paid less than an average of $600 per year, at least 15,000 are not in Southern States.

Closer scrutiny reveals facts that demand immediate remedial action. Twentyeight thousand teachers (1943-44) received an average of $50 a month and 197,000 received less than $100 per month. In only four Southern States did teachers average over $1,000 per year. Iu Alabama, 5,546 white teachers and 2,196 Negro teachers make between $240 and $560 a year. Average salary for all public elementary and secondary school teachers, principals, supervisors, in 1939-40 ranged from $559 in Mississippi to $2,604 in New York. Six States paid $800 less than the average, while 11 States paid $1,600 more than the average.

Just as the southern school child has less chance to develop his natural talents and abilities than the child born outside the South, the southern Negro child has even less of an opportunity.

I feel that it is appropriate to quote a passage from Senate Calendar No. 1598, Seventy-seventh Congress, second session, July 16, 1942, submitted by Senator Thomas of Utah on behalf of the Committee on Education and Labor and which accompanied S. 131:

"In addition to the general need for partial equalization of school opportunities among the States there has long been a need for more funds for Negro schools. This need has recently been brought into sharp focus by the rulings of Federal courts that under the Constitution no discrimination on the basis of race or color may be made in the payment of teachers' salaries" (Austin. v. Board of Education of Norfolk). Senator Thomas continues: "In practice, however, equal facilities have been furnished only rarely. The States that keep separate schools for Negroes are for the most part States with the least economic ability to raise funds for public education. The schools for white pupils have been financed with great difficulty and the schools for Negroes have been given even less support than those for the white pupils. In the Negro schools the buildings have been poorer, school terms have been shorter, teachers' salaries lower, and teacher loads heavier than in schools for white pupils. The white teachers and educational leaders have deplored the situation but have lacked the funds to correct it without leveling down the none-too-generous program of public education for white pupils. "To provide equal salaries for all teachers having the same qualifications and responsibilities it will be necessary in many of the States to lower the salaries of white teachers, to curtail the present school program, or to obtain adequate Federal aid to education. Obviously, the third possibility is the only socially constructive one. It seems a fair proposition that the Federal Government should take the financial steps necessary to make its constitutional requirements effective. The legal restraining action alone cannot solve this important problem.' There is myriad evidence to indicate the undesirable consequences of low salaries. For example, as a result of wholesale desertion of teachers to jobs which would afford a living during wartime, teaching standards have been dropped disastrously. During the emergency, schools turned to unqualified teachers who today remain at their posts. The amount of teacher turn-over in the past 5 years has been tremendously above the prewar rate. At least 50,000 teaching positions have been eliminated and about 80,000 persons are now sering the schools on emergency certificates. These conditions were caused in part by the Nation's military needs and in part by the desire to earn better livelihoods. The latter cause for such mass exodus from the ranks of the teaching profession has not been changed. Indeed, the present increase in the cost of living serves to aggravate the situation more.

Let us survey other measurable factors which give some indication of relative educational opportunities in the various States:

Per pupil value of school property.-In 1942-43 the per-pupil money value of school property was six and one-half times as great in New York State as in Alabama. In 1943-44 the value of public elementary and secondary school property per pupil enrolled ranged from $80 in Tennessee to $526 in New York. In seven States such property was at more than $400 per pupil, while in four others it was appraised at less than $100 per pupil. In 1941-42 in Georgia, the State agricultural and industrial board reported to the General Assembly that 40 percent of the white schools and 95 percent of the Negro schools were unfit for use. In Alabama, the educational association reported that 8,174 new classrooms and 600 new buses are needed. In 1942-43, of the 17,000,000 children attending classrooms supported by less than $600 per year, 60 percent were Negroes from the Southern States, 22 percent were white children from Southern States and 8 percent were from Northern and Western States.

Expenditures per pupil enrolled. Statistics reveal that in 1939-40 Mississippi spent only $24 per pupil enrolled. This was less than one-fifth of the amount spent per pupil in New York and less than one-third of that spent by the Nation as a whole. Ten States spent less than $50 per pupil, while 8 States spent an average of $100 per pupil. Nearly 20,000 children attended the better financed schools but more than twice that number went to schools costing less than $100 per year. At the extreme, so far as costs measure opportunity, some children get 60 times as much educational opportunities as do others.

