of various so-called schools of social reform, masquerading under different names and being carried on by various subversive organi

xations. An examination of their curricula shows that the fundamental purpose of these schools is to destroy the respect of the students for the institutions of the United States. Many of them advocate the overthrow of the governments of this State and of the United States by force, violence or unlawful means. In many schools and courses of lectures and classes, class hatred and contempt for government are being preached, and all those fundamentals which make for good citizenship are either ignored or ridiculed. It is the fundamental purpose of these institutions to develop agitators to enter the labor fields, to preach the doctrine of revolt, and to divide the people of the United States into contending classes so that they may be instrumental in hastening the social revolution.

At the present time there are no methods by which the public authorities can protect the people of the State from the injurious effects of such institutions. Fundamentally, it is the duty of the State in the interests of its self-protection, to see that its citizens are trained to respect its laws, to revere its institutions and to accept the duties and responsibilities as well as the privileges of citizenship. It is also the duty of the State, in the opinion of this Committee, to protect its citizens from subversive teaching. Institutions holding themselves out to the public as institutions of learning, which have the ulterior purpose of undermining our social order, entice into their classrooms large numbers of students who are unfamiliar with the purposes of those institutions, unfamiliar with the principles and character of our form of government, who would be unwilling at the beginning to participate in the movement for which such schools are created, but who, after attending the courses of lectures and imbibing the false doctrines which are there enunciated, are made a part of and become active in movements which are detrimental to the interests of the State and of its people.

Years ago the State recognized its duty to protect its citizens from unqualified lawyers and from unskilled practitioners in medicine and dentistry, but it has neglected what this Committee considers the most fundamental of all questions, and that is the protection of its citizens from false and subversive teaching.

To meet this situation the Committee recommends to the Legislature the passage of a law requiring all schools, courses and classes that are not now under the supervision or control of the Department of Education, or are not created and maintained