or another we get a good deal of Federal control in legislation. I want simply to say that if in the consideration of these bills which are before you a bill comes out which has Federal control in it, it will, of course, be the responsibility of the Congress, and so it seems to me to be one of the things that we ought to be most careful about. For example, it is my belief that the idea of asking States in anywise to match funds which are put up by the Federal Government is, of course, a form of insidious Federal control. I am not mentioning this at this time because of the presence of any of these matching funds within the present bills. I am not sure that any of them contain such provisions, but we do have laws on the statute books now which provide for matching, and we have bills in Congress which, for other purposes, provide that States should match funds. I simply want to point out that whenever a State is required to match funds for roads or social security or any other purpose, it is mortgaging funds which otherwise might be expended for education or some other purpose. So that if we are going to leave off requiring matched funds in educational bills, I say to you it seems to me that we ought to leave off the same practice in other bills which come up from time to time, and that is my real purpose in mentioning it at this time. Senator SMITH. Dr. Zook, do you favor matching?

Dr. Zooк. No, I do not.

Senator SMITH. You are opposed to matching funds at all?

Dr. Zooк. I am opposed to matching funds, whether it be for education, roads, or whatever it is, because it seems to me that the wealthier States, which are the ones that don't need it, are the ones that are best able to match them, and the ones that are least able to match them are the ones whose need is greatest. So I feel sure that the idea is really an outmoded one.

Senator SMITH. You would base distribution on need?

Dr. Zook. Yes, that is right.

Senator AIKEN. You would require the minimum expenditure? Dr. Zook. Yes, I would do that. I think that would be very unwise to take out such a provision.

Senator HILL. You said "minimum expenditure." You mean minimum effort on the part of the State?

Dr. Zook. Yes, sir.

Senator HILL. In relation to its capacity to do so?

Dr. Zook. Yes, sir, as is indicated by present laws and activities within the State.

Senator AIKEN. That might be a maximum on the part of the State-maximum effort on the part of the State.

Senator HILL. The efforts could vary a great deal, of course, as we know, yet you take the State income, and you can get a pretty good idea as to what the effort is, can you not, Doctor?

Dr. Zook. Yes, sir; I think so.

Senator HILL. You find that the need is invariably greatest where the State income is lowest. Isn't that true?

Dr. Zook. Yes sir.

Senator HILL. In other words, the income is a pretty good index of the need?

Dr. Zook. Yes, sir.

Senator HILL. And the percentage of your income that you may be using for a certain purpose is a pretty good index of what kind of effort you are making. Isn't that true?

Dr. Zook. Yes, generally speaking. Now, I carry my feeling about this matter of Federal control clear down to this point, Mr. Chairman: I do not believe these Federal bills which you are now considering ought to specify that this aid shall go either exclusively to so-called "public" schools on the one hand or to "private" schools on the other. It seems to me that any provision of that kind in a Federal law is just another form of Federal control. In other words, I should think-I believe that, in line with our own constitutional provision, this matter ought to be left entirely to the State, whose rights we are always attempting tɔ guard in matters educational. That, I realize, in some instances will not be acceptable to people, but if we are going to preserve the right of the State to control matters educational, then I do not believe that in Federal legislation we ought to say anything about that.

I do not know whether that strikes you as good doctrine or not, but I do not see any other way of looking at this problem so long as we wish to continue to assert that we believe in State and local control of education.

Senator HILL. You mean by that, that you would let these Federal funds go for such purposes as the particular State wants them to go for? Would that be your yardstick?

Dr. Zook. Of course, the States should determine this matter in whatever way they see fit.

Senator SMITH. You would not bypass the State set-up, then, for this express purpose?

Dr. Zook. No, I would not, because it seems to me that is Federal control.

Senator AIKEN. Certainly it would be inconsistent to state in one part of the bill that there should be no Federal control whatsoever, and then in another part of the bill say that the States should not determine where education money should be spent as it appeared best to the officials of that State?

Dr. Zook. That seems to me to be so clear that I see no escape from the logic myself.