Average length of school term. In 1939 the average school term in the Nation as a whole was about 175 days or 834 months. Among the States the average length of rural-school terms was only 166 days, as compared with an average term of 181 days in urban schools. In 1942-43 the average school year in Illinois was onefourth longer than that of Mississippi.

Ratio of high-school enrollments to the total number of youth of high-school age. In 1939-40 the number of children enrolled in high schools for each 1,000 persons from 14 to 17 years old ranged from 392 in Mississippi to 952 in Washington. Seven States had fewer than 500 pupils in high schools for each 1,000 of high-school age, while 12 States had more than 800 enrolled for each 1,000 in this age group. An event over which the States have little or no control is the mobility of the people of the United States. Statistics show that when children in States affording inadequate educational opportunities are adults, many of them migrate into the more wealthy sections of the Nation. Why, you may ask, should the people of these wealthier States favor Federal aid to education to raise the educational level of the poorer States? There is the democratic argument which is sufficient for some, namely, that all children regardless of the place or circumstances of their birth, are entitled to schooling in accordance with their receptive capacities. For those not impressed with such reason, another argument has been advanced. Self-interest of the several States should make its citizens deeply concerned about the educational system and opportunities of its sister States. It has been said that "Ignorance cannot be quarantined." We know this to be a truism as evidenced by the fact that each State annually receives thousands of people who attended school in other States and whose schooling, good or poor, will be an asset or liability to their adopted State as well as to themselves. Indeed, the entire Nation is handicapped to the same extent to which the poorest State is unable to maintain satisfactory schools and to the same extent that a single citizen is handicapped in performing his economic and political responsibilities to the Nation because of inadequate educational opportunities when a youth. It is axiomatic that poorly educated workers have lower earning power and such fact accounts in large measure for low standards of living where found. Statistics show that the 10 leading States in educational expenditures stand in the identical order in percapita income. Illiteracy and near-illiteracy are products of educational neglect in past years. The only way in which this handicap can be overcome within any reasonable time is through Federal aid to education. In 1940 more than one-fifth of the Nation's American-born population was living outside their native States. The number ranged from about 60,000 in Vermont to 3,363,000 in California and the proportion ranged from 9 percent in South Carolina to 64 percent in Nevada. It is estimated that during the war the figures jumped threefold.

Inadequacy of school opportunities in some States is reflected in part by the large number of men rejected for physical and educational deficiencies by Army inducation boards soon after the United States entered the war. Out of every 1,000 men examined in December 1942 for service in the Nation's armed forces, 283 were rejected for medical reasons and 28 for educational reasons (illiteracy, lack of knowledge of English and not having completed the fourth grade in school). The rejection rate for educational deficiencies ranged from zero in Delaware, Montana, and Wyoming to 136 per 1,000 in Georgia. The figures show that the 12 States which in 1920 were paying the lowest teachers' salaries had 100 draftees per thousand rejected for educational reasons in World War II. The States paying the highest teachers' salaries in 1920 had only 23 per thousand rejected.

This discussion has not plumbed the depths of the problem under consideration, but rather, has addressed its inquiries, in a rather cursory fashion, to the more appalling facets of the picture. The logical question for disposition at this point is: Are existing differences among the States with respect to ability to shoulder educational responsibility likely to continue? The consensus is that the position of the States as to the problem before is not likely to change in the near future. All consideration and approaches to the problem coverage to indicate a single solution: Federal aid to education. Specifically, such remedy would insure these results: Schools could be kept open for long and parallel terms; salaries could be

raised where they are substandard (this would bring more and better teachers into our school systems; consolidation of small schools, thereby enabling children to have better libraries, facilities, etc.; schools would be provided for the millions of youths not attending school at all (in 1945, 7,000,000 children in our Nation between the ages of 5 and 17 were in school); more teachers could be employed to obviate overcrowded classes and to reduce the grossly inadequate one- and twoteacher school. Of the 4,402 public schools of North Carolina more than 50 percent have approximately less than five teachers—that is, not even one teacher per grade. In 1943 there were approximately 180 one-teacher elementary schools for white children and 610 for Negro children in the above State; children entering schools of one State from the schools of another State would be protected against the all too often occurrence of being noticeably behind other students in the same grade.

