Senator DONNELL. May I ask just a few questions?

Is Jacksonville Junior College of which you are president a taxsupported institution or a non-tax-supported institution?

Dr. AKRIDGE. We have a pattern in Florida, Senator. We are a private institution receiving appropriations from the city of Jacksonville under a special legislative act. A number of private institutions in Florida have received such appropriations from the local governmental bodies.

Senator DONNELL. No appropriation by the State legislature?
Dr. AKRIDGE. Not by the State legislature.

Senator DONNELL. What proportion of your income, that is, of the college's income comes from the appropriation by the Jacksonville municipality?

Dr. AKRIDGE. Well, before the GI bill of rights came into effect, it was approximately a third, but now since it has come into effect it is lower than that. I could not say, exactly.

Senator DONNELL. Your school is one that has existed a good many years?

Dr. AKRIDGE. Yes, sir; 13 years.

Senator DONNELL. You have outgrown the plant?

Dr. AKRIDGE. Yes, sir.

Senator DONNELL. How many buildings do you have?

Dr. AKRIDGE. The school is located on two or three city blocks in a former big residential building we bought at our own expense from Camp Blanding.

Senator DONNELL. Blocks?

Dr. AKRIDGE. Lots, across one block.

Besides that, Senator, the United States Bureau of Public Roads and the State Road Department have approved a superhighway project through Jacksonville, the gateway to the South, and that superhighway project is scheduled to come by where we are located and our property is to be condemned.

Senator DONNELL. Do you know the total investment in your property at this time excluding the

Dr. AKRIDGE. You mean the real estate?

Senator DONNELL. Yes. How much money has been put into the ground and buildings of your institution?

Dr. AKRIDGE. The appraised insurance value is $48,000, and the real estate is worth probably $15,000.

Senator DONNELL. So you have a total investment of about $63,000? Dr. AKRIDGE. In buildings and ground, that is right.

Senator DONNELL. Now, it consists of one large residence and how many other buildings?

Dr. AKRIDGE. And three additional buildings.

Senator DONNELL. Smaller than the residence?

Dr. AKRIDGE. Yes, sir.

Senator DONNELL. Did you go in debt for that?

Dr. AKRIDGE. No, sir; we paid for that. We do not go in debt. Senator DONNELL. How much did you pay for that?

Dr. AKRIDGE. It was $40,000, I believe.

Senator DONNELL. That is in addition to this $63,000?

Dr. AKRIDGE. Yes, sir.

Senator DONNELL. So you have about $103,000 invested in buildings

and ground?

Dr. AKRIDGE. And of course we have equipment.

Senator DONNELL. Do you have any encumbrances on the buildings or ground?

Dr. AKRIDGE. No, sir.

Senator DONNELL. About $103,000 worth of real estate and free of encumbrances?

Dr. AKRIDGE. Yes, sir; and we have other people willing to go along with us in putting up this plant but they tell us they do not want to spend their money on a building at current prices.

Senator DONNELL. If the Federal Government put in 50 cents to match your 50 cents?

Dr. AKRIDGE. If they could put up a building at normal cost, they would do it immediately.

Senator DONNELL. But under present circumstances they are not willing to go ahead unless there is some Federal program?

Dr. AKRIDGE. Many of them are not, no, sir.

Senator DONNELL. And you advocate not merely that there be a 50 percent maximum participation but you say, "No single segment can hope to do the job alone without much larger Federal participation than this bill proposes." Is that right?

Dr. AKRIDGE. There was some discussion here yesterday about the advisability of including the private colleges. What we intended to say there is that if it is limited to private schools or public colleges alone, that it would take more Federal money to put up the buildings you need on those particular plants alone than it would if you muster all of them in to help.

Senator DONNELL. Do you favor the Federal Government putting up more than 50 percent?

Dr. AKRIDGE. No, sir; I do not think so. I doubt seriously that it will be necessary on the average to put up 50 percent.

I think the Office of Education will be very conservative in their handling of this bill.

Senator DONNELL. So by a much larger Federal participation than this bill proposes, you are referring not to an increase in the percentage? Dr. AKRIDGE. No, sir.

Senator DONNELL. Well, what are you referring to?

Dr. AKRIDGE. If you should say, for instance, that this money will be available only to the public institutions-there was some discussion of it here yesterday-I am confident that you would have to put up more money to build the same number of square feet of public schools than if you did it on private alone.

