I think this has a tremendous impact, but its dimensions are not known.

Senator CLARK. How right you are.

Mr. CAMPBELL. I will also mention the question of the impact of high school dropouts on the delinquency question. Then the matter of selective service as it relates to juvenile delinquency.

We find that many young people upon graduation from high school expect to be inducted into the armed services, and they lack stability because they are in a period of question. In many instances this triggers them and they get into difficulty. So we think this is an area of vital concern.

Also we come to the question of what really are the true dimensions of the problem. What impact has social change in our large urban centers. What impact for example, does the breakdown of family life have on education because both parents are called upon to earn a living to support the family and, therefore, are not in their homes to give the guidance and parental care which is necessary?

Spiritual needs, moral values and other aspects of the problem, it seems to us, all call for serious consideration.

The role of the courts, the police, social agencies, all of these have an impact, and none of us has the answer. We do have basically in Chicago a program which we think will enable us to get into the core of the community and try to work at that level to provide new services, to harness the agencies which are operating in the community and get more of the potential which exists. We are also anxious to fill the voids by instituting new services for the improvement of family life, school attendance and, in general, affect the youngsters in an optimum way in bringing out their best for the future of our Nation.

Senator CLARK. Do you think if you had some relatively minor Federal assistance, minor in terms of the amount of money involved, you could do a substantially better job?

Mr. CAMPBELL. We certainly do, Senator. It would enable us to broaden our base perhaps more rapidly and make a conribution to the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare which would be in a key position to disseminate information to other cities, and it would also place us in a position to extract information from studies that would come in from other urban centers, information which would be of value to us in helping to refine our techniques.

Senator CLARK. Generally speaking, do you think the money should go for the assembly of data and the conduct of research?

Mr. CAMPBELL. Yes, based upon pilot program operation.

Senator CLARK. How about the aspect of training? Do you have any thoughts on that matter?

Mr. CAMPBELL. I think, Senator, that an examination of most social welfare agencies across the country discloses the fact that there is a tremendous shortage of social workers, of competent, qualified people in this field. I think that this is an area which needs exploration and support at the Federal level in order to provide our institutions with staff and to enlist the interest of young people to follow this field as a profession.

Senator CLARK. This would also include, would it not, provisions for better training of the juvenile bureaus in police departments?

Mr. CAMPBELL. Yes. This is one of the most important aspects of the problem. Chicago has done a great deal of work on this front, but it has been confined primarily to working with juvenile officers, helping them to understand some of the basic elements within the problem. But the next step, it seems to me, is to associate it with the work of the other committees that I have outlined, which is so important in the total picture.

Senator CLARK. Thank you very much.

Mr. Kerstetter, did you want to add anything?
Mr. KERSTETTER. I believe not.

I am by no means an exepert in this field, but I wanted to reemphasize that Mr. Campbell said about encouraging indigneous leadership in the communities, which is one of the objectives of the Chicago program. We could not possibly organize out of Washington or out of any State capital the kind of leadership that is needed. We want to use the leadership that exists within the community.

Senator CLARK. There is no doubt that the American Municipal Association has pretty strong views on this subject, is there? Mr. KERSTETTER. That is true.

Senator CLARK. This is not just a cursory appearance for the purpose of the record.

Mr. KERSTETTER. No, not at all. We have been long interested in this.

Senator CLARK. Thank you very much, gentlemen, and we appreciate your coming.

Mr. CAMPBELL. Senator Clark, I would like to leave for the record these two documents which outline the Chicago program.

Senator CLARK. The documents will be filed with the record, but not made a part of it.

Thank you very much.

I would like to offer for the record at this point a statement of Mr. George D. Riley, legislative representative of the AFL-CIO, who had intended to appear as a witness but has been detained.

(The statement referred to follows:)

STATEMENT OF GEORGE D. RILEY, AFL-CIO LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVE, ON S. 694, S. 765, S. 766 AND S. 1090, ON JUVENILE DELINQUENCY

The AFL-CIO supports the general purposes of the several bills pending in your subcommittee. We hope that this year your efforts will result in a good bill which will become law.

It is hardly indicated here that we talk about the problem involved. The fact is there has been a great deal of talk on that point for years. The details of the problem are well understood by almost all of our citizens and, I am sure, especially by your subcommittee.

Addressing ourselves to solutions will carry more meaning. These solutions are not going to be found easily and they will not be found unless and until the Congress takes the issue firmly in hand and blazes the way toward the goal by which coordination can be expected, irrespective of political boundary lines. Delinquency has the same characteristics of all other national problems, the same as illiteracy, menace to public health, to economic distress in pockets of longstanding and growing unemployment, and the other list of perplexities which challenge us every day in safeguarding our standing in our own estimation and in the eyes of the world.

Deliquency will not fade away easily, even after we move against it on a broad front. It not only will never fade away but will continue to become even more massive the longer we temporize and tolerate it through inactivity on a national basis.

