There follows, Mr. Chairman, a detailed statement of the current expenses per pupil and the average daily attendance in Negro schools in 11 States, as compared with white, which shows the disparity between the expenditures for Negro and white pupils:

Source: Derived from Statistics of Education of Negroes 1941-42 and 1943-44, U. S. Office of Education.

School expenditures are but one index to the plight of the Negro pupil in the South. In general appearance the school structures assigned to Negro children, especially in the small towns and rural districts in the deep South, are dilapidated one- and two-teacher frame shacks. One investigator, Dr. Charles S. Johnson, found in 1942 that 65 percent of all Negro public schools in Louisiana were one-teacher outfits and another 27 percent were two- or three-teacher schools. In 1938 the value of public-school property in 10 Southern States was estimated to be scarcely one-fifth of the corresponding figure for whites notwithstanding the fact that one-third of the total value of Negro school buildings were financed by a well-known philanthropist, Julius Rosenwald. Schools for Negroes are uniformly kept open for a shorter period than are white schools. The average term for the Negro schools has been found to be 13 percent shorter than for whites. Although Negro pupils account for approximately one-third of the rural-school population in the South, they received only 3 percent of the expenditures for free school-bus transportation.

Another shocking type of discrimination which burdens Negro education in the South is the Negro-white salary differential for publicschool teachers. In spite of the fact that Negro teachers usually have a 25-percent higher pupil load; in spite of the fact that they hold identical State teacher licenses, Negro teachers are muleted out of approximately $25,000,000 annually because of lower salaries paid

them.

Again, the United States Office of Education throws some light on the character and extent of this form of discrimination. In 11 Southern States during the year 1943-44 the average salary for a white. teacher was $1,475, as compared with $976 for a Negro. And, again, Mississippi was the worst offender. In that State a Negro teacher received 224 percent less than a white one; that is to say, Negro teachers received an average of $342 as against $1,107 for whites.

There follows, Mr. Chairman, a fairly detailed statement as to the average salary per member of the instructional staff for 1943 in 11 States, as compared between white and Negroes, with the percent differential.

Source: Derived from Statistics of Education of Negroes 1941-42 and 1943–44, U. S. Office of Education.

It is our considered opinion that few, if any, Southern States will correct this situation or, in the foreseeable future, bring their systems of public education up to a desirable level without an enlarged program of direct aid from the Federal Government.

With these considerations in mind we have studied carefully the bills pending before this committee dealing with Federal aid to education. From our study we favor the general approach to this problem taken in H. R. 2953 with this reservation: that a floor of $40 annually is much too low to provide a decent education. Forty dollars would give only the barest minimum. We believe that children in the richest nation in the world today are entitled to more than that. They are entitled to receive Federal aid in such amounts as will equip them to live in, and make a substantial contribution to, an increasingly technical and industrialized society.

Recent developments, for instance, in the cotton industry illustrates the point. With the advent of the mechanical cotton pickers millions of agricultural workers will be displaced. Those persons will have to leave the land and find occupations in industry. Such a transition will put them in direct job competition with existing urban workers and will require new skills and know-how. They will undoubtedly need more than a bare minimum education which would be of dubious adequacy for a well-rounded and successful life even in rural areas. What is occurring in cotton is but a harbinger of what is happening, or will happen, in many other occupations and industries.

We therefore recommend that the appropriation for the first year of the act be increased to such an amount as will provide a minimum of $50 per pupil. We also urge that appropriations for each succeeding year be progressively increased until each child in every State is guaranteed by the Federal Government a minimum per capita expenditure of $100 per annum.

Attention has also been given to provisions contained in H. R. 2953 designed to

provide for a just and equitable apportionment of such funds for the benefit of public schools maintained for minority races

* *

I think I should say here, Mr. Chairman, that the association is unequivocally opposed to segregation in all public, private and other types of facilities. The matter arose in the Senate, I think in 1943, with an educational bill which was then pending and on the floor for debate. Certain steps were taken to undertake to raise the question as to whether or not this legislation would end segregation, and it would be a means and a vehicle for ending segregation.

I just want to say here that we have cases pending in the courts in Texas and Louisiana and various other States on the question of segregation, and we do not regard this legislation as a vehicle or means of getting to the proposition which is very distasteful to us, namely, segregation.

Though there is no doubt as to the obvious intent of these sections to safeguard the interests of Negroes in States having separate schools with respect to the expenditure of Federal funds for education, we feel that the bill can be materially strengthened on this point.

This committee will recall that the Selective Service Act of 1940 carried a clause prohibiting discrimination on account of race in the selection and training of men under the act. The exact language of that act is as follows:

Provided, That in the selection and training of men under this Act and in the interpretation and execution of the provisions of this Act, there shall be no discrimination against any person on account of race and color.

We are all familiar with the pattern of discrimination against Negroes in both the Army and Navy. It reached suh outrageous proportions as to border on an international scandal. The NAACP has also had experience with Federal administrators who, under the lash of political pressure, have time and time again closed their eyes to the plain language and intent of the law they took an oath to uphold and enforce.

I refer to these facts simply to say that a nondiscrimination clause—– no matter how well intentioned the framers might be is not selfexecuting. We should therefore like to see in H. R. 2953 some administrative procedure set out whereby an aggrieved citizen with a bona fide complaint might make formal representations where it is alleged that funds are not being equitably apportioned by a State.

Section 7 (1d) provides that the State educational authority shall audit the expenditure of funds received and apportioned to local school jurisdictions. We believe that the United States Commissioner of Eduction should be authorized under this act to make an independent. audit of expenditures of Federal moneys. The entire history of the administration of State educational funds, where separate schools are maintained for the races, justifies our worst fears. Most of these States have shown a settled determination to distribute funds in an unequal manner. Every possible precaution should be taken to guard against this where Federal funds are involved.