Senator DONNELL. Yet this bill is clearly not limited to public institutions.

Dr. AKRIDGE. I understand it is. There was some discussion of it in the committee yesterday and that is the reason I mentioned it today.

Senator DONNELL. The bill applies to public institutions first, and, second, to private institutions, no part of the net earnings of which shall inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual. Do you have in mind that there should be more money than $250,000,000 inasmuch as both public and private institutions are comprehended within this language? Is that what you mean by your language?

Dr. AKRIDGE. No, sir; I think this $250,000,000 is probably adequate for our present purposes.

Senator DONNELL. I am puzzled to know what you mean by this language. You say in your statement here that "No single segment can hope to do the job alone without much larger Federal participation than this bill proposes," and yet you say you do not favor increasing the percentage above the 50 percent to be borne by the Government nor do you favor increasing the amount to more than $250,000,000. Well, what do you mean in your testimony by such language as "much larger Federal participation than this bill proposes" if you do not mean it in either percentage or amount?

Mr. AKRIDGE. Senator, preceding that sentence was my statement that in support of having both public and private colleges, as the bill proposes, participate in this fund, what I meant was that if it should be confined should be amended so as to confine it only to the public institutions, they only have a certain amount of their own money they can put into buildings and if all this square footage has to be built on those plants alone, it would probably take more than 50 percent to do it on such an amended basis; but as it is, I think it would be adequate.

Senator DONNELL. So if the bill were amended to cover only public institutions, it would take more money than if it includes both public and private?

Dr. AKRIDGE. I am confident they can only muster up so much money and you would have to put up the difference.

Senator DONNELL. Does your school charge tuition?

Dr. AKRIDGE. Yes, sir.

Senator DONNELL. What rate?

Dr. AKRIDGE. Our tuition rate is $12 per semester-hour and the city of Jacksonville appropriation applies to the local students at the rate of $3 per semester-hour, which makes it $9 for each semesterhour for people coming in there and paying their own fees.

Senator DONNELL. What would that amount to for a student who comes in and

Dr. AKRIDGE. The normal load is 30 hours-about $270.
Senator DONNELL. That student would have to pay $270?

Dr. AKRIDGE. And the city of Jacksonville will pay $90, making a total of $360:

Senator AIKEN. Thank you, Dr. Akridge.

Dr. Akridge is the last witness scheduled to be heard before this committee.

We have now been holding hearings on elementary and advanced education going well into the third week. The next move will be for the subcommittee to meet within the next few days to decide first whether Federal aid to sectarian schools or colleges should be given and if it should be given, in what manner it should be given and in what schools.

I think we all recognize the seriousness of our educational systems in this country, both in the secondary and in the advanced grades and I believe that the committee will give it very, very serious consideration.

It has developed differences of opinion, as we are all well aware. Some of those differences, of course, will have to be reconciled before

we can hope to report out any bill either for the aid of the colleges or aid of the secondary schools.

The Chair is confident, for one, that there are no insurmountable difficulties in the way of attaining our objective, or partially attaining our objective. Of course, as I understand it, our ultimate goal is always out ahead of us. That is what keeps us going on, seeking ultimately to achieve it although we never quite do that.

The chairman of the subcommittee will call a meeting of the subcommittee within the next few days to determine what, if anything, shall be done in regard to this bill which has been before us yesterday and today and also the one that was before us for the preceding 2 weeks.

At this time, the hearings are adjourned.

(Whereupon, at 11:45 a. m., the hearing was adjourned.)

LETTER FROM CHAT PATERSON, LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVES, AMERICAN VETERANS COMMITTEE, FOR INCLUSION IN THE RECORD:)

THE AMERICAN VETERANS COMMITTEE (AVC),

Senator GEORGE D. AIKEN,

Washington, D. C., May 9, 1947.

Senate Labor and Public Welfare Committee,
United States Senate, Washington, D. Ć.

DEAR SENATOR AIKEN: The American Veterans Committee (AVC) is deeply interested in all legislation affecting the educational program of veterans in training and education. Our membership includes a very considerable number of the veterans now enrolled in colleges and universities. We are consequently glad to endorse provision for permanent construction on a grant-in-aid basis for institutions in which veterans are enrolled as provided in S. 971.

