medical education, agricultural-improvement projects and agricultural education, industrial work and industrial education, as well as social-service centers and training in cities and country, and extensive participation in relief projects on behalf of American churches, such as flood and famine relief in China and famine and refugee relief in India. Therefore, we welcome the proposal in theory and to the extent that it can be carried on effectively for the sake of the peoples concerned. I think that is the point of view; that we are interested in this for the sake of the peoples around the world primarily rather than for our own sake.

2. We believe that a thoroughly Christianized community, from the home and the village level up to the level of world order, is the only permanent basis for justice, righteousness, mutual understanding and good will, and thus of lasting peace. Therefore, we welcome this program to the extent that it will be in harmony with and contribute to those foundation stones and will not make their realization more difficult. The means must be recognized as a part of the end and consonant therewith. We believe that the program can be successful to the extent that it is motivated by Christian unselfishness and concern for the peoples of the world.

3. We believe that, for greatest effectiveness, the United States must retain the right to withhold payments on appropriations if the work is not being carried on effectively, economically, and in such manner that the people for whom the plan was designed receive the maximum help from it.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you mean by that that you don't want the United Nations to handle it?

Dr. CROSS. No. We are quite in favor of the United Nations handling as much of it as they can.

The CHAIRMAN. You say you favor the United States retaining the right to withhold payments on appropriations. Do you mean if the United Nations doesn't carry out the work effectively?

Dr. CROSS. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. All right, go ahead.

PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS

Dr. CROSS. 4. We believe that high personal character and unselfish concern for the welfare of the masses on the part of all personnel involved-American, United Nations, or local-is at least as important as professional qualifications and must be provided for at all costs. I think this is something that we want to emphasize very strongly. Americans who go to other countries in connection with these programs referred to must be prepared to do so at the sacrifice of comfort and personal security, in a spirit essentially missionary. It would be better not to send anyone than to send men and women who might be competent professionally, but who would not take with them and embody the very highest ideals in American life.

We have several illustrations in this long memorandum, which I will not read, that bear out this point, where missionaries have been successful in building up the living standards of a community or a nation, even while at the same time building the good will for America that is so necessary.

ENLISTING COOPERATION OF PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS

6. We believe that the objective of the point 4 program will be achieved to the maximum extent only by enlisting the services of institutions in the United States, such as our colleges of agriculture, home economics, engineering, medicine, and so forth, and private organizations in a position to help. This does not preclude working with United Nations agencies. It means the program should be distributed widely among existing American facilities. Now, there is an illus. tration given in the memorandum of how the New York State College of Agriculture at Cornell University cooperates with the College of Agriculture and Forestry at Nanking and has had over a long period of years an exchange of professors and students coming from there to America to be trained in the development of a forestry program that has benefited the whole country of China. That is what we mean when we say there are institutions of that kind, large numbers of them, in this country that could be enlisted in this program.

7. We believe that the point 4 program should be included in the bipartisan foreign policy of our Government. The problems of underprivileged peoples are long-term ones; and, unless there can be a continuing program, it would be better not to start at all.

RESOLUTION OF FOREIGN MISSIONS CONFERENCE

Now, I would like to read the resolution regarding the technicalassistance program that was passed by the Foreign Missions Conference:

The following resolution was adopted by the Foreign Missions Conference of North America at its annual meeting on January 12, 1950:

Whereas the Foreign Missions Conference believes that a high-minded and long-range program of assisting the peoples of economically underdeveloped regions, if placed in the forefront of foreign policy, above the vicissitudes of partisan politics, can prove a bulwark of freedom, peace, and prosperity in the world: Therefore be it

Resolved, That the Foreign Missions Conference of North America urge the Congress of the United States to give favorable consideration to such legislation for a cooperative program of aid to economically underdeveloped regions as will serve the genuine needs of the peoples in these areas, help them to muster and organize the human and material resources necessary for vigorous selfdevelopment, enlist the services of competent experts who embody the highest ideals in American life, encourage the participation of private institutions in this program, and loyally support the cooperative endeavor projected by the United Nations and its specialized agencies.

It is signed by the secretary of the committee.

I think, Mr. Chairman, that I should not take more time to go through this memorandum which, as I said, gives in detail the working out of the recommendations in these seven points that I have read. The CHAIRMAN. We will print that in here, if you like.

[See The Church and the Point 4 Program, printed above.]

Dr. CROSS. All right.

The CHAIRMAN. Is that all?

Dr. CROSS. That is all.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Hickenlooper, have you any questions?

ATTITUDE TOWARD PRIVATE INVESTMENT

Senator HICKENLOOPER. Dr. Cross, does your program of recommendation include any phase of American private capital investment and development in these foreign countries, in other words, American capital moving in and investing?

Dr. CROSS. No; it doesn't. The Foreign Missions would not be interested in that, except as it goes out through missions. Of course, we have a great deal invested in the Christian colleges in China, for instance, where they have opened that school of agriculture and forestry. The various projects with respect to relief work and the relief program overseas, such things as that, we are interested in; but investment by private business is outside our field.

Senator HICKENLOOPER. I mean, do you have a position of hostility to that? Do you object to that one way or the other? Have you taken a position?

Dr. CROSS. No.

Senator HICKENLOOPER. I just want to get straight whether your thought is that the entire program should be completely demonetary or whether there is any part in the program that you would accept, not under an exploitation basis as we understand exploitation but under an investment basis.

Dr. CROSS. I think our missions would certainly have no objection to that; they would be neutral with regard to it, but, if it was on an exploitation bases, they would stand against it, as they have from time to time in different countries. When they felt the peoples were being exploited, then they expressed themselves.

