In 1932, a crisis developing out of the Depression worried SFA supporters. A Joint House-Senate Committee on Organization and Efficiency in Austin recommended the downgrading of six of the eight teacher colleges in Texas to junior college level, or if the local communities refused, suggested that the colleges operate as freshman-sophomore feeder-institutions for the University of Texas. The report also projected the merger of North Texas and CIA [Texas Woman’s University], the reduction of Texas Tech to a liberal arts college, the removal of agriculture courses from every school but Texas A. & M., and the limitation of all graduate courses to A. & M. and the University of Texas. The committee proposed particularly harsh measures for Southwest Texas State which seemed more vulnerable than SFA since it was surrounded by other schools in the central Texas area. The committee recommended that San Marcos plant “be given to the city for use as a high school or other educational plant.”

Birdwell’s reaction

The attitude in Austin had worried SFA supporters for some time. As part of the heated election of 1932, candidates for office made promises to local supporters that the retrenchment would not include the elimination of SFA. Former governor Jim Ferguson, running for governor under his wife Miriam’s name, pledged support for the college if reelected. Ferguson sent the following telegram to Nacogdoches supporters: “Under my administration, Stephen F. Austin college was located and built at Nacogdoches, and I am proud of its record and accomplishments. My wife pledges her help to not only keep it there, but to adequately maintain it with buildings, equipment, and staff.” Senator John S. Redditt gladly made the same pledge, as did Edwin Tillery, the local state representative.

In his first public reaction to the threats, President Birdwell tried to dispel fears and, at the same time, began to rally support. “Half a hundred people have asked me today about the closing of the college. I wish all Nacogdoches citizens and people throughout this section would take the attitude that the college will not be closed.” He called the proposals “naive” and destructive: “The people of Texas, in my opinion, will not deliberately destroy the work of decades, nor will they deliberately destroy the opportunities of thousands of young men and young women to secure advanced education at comparatively low cost.” He found it ironic that the threat came at a time when SFA had its largest enrollment and was “in its peak year of service to East Texas.” While he voiced his readiness to “fight to the finish if such is necessary,” Birdwell feared a frontal attack less than he did a slow erosion of funds through cuts in maintenance and faculty salaries; either approach could undermine SFA.

The organization of support

Birdwell worked to organize opposition on two levels. He sent letters to colleagues and to the Board of Regents suggesting “a definite policy of retrenchment” to save “every possible dollar.” At home, he marshaled his faculty, the local citizens, and the politicians to argue SFA’s case. He asked his top faculty people, the ones with their doctorates, to draft the arguments. He asked banker friends like Thomas Baker to accompany him to Austin to argue SFA’s case before the Senate Finance Committee where he thought the real battle would be fought. The organization on the local level is reminiscent of the citizen’s campaign back in 1917, which produced the famous “Twenty Three Reasons Why.” The committee finished the pamphlet quickly, had it printed immediately, and set about to distribute it liberally in the area and in Austin. It was another good example of the close cooperation and unity between town and gown in the early years.

"A Defense" summarized

The 1933 pamphlet was entitled: “A Defense Of The State Teachers Colleges Particularly From The Standpoint Of East Texas – Stephen F. Austin State Teachers College.” It had eight columns of text, an overall size of approximately 4”x11”. The credits read “Prepared and Printed by Citizens of Nacogdoches.”

The tract first reviewed the charges, refuting quickly what it said were the “insignificant” items. It then admitted, up front, the need for economy: “The teachers Colleges certainly have no quarrel with those who advocate economy in government. They are as anxious an anybody else to reduce expenditures in accordance with the demands of the times, and in the interest of the reduction of burdensome taxes on those who are not able to pay.”

When it turned to specifics, the authors emphasized the rural clientele of the student body, the regional services being rendered, the distribution of the counties being served, the density of the population in East Texas, and their adherence to their mission. The charges receiving the most attention were, first, that the college was not adhering to its mission; and second, that it was duplicating the services of other schools.

Had it become just another liberal arts college? “The college does in fact offer liberal culture [and] ... subscribes to the doctrine that one cannot teach what one does not know, and that accurate scholarship and liberal training are necessary if one is to make an acceptable teacher. Is not this standard recognized for all professional service? The law schools require at least two years of liberal training for entrance into their technical courses. The medical schools require this much, and are pleased to have their beginning students have standard Bachelor’s degrees. If we are to have good teachers, educational and social leaders in the various communities of the state, liberal culture is essential.”

Was it duplicating or overlapping other institutions? In answering this question, the authors did a careful geographic analysis of the student body over the 10 year period. Their conclusion: “As a matter of fact, location at Nacogdoches enables this school to serve central East Texas much more effectively than any other college can. ... A centralized system of education can never succeed in Texas.” They argued for a strong, virile system of regional colleges with Nacogdoches serving as the “essential link” in East Texas. There was not even a strong private or denominational college in the area to serve an area larger than some states in the Union. SFA, in short, was “educating the young people who come from an extensive region which is nearer Nacogdoches than any other region.”

The pamphlet became expansive when talking about the opportunities for future growth in central East Texas, opportunities which in themselves were sufficient to warrant a college in Nacogdoches.

“... With the world’s greatest oil field, tremendous quantities of lignite and natural gas, extensive deposits of iron ore and salt, cotton and wood in abundance, amazing food producing power; and with a highly talented population, it is exceedingly difficult to estimate the possible development of this region without appearing to be extravagant. Let us remember that a relatively poor and rugged land of similar size in southern New England now has a population of almost 6,000,000. Doubtless a time eventually will come when the population of central East Texas shall number millions. And in that day, who can say how great may be the need for a greater regional college than the one now located at Nacogdoches?”

The crisis passes

In March of 1933, the crisis lessened when the House Committee on Education refused to recommend the Anderson-Metcale-Hughes Bill. An effective combination of concessions in their budgets and strong support from important constituents held off the worst. The Committee did, however, recommend the creation of a central board of coordination for all the institutions. Birdwell’s reaction to this was mixed: “It may make for greater efficiency. It probably will not save the state any money.” The first tangible indication that the crisis was passing came about the same time when the college’s funding for summer school came through. Locals knew from their experiences in 1917, nothing was sure until the funds were in hand!

In June of 1933, Governor Miriam A. Ferguson kept her promise and signed the appropriation bill maintaining SFA as a senior institution. Birdwell said this reaffirmed “the value and worth of this institution to this section of East Texas” and gave “official recognition of the superior type of service this institution has rendered in the past and is expected to render in the years to come.” While joyous, The Pine Log lamented the “vast expenditures of money, great mental worry, and disturbances made on the part of our president, faculty, student body and citizens through various local organization for the specific purpose of maintaining an institution of higher learning in East Texas.”

Birdwell’s summary of the events went in his report to the Board of Regents. “In our section, the people are more solid for the college than ever before. The citizenship of Nacogdoches and of our section of East Texas have held the lines at every point, and I feel that we have come out of the fight stronger than ever before. We have endeavored to make no mistakes, to say nothing that would leave a permanent sting. We have not hesitated to recognize our short-comings, and we have been trying to remedy them. We are perfectly sure that the fight is not over, and we are determined to try to make a first-class showing in the administration of the college.”

The threat of extinction had passed, but the Depression was still there.