Senator AIKEN. Some of the mail I have received indicates a slight degree of inconsistency on the part of the writers in that respect.

Dr. Zook. I don't want you people to feel, however, that there are not some areas, several areas, in which there would have to be Federal control. For example, we have had several decisions of the United States Supreme Court, based on the fourteenth amendment, which require that a State shall not differentiate between different parts of their population in support of education, when those parts attend different schools. One such decision of the Supreme Court reads, "If a State furnishes higher education for white residents, it is bound to furnish substantially equal advantages to Negro residents, not necessarily in the same schools." I therefore believe that the carrying out of our constitutional requirements there requires that we do put in a clause in a bill of this kind which will guarantee that situation. That is simply a part of our Constitution, as I see it.

Senator SMITH. That is a matter of antidiscrimination.

Dr. Zook. That is antidiscrimination, but it is based, I want to emphasize, upon the interpretation of a constitutional provision which seems to me to bind us all.

Senator AIKEN. So far as I can see, Doctor, there is no prohibition in the bills against a State spending more on white schools, so long as it spends the minimum requirement on the Negro schools.

Dr. ZOOK. Well, this legislation, as I understand it, provides simply that there will be an equitable division of funds between the two types of schools, and that is what I was referring to.

Senator AIKEN. It guarantees to every colored child, every child, you might say, a minimum-an opportunity for a minimum amount of education.

Dr. Zook. I think that would be fair to point out, Mr. Chairman, that the Southern States, as I see it, have not yet been able to live up to the requirements of our Supreme Court decisions. Those, however, are State funds. We are now talking about Federal funds, and it seems to me that if a law is passed in this area, the Federal Government must follow the lines of the decisions of the Supreme Court.

Up to this time I have expressed very largely my own personal opinions. I wish now to call your attention to two kinds of things which have been done by the American Council on Education as an organization.

First of all, I think you have seen this pamphlet entitled "FederalState Relations in Education," which is a joint publication of the Educational Policies Commission of the National Education Association and the Problems and Policies Committee of the American Council on Education. I have put into this testimony a number of brief statements taken from this document which represents the deliberations of these two very important committees over a long period of months, and which is simply one of the many illustrations of deliberative bodies which have come to the conclusion that Federal aid is necessary.

I wish in conclusion to ask your indulgence to read the last page of my prepared statement which I have submitted to you, where entirely new material is presented for the first time. During the past year the American Council on Education held a special meeting of the representatives of these constituent organizations which belong to the council, to which I referred a little while ago for the purpose, among other things, of discussing and voting on the major issues involved in the matter of Federal aid to education. Later the ballot used at this meeting was also circulated to the institutional members of the council, and reactions secured from them. Since this procedure identified the very issues which are chiefly under discussion here, I will summarize a number of the more important ones. The entire table, with break-down of replies from colleges, universities, school systems, public and private, is being made available to the committee, and I wish now to submit it for the record, Mr. Chairman, for whatever use you care to make of it.

Senator AIKEN. Without objection it will be received for the record.

(The paper referred to appears hereafter at the conclusion of Dr. Zook's testimony and brief.)

Dr. Zook. The first question which was asked of the representatives of all these organizations, and of these institutions, was:

Do you believe that Federal aid to education is necessary and desirable? Representatives of organizations replied "Yes," 82, "No," 4; representatives of higher institutions and school systems, "Yes," 366, "No," 53; total, "Yes," 468, 89 percent; "No," 57, 11 percent.

Now I wish to submit, Mr. Chairman, that that is a very important conclusion which has been reached by the representatives of a large number of all those organizations assembled, and by letter ballot from the executives of the school systems, of the colleges and universities of the country. I assure you that there would never have been anything like that unanimity of opinion with respect to this matter a few years ago-10 years ago.

Senator THOMAS. What is the reason for their being unanimous now?

Dr. ZOOK. I myself believe that this continuous barrage of information and research work has convinced many people, even those who felt quite differently earlier, that there just aren't very many people in this day and age who feel that they can conscientiously vote against the information which is in these statements.