We therefore recommend as a substitute for section 8 of H. R. 2953 the following amendment setting out an administrative procedure to assure equitable minority group participation under the act:

SEC. 8. The Commissioner shall cause an audit to be made of the expenditures of funds under the Act by each State educational authority. Such audits shall at all times be available for public inspection. If either before or after an audit has been made any person shall complain to the Commissioner that he has reason to believe that any portion of the funds appropriated under this Act have been expended by any State in a manner contrary to the provisions of this Act, or have otherwise been lost or unlawfully used, the Commissioner shall afford such person a hearing on his complaint. If the Commissioner, after notice and hearing to the State charged with the improper expenditure or loss, upon either complaint filed by any person or upon the Commissioner's own complaint, finds that any portion of the funds appropriated under this Act have been expended by any State in a manner contrary to the provisions of this Act, or have otherwise been lost or unlawfully used, an equal amount shall, after reasonable notice, be withheld from subsequent payments to any such State unless such amount is replaced by such State and expended for the purposes originally intended: Provided, That the State educational authority shall have the right to appeal, within thirty days, from the decision of the Commissioner to withhold funds to a United States district court and such court shall have jurisdiction as to both fact and law. Any person who has filed a complaint before the Commissioner pursuant to this sec tion shall likewise have the right to appeal, within thirty days from the decision of the Commissioner not to withhold funds, to a United States district court. If the Commissioner fails to provide a hearing on a complaint within three months after it has been filed with him or fails to issue a decision within six months after the close of the hearing on such complaint, the person who filed the complaint may file a suit in a United States district court which shall then try the case de novo. In either an appeal from a decision of the Commissioner not to withhold funds or a trial de novo of a suit filed after the Commissioner has failed to proceed to a decision within the time specified, if the court finds that any portion of the funds appropriated under this Act have been expended by any State in a manner contrary to the provisions of this Act or have otherwise been lost or unlawfully used, the Court shall direct the Commissioner to withhold an equal amount from subsequent payments unless such amount is replaced by such State and expended for the purpose originally intended.

Surely a nation which contributed $341,000,000,000 toward winning World War II will not hesitate to invest during peacetime a representative proportion of the national income for the education of future American citizens. We earnestly urge the Congress speedily to enact legislation to provide adequate Federal aid to education.

Mr. McCowEN. Mr. Owens, have you any questions?

Mr. OWENS. I am glad one of the representatives from the Southern States came in here so that I can speak more freely on this, but I notice I will not be able to take much advantage of it, because it appears here that North Carolina seems to be right up at the top. There is only a difference of 10 percent between what they pay their colored and white teachers. Is that right?

Mr. PERRY. I would assume that is correct.

Mr. OWENS. In other words, if the situation in the other Southern States reaches that point, you would be pretty well satisfied, would you not?

Mr. PERRY. I do not think we would be satisfied. I do not think there should be any differential in State expenditures. I believe they should be equal.

Mr. OWENS. Do you not believe there might be a possibility here that some of the teachers might even be better and be paid a bit more money from the fact that they are more skilled, and that that might, . in the general average, show the white person is a little more skilled

than the Negro person would be? You would not complain about that, would you?

Mr. PERRY. Let me put it this way: Most of the differentials have obtained on the basis of your salary schedules, based on considerations solely of color. In the public schools, as I recall, in North Carolina you have State license boards, and you have various gradations within the teachers' licenses. A person holding a grade A teachers license or certificate in an elementary school ought to receive the same salary as everybody else, irrespective of color.

Mr. OWENS. You have not shown in your figures that that was so. What you show is the total paid to white teachers amounted to 10 percent more in that State than to the Negroes. You do not show that they were absolutely in the same category. There may have been more of the whites employed in the grade A than Negroes; is that correct?

Mr. PERRY. The figures I have presented show the average salary per member of the instructional staff. If you average your principals, your elementary, your secondary, your whole area of public schools, you arrive at the average. I do not know where you may have peaks and valleys. You may have proportionately more colored elementary teachers in North Carolina than high-school teachers.

Mr. OWENS. That is what I say. When you come to a percentage like 10, that may very well illustrate the point I made, rather than where you have a percentage of 224. There certainly is not any discrimination when it is down to 10. That can be the difference in plain intellect.

Mr. PERRY. Again, I do not think it is a question of intellect; it may be a question of stratification of teachers in a given grade. I do not see where the intellect plays a part in it. Another thing, I have not gone behind the figures prepared by the United States Office of Education.

Mr. OWENS. Did they prepare this one with regard to the percentage of whites, where it says $77.83 as against $40.56 for the Negroes, and where it says percent cost per white pupil is greater by 164 percent?

Mr. PERRY. Yes.

Mr. OWENS. That should be only 111 percent; should it not?

Mr. PERRY. Where is that?

Mr. OWENS. On your page 2. You give the total, white, $77.83: Negro, $40.56; percent for white pupil is greater than for Negro pupil by 164 percent. I should be only 111 percent; should it not?

Mr. PERRY. Perhaps so. I would not be able to say.

Mr. OWENS. Well, it makes a great deal of difference. I would not have much respect for these figures as they stand.

I think that covers what I have to say.

Mr. McCOWEN. Mr. Barden.

Mr. BARDEN. As a matter of fact, do you not know that the State law in North Carolina requires grade for grade and certificate for certificate the same pay for colored teachers as it does for white?

Mr. PERRY. I am not personally familiar with it. I understand that there has been a recent

Mr. BARDEN (interposing). You say you have not gone behind these figures. What do you mean? Do you mean you have not made any investigation of the figures given you?