Fighting delinquency on several levels with modern weapons can cut our tax bills materially. The savings can go toward productive purposes once the tide of battle has been turned.

Labor's position supporting help for our junior citizens certainly is not of recent origin. The American trade union movement continues to want our Ichildren to have a better chance in life. The founders of the labor movement worked for establishment of the free public school. There were the campaigns which labor led for compulsory school attendance and free textbooks.

LABOR'S POSITION ON HELP FOR CHILDREN IS LONGSTANDING

Not only did we ask for formal schooling for our Nation's children—all of them but we wanted that schooling given under the best possible conditions. We still do. In this connection, we have long recognized that the well-being of the child cannot be considered as something apart from his family and his community.

There are, no doubt, scholars and civic leaders who with historic perspective are mindful of labor's fight in many States for mothers' pensions, to help keep a fatherless family together. There are many who rejoiced when these battles for our children at State and local levels were recognized as a national problem, when certain aspects of the social security law adopted in 1935 at long last recognized the Nation's responsibility to help the States serve their children.

Labor's fight for our children goes back many, many years. Some, no doubt, have read of Samuel Gompers' magnificent support of the proposal, when first made, to have a "children's court" established. Few men at the turn of the century recognized as did Samuel Gompers the need for a special form of equitable procedure in dealing with the child who had broken the law. Gompers was, you will recall, not only a vigorous crusader for human rights; he also was a scholar.

He

His own family background in England had made him aware of the severity of the English common law-especially of its harsh treatment of children. told his coworkers that he was shocked when he realized that under the common law a child of 8 could be held responsible for a capital offense and executed. But, even more, he was shocked when he read our American colonial laws, especially those compiled in the blue laws-Connecticut's blue laws particularlywhich legally, certainly not morally, authorized a parent to present testimony in support of his request to have his own child executed if the child were "persistently and perniciously disobedient."

Today we shudder as we read that court records show that under those laws children of 12 and 10 and even 8 were tried, convicted, and executed. We've come a long way since the law permitted parents to have their children executed. We are proud to recall the step-by-step fight made by our trade-union leaders to bring greater protection to our children and to help the child and youth recognize his responsibilities.

It was shortly after establishment of the first Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, in the last quarter of the 19th century, that the humaniarians of that day became interested in protecting children as well as animals. So the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children was founded. The puritanical Mr. Comstock took a leading role in these movements. Labor did not like Comstock, but, as the old meeting records show, they decided to support these movements, in spite of their feeling toward Comstock. It was the wellbeing of the child and the world he lived in which concerned our members then. At that time there was an especially bad practice legally recognized. Children-mostly the hungry children who could not get food at home-were kidnaped by representatives of farmlands, beetfields particularly, and shipped out on the Great Lakes boats. There were also the poor indentured young workers who were actually slaves during the period of their indenture. If there were time. I should like to present this story of child exploitation as recorded by Edith Abbott. This brilliant, able citizen, you will recall, headed the Children's Bureau in the 1920's. Her writings and those of her sister record these shocking abuses of our children. But they also tell of our trade unions' fight to protect the children.

When the movement to give the child malefactor a rebuilding was started, our trade-union members gave support to these movements.

Some early records show that our unschooled men sensed the social necessity of firm, positive training for children and youth, but also recognized that severe, even brutal, punishment is not the answer. "It's what they're thrown with that we must fight," said one of our early New York leaders.

Samuel Gompers liked to recall the wisdom and the foresight of Teddy Roosevelt in facing children's problems as "the problems of people who are least able to help themselves."

The attitude of our early leaders to child protection is actually the basis for our present concern. We want a program of firm child discipline, but a discipline which will encourage social rehabilitation. It is in this frame of reference that we appear today.

OUR POSITION ON THE PRESENT BILLS

In regard to the provisions of the several bills before your subcommittee, those calling for creation of the Federal Advisory Council on Juvenile Delinquency, it is noted that the appointed membership thereof shall be those "who are recognized authorities in professional or technical fields related to juvenile delinquency or persons representative of the general public who are leaders in programs concerned with juvenile delinquency."

It is doubtful that the proponents of these bills really intended to bar from such membership public figures who are not necessarily "well known for leadership" in youth programs. It is further noted that the American Medical Association is included for representation. The AMA may well have members who are eminent in the field. But it will not be difficult to distribute representation into other fields, veterans, labor, and others, in order to spread general interest in bringing about solutions.

It, therefore, is recommended here that your subcommittee give some thought to the suggestion that the advisory council be not restricted but rather extended into those other portions of our citizenry where as much assistance as is possible can be assembled to carry out the provisions of the bill which I believe you will report.

