brought under government control a whole array of material things, such as food, fuel, shelter, transportation! Why should we hesitate to bring order out of chaos with respect to Americanization, which affects the spirit and understanding of the nation?

PROVINCE OF THE BUREAU OF NATURALIZATION

The Bureau of Naturalization seems to claim jurisdiction over the education of the immigrant. The general powers given to this bureau1 apparently justify the claim. However inappropriate it may seem to intrust matters affecting the education of the immigrant to any agency other than an educational one, we may not blame an organization for attempting to exercise a power seemingly imposed upon it by legal enactment. The Bureau of Naturalization proceeds very much like the Bureau of Education. It has dealt particularly with communities, through superintendents of schools. The bureau cooperates with local school officials by sending to the latter the names and addresses of immigrant children coming under the compulsoryeducation laws; it reports the names of declarants and petitioners for citizenship, so that they may be organized into evening classes for training for naturalization; and recently (1918) it has issued educational material (textbooks) offered free for use in such classes. This bureau

1 The Work of the Public Schools with the Bureau of Naturalization (Government Printing Office, 1917).

has been especially insistent with communities that evening schools be organized for the educational needs of immigrants.

1

The Bureau of Naturalization makes excessive claims as to the number of communities co-operating in its educational program. There is good ground for doubt that this bureau is making the educational achievement which it claims. The writer believes that most school administrators are more confused than aided by the sudden entrance of a noneducational agency into the field of educational enterprise. That the bureau should urge the establishment of institutions for the instruction of immigrants seems wholly fitting; that it should assume a sort of educational jurisdiction over the conduct and character of educational institutions is wholly inappropriate. Schoolmen are accustomed to deal with the Bureau of Education, but in educational policies have never before been asked to deal with an agency extraneous to educational administration and organization. As between the two sets of educational instructions coming from the Federal government, the natural tendency of school administrators is to deal with the educational bureau in matters pertaining to the education of the immigrant as they do with respect to other educational problems.

Of the private agencies classed as national societies there are a number which co-operate closely with the Bureau of Education. The 1 See chap. x.

National Security League, the Committee on Education of the United States Chamber of Commerce, and the National Education Association are prominent in this relation. Each of these associations has conducted campaigns for Americanization, and has made widespread appeals to its constituents to do what may be possible in furthering efforts to educate the immigrant. Since the ending of the war the National Security League has turned its attention to Americanization as the foremost work to be done in securing the safety and welfare of the nation, and is now conducting campaigns for state and community action, by holding meetings, by publicity, and by circular appeal.

A great deal of the present interest, especially on the part of business men, manufacturers, and employers of labor in general, may be due to these national societies. A large part of the current state legislation and municipal activities (1918-19) designed to promote the welfare of the immigrant is also directly traceable to them. The substantial result of the widespread interest and agitation of semipublic and private agencies with respect to Americanization has been the education of the public to the need of a program. Public action can take place only as the result of public recognition of the need.

GROWTH OF STATE BUREAUS

In 1915, and even earlier in some states, state programs of Americanization were begun. Mas

sachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Ohio, California, and New Jersey are pioneers in the movement to make special provisions for their immigrant inhabitants. At the present moment nearly all states with large foreign-born populations are stirring and making effort toward a betterment of conditions affecting the immigrant. State councils of defense in such situations have maintained divisions dealing with questions pertaining to immigrant education, and they have done this as the result of instructions emanating from the National Council of Defense. It is impossible to predict how much of a legacy of action the passing councils of defense will give to permanent state forces. In general we find that certain activities undertaken during the war have so proved their worth that they have been retained into the after-war period; numerous states have transferred Americanization enterprises from special war agencies to permanent state bureaus.

In Massachusetts serious and comparatively early attention to the problem of the immigrant is indicated by the appointment in 1913 of a special commission to report to the legislature in the following year. The resulting report of this commission presented a comprehensive and constructive series of recommendations concerning many phases of the welfare of the immigrant. This report particularly emphasized the importance of immigrant education, and counseled among other things the granting of state moneys to communities carrying on the work. Few of

the recommendations of the commission have been enacted into law, but great stimulation has been the result. Massachusetts to-day may be said to have a state program for Americanization assigned to the state Board of Education and the state Bureau of Immigration. Before 1919 Massachusetts appropriated no money directly for the maintenance of classes for instruction, but the Commissioner of Education issued bulletins containing plans and suggestions similar to those of the Bureau of Education at Washington. By means of the Department of University Extension teacher-training classes are conducted, and some state supervision is given to factory classes, whether maintained wholly by the employers' funds or jointly by the employer and the public-school funds of local communities.

The state of New York presents a better example of a state program. This state appropriates money,1 conducts teacher-training courses, exercises supervision, and enforces state laws affecting school attendance of illiterate minors. The action of New York is more recent than that of Massachusetts, and is more comprehensive.

California has won much favorable attention for the vigor and effectiveness of her state program. The California Commission on Immigration and Housing has a program that is social as well as educational. The education program,

1 For every 180 days or more of teaching during the year, $100 per teacher is allowed; a night is reckoned as half a day.