Thus, gentlemen, I think we cannot afford to neglect our duty any longer. It should be an embarrassment for each of us that we have not adjusted this matter before, an embarrassment that we need even testify in behalf of such a measure rather than having acted in the past to grant to our youth one of their basic birth rights. We expect so much of much of them, but how can they come up to our expectations, our demands, when we have failed to extend to them opportunities for even knowing adquately of our demands? Through equal opportunities of education we can mold the basic structure for useful and democratic citizenship. Truly, gentlemen, we cannot fail to act this time for if we do we must accept the responsibility for the social ravages of illiteracy, juvenile delinquency, and amorality.

Thank you.

Senator AIKEN. Before calling the next witness, the Chair will submit for the record a letter received from Frederick C. Fowler, chairman, Committee on Christian Liberty. Dr. Fowler is adding somewhat to his testimony of last week and without objection this letter will be inserted in the record.

(The letter referred to follows:)

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF EVANGELICALS,
Washington, D. C., April 29, 1947.

Re: Federal aid to education.

UNITED STATES SENATE,

Subcommittee on Education,

Washington 25, D. C.

HONORABLE SIR: When I testified on behalf of this assocation on April 25, Senator Hill requested that I furnish evidence that the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church favors Federal aid to schools. I present the following and request that it be included in the record as part of my brief:

As far back as 1924, the Roman Catholic paper America published in its July 26 issue an article by Timothy L. Bouscaren, S. J., in which he asks the question: "Shall Catholics demand a share of the public taxes for the support of Catholic schools? The answer is, Yes, without hesitation."

Later, on April 24, 1936, The Commonweal, a Roman Catholic voice on public affairs and education, had an editorial about the Roman Catholic parochial schools as presented in a speech by the Rev. George Johnson, secretary general of the National Catholic Education Association, who insisted that Catholics have the right to use tax money for parochial schools and said, "Catholics do not forget for one moment that the refusal of the State to permit them to use the money they contribute through taxes for education to provide for their children a schooling that accords with the dictates of their conscience is a limitation upon their religious freedom."

Bishop Thomas E. Molloy, a member of the Roman Catholic hierarchy in the United States, said in the 1939 issue of The New Age, "from those schools of elementary grade to the university, inclusive (may), soon be properly recognized as agencies of public service and as such should be fully supported by public funds."

In a pamphlet put out by the National Catholic Educational Association in 1946 entitled “Federal Aid for American Education," the Most Rev. John T. McNicholas, O. P., S. T. M., archbishop of Cincinnati and president general of the National Catholic Educational Association states on page 5, section 3 and

page 6 section 4, that the religious liberty of Catholic parents is being curtailed by failure of the Government to financially support parochial schools.

On April 10 the Rev. William E. McManus, assistant educational director of the National Catholic Welfare Conference, attacked the National Educational Association before a convention of his association by accusing the National Education Association of blocking Federal educational grants, and then said: "Catholic schools ask for a reasonable and limited amount of public funds, just enough tax funds to make the Catholic schools an integral part of American educationjust enough money to disabuse the public schools professional group of antidemocratic notions that they have any such monoply.' He also said, "Catholic educators will never permit the Federal Government to treat parochial school children as stepchildren or second-class citizens."

In addition let me respectfully remind the committee that the Rev. Mr. McManus who preceded me on the stand has no constituency whatsoever unless he himself represents the Roman Catholic hierarchy. The National Catholic Welfare Conference in all its ramifications is established by the Conference of Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church of the United States and as such voices the official opinions and implements the program of the Roman Catholic Church in the United States of America. His brief bears record to the official attitude of the Roman Catholic Church as supporting Federal aid to schools if nonpublic schools are to be included.