This is the year during which it is entirely possible even probable that legislation can be had at the Federal level to combat this longstanding, cancerous condition in our body politic. We can make a case for an exceptionally good bill with a budgetary full dress and price our goal out of the financial market. On the other hand, it is essential to get a bill on the books and to incorporate into the law of the land an act which will retain the essentials upon which can be built extensions and improvements and which bill can include authorization for an amount of money which your subcommittee believes actually can be had.

I know no one in better position to evaluate the financial possibilities for the bill than Senator Hill himself, the chairman of this committee and the cosponsor with Senator Clark of S. 694. In his dual responsibility as chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Health, Education, and Welfare, Senator Hill is extremely well situated to see just what size bill is on the practical side, remembering at all times that compromise is the essence of legislation. It is not indicated that we endorse one bill over the other at this point. Certainly, every bill has much to recommend it. The job as we see it is to get a bill to the Senate floor and passed. This is the year for action. This is the year when results can be had now at long last after many years of efforts. Senator CLARK. Mrs. Brown?

STATEMENT OF MRS. SAMUEL BROWN, NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN, INC., NEW YORK, N.Y.

Mrs. BROWN. I am Mrs. Samuel Brown, and I am here to testify for the National Council of Jewish Women, Senator Clark. I am a member of the national board, and the chairman of the National Committee on Public Affairs of the National Council of Jewish Women.

Senator CLARK. Thank you. We would be very happy to have testify. Won't you sit down and make yourself comfortable? Do you have a prepared statement?

Mrs. BROWN. Yes, I have.

you

Senator CLARK. I would like to have this statement of Mrs. Brown appear in the record at this point.

I assure you, Mrs. Brown, I shall read it, and the other members of the committee and the staff will, and then I will ask you, in view of

the relatively short time we have, whether you would be willing just to hit the highlights of its extemporaneously.

(The statement referred to follows:)

STATEMENT OF MRS. SAMUEL BROWN, NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN, INC., NEW YORK, N.Y.

I am Mrs. Samuel B. Brown, a member of the national board and chairman of the National Committee on Public Affairs of the National Council of Jewish Women. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you in support of legislation which will strengthen and improve Federal, State, and local programs for the control and prevention of juvenile delinquency.

The National Council of Jewish Women just celebrated its 65th year of existence and has over 100,000 members in 240 communities throughout the country. Our purposes are to keep our membership informed on important issues of the day; to determine community needs; and to initiate and support programs to meet these needs. One of the major functions of the National Council of Jewish Women is to establish and maintain welfare projects which will help alleviate the social problems of the community.

Because we are so concerned about juvenile delinquency and so anxious to lend our support to the passage of needed Federal legislation, 2 years ago we asked our sections to begin a study of their local delinquency problems. Information was secured through interviews with the people in the community most directly concerned the police officers, the judges of the courts which handle juvenile delinquency cases, and the social agency staffs whose services are offered to the young offenders and their families. This survey emphasized to our members the fact that juvenile delinquency was on the increase, and indeed current statistics confirm this fact.

Although it is evident that States and communities are making great efforts to deal with growing problems, facilities are far from adequate. One of the greatest lacks is in trained personnel. Most police departments are trying to give some kind of inservice training to their officers who deal with juvenile offenders. Only in the largest cities, however, are specially trained people hired for this work. From the descriptions given our inquirers it would appear that this training is limited both in time and content. In a number of cases the answer was "they are trained mainly by experience."

There is universal difficulty in securing the services of adequately trained probation officers. One probation officer pointed out that it is not only a problem of low salaries, but also of lack of prestige of the job. He believed that many men preferred to take jobs at lower salaries in private agencies because of the higher status. In addition, in many cases, the probation officer serves at the pleasure of the judge and has no job security. A program of scholarships to encourage social-work students to train to be probation workers was suggested as one approach.

One of the most interesting observations to be made on the basis of the responses is the difference in emphasis which the police, the court, and the socialwork groups placed on what needs to be done.

In a substantial number of communities, the police seemed to feel that they had to apologize for the fact that there was any juvenile delinquency in the community. In many instances the statistics they submitted were broken down for residents and nonresidents and the point was made that it was "the kids from outside who made the trouble". In a few cases, the police declined to reveal any figures claiming that they were confidential. Most of the police officers questioned had a tendency to assess "blame" and to charge that failure of family responsibility was the greatest cause of juvenile delinquency. In many cases they saw the answer in stronger punishment, in making parents legally responsible, in better patroling of trouble spots. This is not to say that they did not recognize the broader nature of the problem, but since they saw their main job as apprehension, their responses were directed to the ways in which the number of delinquent acts could be cut down.

At the other end, the social agency workers and probation officers stressed preventive services and rehabilitation. It was emphasized that a proportionately larger number of juvenile delinquents come from broken homes or are neglected children. The need for working with the total family group was stressed. The importance of early detection was also emphasized. One interesting point was made in the suggestion that more attention be paid to 8- to 10-year-old children