Senator THOMAS. Haven't some of the stronger opponents of Federal aid in the past given up, changed their opinions?

Dr. Zook. I don't know that we have had any dramatic illustrations of that. Yes; one does suddenly come to my mind.

I mentioned here a few moments ago the American Youth Commission. Mr. Newton D. Baker was chairman of that commission during the earlier part of its history, and he was attending a meeting of that body one day after having stayed up most of the previous night reading the writings of Thomas Jefferson, so he told us. Mr. Baker announced quite categorically at the beginning of the discussion that nobody could ever convince him that Federal aid to education was necessary.

Well, the debate started and lasted throughout that day. Along about 4 o'clock in the afternoon, after not having said anything except by way of keeping order, Mr. Newton D. Baker said: "Well, something happened today that I did not suppose could have happened. I told you people this morning that nobody could ever convince me that Federal aid to education was necessary, but this discussion during the day has convinced me that Federal aid to education is necessary."

Well, I didn't intend to bring up that incident, but that was one of the most dramatic incidents I ever witnessed. I assure you there was a moment of complete silence after he made that statement that day, and I think that is an illustration of what has been going on in the minds of important people, and others as well.

Senator THOMAS. The opposition to Federal aid to education has generally been based upon premises which are not very valid, has it not?

Dr. Zook. I should say that primarily they were matters of opinion pretty much.

Senator THOMAS. Matters of opinion or prejudice?

Dr. Zook. I don't like to speak of it that way. It was a matter of opinion from which they didn't like to be moved, and the fear of Federal control, which most of us share in varying degrees.

Senator THOMAS. One side was afraid of the other fellow, and that fellow was afraid of some other fellow?

Dr. Zook. Yes.

Senator THOMAS. Each was afraid that the other would get control of it. That, it seems to me, has been the basis of the opposition through the years that I have been connected with it. It never has been opposed on the basis of real experience or real logic, but merely on the basis of fear.

Senator HILL. Isn't it true also, Doctor, that the more we study this great question, and therefore become more familiar with the facts, more people have come to realize the need, the necessity for Federal aid, but also the more you study, the better we have come to know how to draft legislation to carry out the Federal aid? For instance, if we go back and see some of the old bills first introduced, and then examine the present bills, we have made marvelous progress, have we not, in the matter of mechanics, the machinery, how to do this job?

Dr. Zook. Yes, I should say so. And the incident I stated, the matter of matching, seems to me to be one of those very things.

Senator ELLENDER. In that connection, Dr. Zook, we have before us for consideration four or five bills. Do you discuss all of the bills in your statement, or would you have preference for any of them?

Dr. Zook. I have not looked at these various bills with that in mind, Senator. I have tried merely to bring up a number of the major issues which seems to me to be pertinent, and therefore I don't know that I feel competent to choose among them.

This conclusion to which I referred a moment ago, I think is all the more important, Senator, because among the institutional members of the council there is a very large number of privately controlled colleges and universities. Ordinarily they have been thought of as perhaps being institutions that it would be most difficult to convince of the need of Federal aid, and yet they, along with these others, are now voting largely in favor of that position.

Might I continue by saying that the representatives of both the organizational and the institutional members of the committee are equally positive that if a Federal aid bill were passed it should not be accompanied by Federal control of administration and instruction in the educational system. On this issue the total vote was 468 to 52, which is even a larger percentage, I believe, than the earlier one.

On the question as to whether a law providing Federal aid should require that this aid be available to private as well as public schools, there was an almost equal division of opinion. The representatives of the organizations voted "yes" 42; "no", 40. The representatives of institutions voted "yes" 199; "no," 204. Total, 241 for "yes" and "no" 244.

I need not tell you that the publicly controlled colleges and school systems, 154 of them, were in substantial disagreement with the privately controlled colleges and school systems, 249, on this matter. The former voted almost unanimously, 91 percent, against Federal aid for privately controlled education, while the latter, 75 percent of them, voted in favor of it. As far as I can recall, that is the chief difference of opinion that comes out in this ballot between the privately controlled group on the one hand and the publicly controlled ones on the other.