Senator HICKENLOOPER. I don't want to get into a discussion of what is exploitation and what is not exploitation. I think there would be a twilight zone among people who would claim there was exploitation and others who would claim there was no exploitation. I think you have answered the question; thank you. That is all.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.

The next witness is Prof. Leo Hansberry.

STATEMENT OF PROF. LEO HANSBERRY, PROFESSOR OF AFRICAN HISTORY AT HOWARD UNIVERSITY

Professor HANSBERRY. Mr. Chairman, I am Prof. Leo Hansberry. I am professor of African history at Howard University.

The CHAIRMAN. How long have you been there?

Professor HANSBERRY. Twenty-eight years. I am adviser to our African students, of which we have about 50 now.

The CHAIRMAN. From Africa?

Professor HANSBERRY. From Africa, from tropical Africa. They are from Nigeria rather than from Egypt and the north African countries, and I am representing the reactions of the native African peoples today toward the point 4 program.

The CHAIRMAN. All right.

Professor HANSBERRY. My statement is a brief one and is directed primarily to that particular aspect of the bill, and it will only take about 4 minutes to read it.

The CHAIRMAN. Go right ahead.

Professor HANSBERRY. As an American citizen, with a long-standing professional interest as a research student and a teacher in the early and modern history of several of the new economically underdeveloped areas of the world, I wish to go on record as endorsing heartily the declared aims and objectives of the House of Representative bill 7346. It is, however, my opinion that, if the laudable purposes of the bill are to be achieved, there are certain parts of its text, as at present drawn, which need to be amplified and clarified.

Although the present wording of the bill makes no specific mention of any particular geographical area or areas where the provisions of the bill will be applied, it is, nevertheless, generally understood that the program will include operations in a number of colonial regions where, under present arrangements, the native inhabitants have very little if any opportunity to participate in the formulation of the larger policies which determine and regulate economic conditions in such regions. Under present arrangements, all such policies are determined by nonnative officials of the governing colonial powers. In short, as is well known, under existing regulations, there is no way by which the native peoples of most colonial areas can carry on direct negotiations with the outer world in the course of their efforts to improve the economic condition under which they must live.

HANDICAPS OF COLONIAL PEOPLE

There is now available much concrete evidence which makes it very clear that past and present regulations have often had the effect of imposing severe handicaps on the efforts of native peoples in colonial areas to better their economic lot. In recent years, for example, there has been established, largely through American legislation, a number of agencies ERP, ECA, and so forth-which were designed to provide financial assistance to various colonial powers, with the intention of helping these powers to overcome the economic handicaps resulting from the unsettled conditions growing out of the recent war. It is regrettably true, however, that up to the present time most colonial peoples governed by these powers have derived little if any direct benefits from or through these various agencies, which were established at such great cost to the American taxpayer.

Apropos of this, it may be here pointed out that in the course of the past 2 or 3 years various duly organized native African business corporations, as well as African businessmen of unquestionable character, training, and technical experience, have applied to one or more of these agencies for financial assistance which would have enabled them to purchase American machinery and to procure other technical aids which would have contributed greatly not only to the development of their enterprises but to the wholesome improvement of the economic life of the native peoples whom they were endeavoring to serve. Up to the present time, however, none of these applications has met with any success. As a general rule, the applicants have been told that under the existing legislation there is no way, however worthey their appeal may be, by which these agencies could comply with their requests. Under H. R. 7346, as it now reads, there are no provisions which make it certain that native peoples or native enterprises, or their native representatives, in the colonies and protectorates will

have the opportunity to make direct requests for assistance to the agencies which will administer the point 4 program.

GREATER PARTICIPATION OF COLONIAL PEOPLE

For these and other reasons, there is now in Africa's non-self-governing territories a growing feeling that, unless special precautions are taken to make it otherwise, our Nation's "bold new program," as it is expressed in this bill, is likely to bring no more direct benefits to Africa's native peoples than have the other American-born agencies that have already been mentioned. In other words, unless some way is found to incorporate in the present bill provisions which will make it possible for colonial peoples to have a share in determining how the point-4 program will operate in their respective countries, it is going to prove well-nigh impossible to convince these peoples that the present act for international development, despite the laudableness of its declared aims and objectives, is not just another device, under a new guise, to strengthen the old-fashioned imperialism of the past.

It is true that the President, in his historic announcement of this proposed program, declared in no uncertain terms that "The old imperialism-exploitation for foreign profit-has no place in our plans." But this stirring declaration needs to be implemented by specific legislative guaranties in the act itself in order to safeguard the rights of the colonial peoples among whom it will operate. Without such safeguards, it is reasonably certain that the noble intentions of this act would come to naught in most of the colonial areas where efforts would be made to put the act into effect.

SAFEGUARDS FOR COLONIAL PEOPLE

Such safeguards should include, among others—

1. Provisions which would make it possible for qualified native African organizations, corporations, and businessmen to make direct application for financial and technical assistance to the agency or agencies administering the point-4 program, and here, Mr. Chairman, I would like to dwell particularly on this provision, in light of some of the observations that have been made by some of the previous speakers. 2. Provisions which would make it possible for promising African students to secure in America or Europe, through point-4 aid, the types of professional and technical education and in-service industrial training which would qualify them to take a leading and responsible part in operations of the program, and, with your permission, I would just like to expand that observation in just a minute.

We have now at Howard University, as I said, some fifty-odd students. Among them are some truly brilliant men. We have some at McGill now, all with A records, with one exception, one B. We have several with A records, and these students are going to be in the future potentially very able allies of America. Many of these students prefer to come to America rather than go to England. There is something about America, despite all the faults it may have, that appeals to people the world over, the Africans not excepted. More than that, these people could be thoroughly qualified to carry on much of this work, for in tropical Africa there is the problem of health for foreigners,