Over-all data regarding the enrollment of veterans and the building needs of colleges and universities have been presented to you by the United States Office of Education. The experiences of our veterans on many institutional campuses certainly verifies the desperate need of colleges and universities for an expansion of physical facilities. Laboratories, libraries, and even classrooms are so crowded in many institutions as to make effective education extremely difficult. In some of them, laboratories that were planned originally for 20 to 25 students now have twice this number in a single section.

Yet, in spite of these circumstances veterans by the seriousness of their efforts are doing superior work. Statements from many campuses indicate that they are procuring better grades than nonveterans and that they are dropping out at a lower rate than other students.

Institutions have shared with the Federal Government this responsibility for the education of the veteran and they and the Congress have made unprecedented effort to meet veterans needs. Further investment in temporary facilities, either by the institutions or by the Federal Government, would in our judgment be unwise. The veterans will remain an important part of the university load for at least 5 years, and their need more than justifies the $250,000,000 expenditures proposed in this legislation.

With the Government already investing over a billion dollars a year in veterans' education on college and university campuses, this additional amount is small in comparison to its value in increasing the effectiveness of the larger investment. AVC is heartily in favor of S. 971 and I should like to take this opportunity to thank you on behalf of AVC and the thousands of student-veterans who will benefit through your foresight in introducing this bill. I would appreciate having this letter inserted in the committee hearings as the formal statement of the AVC.

Sincerely yours,

CHAT PATERSON, Legislative Representative, AVC.

Table submitted by Dr. Arthur S. Adams showing distribution of veterans by ages. (Table referred to on p. 13.)

A sample of 1,000 of the 5,500 veteran students at Cornell shows the following percentage distribution by ages:

STATEMENT OF CHARLES E. FRILEY, PRESIDENT OF THE IOWA STATE COLlege, IN SUPPORT OF SENATE BILL 971, RELATING TO FEDERAL ASSISTANCE FOR NONHOUSING CONSTRUCTION IN THE COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES OF THE COUNTRY

The Iowa State College of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts, Ames, Iowa, is one of the great group of State institutions of higher education which is struggling with an unusually heavy postwar enrollment. Of the 10,000 students at the Iowa State College, approximately 65 percent are veterans.

This number represents an increase of more than 50 percent over the best prewar enrollment; the applications for admission for the coming year indicate an even larger number for the year 1947-48, and all indications point to a further increase at least through 1950,

More than 12,000 qualified students applied for admission to the Iowa State College in the summer and fall of 1946, but the institution was forced to turn down about 2,000 of these applicants because of lack of housing and instructional facilities.

While the housing situation has been somewhat relieved, the tremendous pressure upon the instructional facilities makes it imperative that prompt assistance be given in that area. Like many other schools of the Midwest, the Iowa State College had relatively little construction for educational purposes during the decade beginning 1930; consequently, the institution is now trying to take care of the student body of 10,000 young men and women with a plant which normally would be adequate for not more than 6,500.

In 1945 and 1947 the legislature of the State of Iowa appropriated certain funds for the construction of classrooms and laboratories; however, the rapidly rising costs of construction will prevent us, with the funds now at our disposal, from completing the program of buildings deemed necessary to care adequately for the students now in attendance and those who will be seeking admission in the future. Senate bill 971 provides the additional funds necessary to enable the Iowa State College to complete the building program which has been planned. It is the general conviction that such an expenditure is one of the most valuable that can be made by Congress in view of the increasing importance of higher education, in all of its phases, in our modern civilization.

The Iowa State College is an institution of science and technology, devoting its energies to the fields of agriculture, engineering, home economics, the basic sciences, and veterinary medicine, both at the undergraduate and graduate levels. The institution has comprehensive programs in the three major areas of teaching. research, and extension.

The college was one of the leaders in the Midwest in developing the great food program during the late war; the college also had a prominent part in the development of atomic energy and is now ranked as one of the seven major laboratories for atomic research in the Nation.

The contributions of the principal colleges and universities to the successful outcome of the war and their present efforts in the development of a constructive peacetime program are ample justification for the expenditure by Congress of supplementary funds to enable the institutions to provide adequate facilities for the great body of young men and women who are seeking a college education. CHARLES E. FRILEY, President.