Now, it covers a broad, comprehensive series of lectures and instructions for all types of people interested in labor management activities and union responsibility, and so forth.

Now, there is an institution that has been in this field all of these years, and has been doing this work.

I have observed, as a resident of the State of Wisconsin, some of the effectiveness of some of that work, but I quite disagree with you with what you say about those representing labor in collective bargaining, as I have observed it, and as I have sat in these conferences a number of times. I do not believe that the fellows sitting on the side of labor are quite as illiterate, or quite as irresponsible, or quite as unlearned as you have pictured them. My observation is that they are pretty well advised, and they are pretty smart, and that they have pretty good advice, and if you have a situation involving a small union group where they do not have in their local leadership of the type that they ought to have, the parent union sends in men who are well qualified to discuss the position of labor.

I am for the program in its broad aspects as you indicate it. I think that is a splendid thing. The question is that this committee is confronted with a little insignificant appropriation of $37,000 to be given to the Bureau of Labor Standards, ostensibly to carry on a Nation-wide program for the purpose of educating union stewards, foremen, and representatives, and one thing or another.

To me it is just a pitiful pittance with which to try to implement a dream, because I cannot see, for the life of me, how that is going to do for this broad program, unless those who are sponsoring it contemplate that next year they will ask for $320,000, and the following year for $3,330,000, and finally we will have a huge Department of Education in Labor Affairs located in the Department of Labor. Now, you realize, do you not, that that is how these bureaus grow. You plant a seed, and you come in here and it is just a little item, it does not amount to anything, 37,000, but once it gets started, away it goes, and the first thing we know we have an outfit that is competing with the Office of Education. Why is not that a function of the Office of Education?

Mr. WEYLER. Because the Office of Education has neglected this branch of education. After all education is the light that leads the progress of the human family, and we cannot get away from that. Mr. KEEFE. As a broad general statement, that is true, I think. Mr. WEYLER. As I said before, down in Kentucky you can go to our universities and colleges and you can learn now to be a doctor, a preacher, an engineer or a scientist, or what not, but we have no schools that teach us how to be a steward, a labor agent, or a labor leader.

Mr. KEEFE. Why not?

Mr. WEYLER. Because we have not sufficiently progressed as has Wisconsin. After all, the State of Wisconsin had a social security act before our Nation woke up to the fact that that was justice, and Wisconsin has pioneered in a good many fields.

Mr. NEELY. Is not that largely the result of the pioneering work done by the elder LaFollette in behalf of liberal government? Mr. WEYLER. I would think so.

Mr. KEEFE. He had to have a lot of help, you know, Senator.

Mr. NEELY. Yes, I understand he had the help of the distinguished gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Keefe.

Mr. KEEFE. I happen to be one of those who follow his philosophy, but today I am designated as a black reactionary. I still adhere to those principles.

Mr. WEYLER. You say this may be a dream, but after all, if you do not have dreams you do not have world leaders.

Mr. KEEFE. I am a dreamer and I do not object to dreams, but I like to see the dreams come true. I think you have made a splendid statement. You have made the best statement of anybody who has appeared here. You have given better reasons than aybody who has appeared. The rest of it has been off in the realm of the clouds, but I would like to pin this down to just what you expect the Bureau of Labor Standards to do with this $37,000 that is being put in there that you say they are not doing now. What can they do?"

Mr. WEYLER. They can get out more of these pamphlets.
Mr. KEEFE. You say they can get out more pamphlets?

Mr. WEYLER. Yes, sir. For instance, every local union of the A. F. of L. or CIO ought to be on the mailing list of the Department of Labor, and every one of them ought to get one of these new pamphlets as they come out. I will agree that some of them would not read them, but the great majority of them would. This Department should have more people that can go right out to the cities and the crossroads and teach these new people how to do the job they are supposed to do.

Mr. KEEFE. Would you expect them to go into Kentucky, for instance, and act as sort of salesmen to try to organize in the State of Kentucky a workers' school or institutes such as we have in Wisconsin?

Mr. WEYLER. I am proud to say that it was the Office of the Department of Labor that gave us the intelligence to set up our program in Kentucky. We are pioneering a program too. Our Kentucky State Federation of Labor is the only federation in the country that has such a program.

Mr. KEEFE. Is it your idea that the Federal Department of Labor can give leadership and guidance to this thing nationally?

Mr. WEYLER. Certainly.

Mr. KEEFE. And encourage the State organizations of labor to cooperate and bring these institutes to fruition in the various States?

Mr. WEYLER. Yes; it already has in Kentucky. That is where we got the know-how to do it in Kentucky.

Mr. HARE. I might say to the committee that our time is limited to 30 minutes, and the members have insisted that I always call time. You have made a very fine statement. I think it would be a very valuable contribution to the testimony, and I appreciate your statement.

Mr. WEYLER. I would like to make this plea, though, please give this Department more than $37,000. They ought to at least have $100,000 in this appropriation.

Mr. KEEFE. They have not asked for it.

Mr. WEYLER. After all, you know a department is going to ask for what they are sure they can get, not particularly what they think they are entitled to, but what they think they can get. After all, I think you can see that $37,000 is not a suflicient amount for this purpose.

Mr. NEELY. On the basis of $37,000, if it were equally divided, each State would have just a little less than $771.

Mr. WEYLER. Yes; very little.

Mr. NEELY. Is there any other State in the Union, to your knowledge, that has a school of instruction such as that which you and Judge Keefe have been discussing?

Mr. WEYLER. In Detroit they have a wonderful program there, and Antioch, I understand is doing a nice program, and I know that some of the colleges like Yale, and others, and I think Harvard, are considering programs, but we have got to have more inspiration for this thing, you know.

Thank you, gentlemen, and I am so sorry that I have taken more than the time due me, but I am so hopped up on this thing, because I realize that education will do it where law will not.

Mr. HARE. Thank you, Mr. Weyler.