After the hearing, I was informed that I might have left the impression that I favored Federal aid to private schools for lunch purposes. We were discussing Federal aid to public schools in general. I want it very clearly understood that I am opposed to any Federal aid to any private schools for any purpose. This is not a matter of discrimination because every individual in the United States has the opportunity to benefit from the program offered by the public schools. If they refuse to take advantage of attending public schools and insist on attending the private institutions then they should be compelled to pay the necessary cost which this involves.

Respectfully yours,

FREDERICK C. FOWLER, Chairman, Committee on Christian Liberty.

Senator AIKEN. The next witness scheduled is Mr. W. R. Ogg. I do not see him in the room so we will pass over Mr. Ogg for the time being and call on Dr. Clark Foreman, president, Southern Conference for Human Welfare.

STATEMENT OF CLARK FOREMAN, PRESIDENT, SOUTHERN CONFERENCE FOR HUMAN WELFARE, WASHINGTON, D.C.

Mr. FOREMAN. Mr. Chairman I have to ask the committee's indulgence. I lost my voice since yesterday but I will try to make myself heard. Yesterday, I was prepared to speak more clearly.

Senator AIKEN. The committee will listen attentively and it also has a printed copy of your testimony.

Mr. FOREMAN. Yes; I was going to say that I have submitted my testimony in writing.

I wanted to say simply that it seems to me that the basic problemwhich the Southern Conference for Human Welfare bases its support for Federal aid to education on-is the success of democracy as directly related to the education of the voters.

Taking that in the South in particular, I think we, without reflecting on my home regions, are an indication of how much we have suffered in democracy and in prosperity as the result of not having sufficient education.

We are at the present time producing more than our share of children, about one-third, and we have less than our share of income of the national income, being only about one-fifth.

In illiteracy, the Selective Service showed 9 out of every 10 illiterates were from the South.

Then, in the 1940 census, among all the people of the South, age 25 or over, only 1 in 10 had finished high school.

These statistics are carried in the written statement but when we realize that the South is also paying a higher proportion of its income for education than most of the other States-for example, we find that in the South in 1943 and '44, more than half of the southern States exceeded the national average expenditure for education of 1.55 percent of the total income and one southern State devoted 2.47 percent to this purpose.

Then we realize also that the variation of expenditure per classroom unit goes all the way from $6,000 to $100 and that, it seems to me, adequately demonstrated that the people of this country are not being equally prepared for their democratic duty.

Furthermore, I think it should be realized as the national situation that a great many of the South's children grow up in ignorance and ill health, and then leave the South and go to other parts of the coun- . try to find economic opportunity.

It seems to me that this country is now committed to help democracy in any part of the world and it should certainly be willing to help democracy in the South.

Further and finally, I would like to say that the Southern Conference for Human Welfare is for any type of Federal aid to public education.

We approve of S. 472 with the exception of section 6 (B) and we approve even more heartily, Senator, of S. 199 with the exception of title 2.

We are entirely against any help to any kind of school other than public schools from public money.

Senator AIKEN. Mr. Foreman, I had an instance called to my attention this morning where there is a crippled children's home. I will be frank with you. I cannot tell where it is, but it was called to our attention that they were furnished supplies from public funds.

Now, what would your solution be to instances like that, children living in isolated areas and unable to get to school, or where they are crippled, if school boards were denied the right to lend public property, books, and supplies, to private families or institutions?

Mr. FOREMAN. Senator, I see no reason why public service, if adequate, could not take care of that situation just as well as a private school.

Senator AIKEN. Yes, but suppose there were no public school there. Suppose it was in an isolated area. I know communities where, as Mrs. Grubbs has testified, children would be completely denied a high school education if they could not attend a school which is partly private and partly supported by public funds.

Mr. FOREMAN. But, Senator, is not that the result of the fact that we do not have Federal aid to education? And in a number of cases, I am sure that is true now; but if we had Federal aid to education it would not be true, certainly.

Senator AIKEN. I have in mind communities of 600 to 800 population that simply could not support a public high school if they did not have the income from old endowments. They are public schools in fact, but they are not public schools in the eyes of the law and I