to validate, we think, the specific safeguards for minority racial groups that are included in this bill.

There are some 17 States and the District of Columbia which, by law require completely segregated schools for white and Negro children. These happen to be States in which four-fifths of all NegroAmericans live, and States whose resources for the support of public education are, with one or two exceptions, most meager. They are likewise the States in which educational facilities for Negro children are markedly inferior to even the substandard facilities for white children in the same communities. This condition was summarized as follows by one of the studies prepared for the President's Advisory Committee on Education:

THE STATUS OF NEGRO EDUCATION-A SUMMARY

The indexes utilized in this investigation point consistently, in practically every field, to a relatively low standard of public education for Negroes in the Southern States. In general, and especially in rural areas, Negro elementary pupils attend extremely impoverished, small, short-term schools, lacking in transportation service, void of practically every kind of instructional equipment, and staffed by relatively unprepared, overloaded teachers whose compensation does not approximate a subsistence wage. The vast majority of pupils progress through only the primary grades of these schools. The few who finish the elementary grades find relatively little opportunity, especially in rural areas, for a complete standard secondary education. Opportunities for education in public undergraduate colleges are even more limited, and opportunities for graduate and professional study at publicly controlled institutions are almost nonexistent. In most special and auxiliary educational programs and services-public libraries, vocational education, vocational rehabilitation, agricultural research, and agricultural and home economics extension-the same low standards obtain. Only in case of one or two Federal emergency programs is there an approach to proportional provision of public education for Negroes in these States.

Educational opportunities in all fields are much more nearly adequate for the white population. Though its status is far below that for the Nation as a whole, still, on a scale of relative adequacy, public education for white persons in these States is markedly superior to that for Negroes. For example, the general elementary and secondary schools for white children, as measured by per capita expenditures alone, function on a level which is approximating two and one-half times as high as that for corresponding Negro schools. The disparity between the general status of education for the two racial groups appears to be decreasing only very slowly, if at all.1

The CHAIRMAN. Doctor, may I suggest here, that since this is the last afternoon of the hearing, and since most of the statistics have already been put in the record, that where you have information which you are sure is in duplication of what we have heard, will you pass over that with the understanding that the recorder will make your record complete before it is printed?

Dr. WILKERSON. Surely. Of course I have not been following the testimony here but I think I know the types of data that have been presented, and I will abridge that, so far as this oral testimony is concerned.

The CHAIRMAN. The reporter will see that that appears properly in case you abridge your testimony.

I say this because I would dislike to see anyone crowded out completely this afternoon.

Dr. WILKERSON. Well, there are several things we would like to say about these general educational inequalities for which we won't here

1 Doxey A. Wilkerson, Special Problems of Negro Education. The Advisory Committee on Education, Staff Study No. 12, Washington: Government Printing Office, 1939, pp. 151-152.

317387-41—— 21

quote data. One is that they cannot be explained solely, or even primarily, in terms of the meager financial resources of States with segregated systems of schools. Rather, they are evidence of deliberate racial discrimination in the expenditure of public funds. Were the States to attempt to provide democratic educational opportunities for the education of all their children, then, such funds as are available would be divided equitably between their white and Negro schools. All would share alike in the resources available. Yet, while recognizing the discriminatory policies which characterize the expenditure of public education funds in States with segregated schools, it is important to appreciate the dilemma in which these States are placed, and the necessity of Federal aid for any basic correction of existing inequalities.

It is estimated that, during 1935-36, the 18 States with separate elementary and secondary schools spent $314,192,511 for white schools and $38,316,250 for Negro schools, a total expenditure for current purposes of $352,508,761. On the basis of their 6,300,320 white pupils and 1,885,690 Negro pupils in average daily attendance, per-capita expenditures averaged $49,87 per white pupil and $20.32 per Negro pupil, a ratio of more than 2 to 1. If these States were to have attempted to equalize white and Negro school conditions, they would have had to choose one of two alternatives; either they would have had to increase current expenditures for Negro schools by $55,723,110, which they simply lacked the financial resources to do; or they would have had to reduce the already inadequate expenditures for white schools in order to apply more money to Negro schools, which is both impractical and socially undesirable.

What is really needed, of course, is to raise the expenditure levels for both white and Negro schools to some defensible minimum standard of efficiency. It is estimated that to do this in the 18 States with separate schools, would require a gross school budget of nearly $807,000,000.

It is also estimated that, with a model tax plan and with reasonable effort to support schools, in 1935 these States could have raised from their own resources only about $575,000,000 for all social functions of government. Thus, the cost of a defensible program of education alone would be 40 percent more than these States could raise for education and all other social functions of government combined.

It is clear that any substantial correction of this situation is going to have to come through aid to these States in enlarging their educational outlays. It is also clear that the only source from which such subsidies might come is the Federal Government.

Experience has shown also that merely to give Federal funds to States with segregated school systems is not sufficient to further progress toward equality of educational opportunity. On the contrary, it appears with certain existing Federal subsidies that, unless prevented by law, the more money these States with segregated systems of schools receive, the less money, proportionately, do those States spend on Negro schools.

The CHAIRMAN. You mean by that, that that would just happen naturally?

Dr. WILKERSON. Not naturally; rather, I think, deliberately. What I am saying is this-I can cite many funds to illustrate, but in general it is this: When we give several million dollars, say, to the

southern school system for education, the bulk of that money is spent for the white schools, thereby even widening the disparity which previously existed between the two groups, rather than tending to equalize. We could illustrate that in many places. I should like to call brief attention to the Federal funds for vocational educationSenator ELLENDER (interposing). You wouldn't say that that is general, would you?

Dr. WILKERSON. Yes; it is general; it is documented.
Senator ELLENDER. Have you facts to show that?

Dr. WILKERSON. Yes.

Senator ELLENDER. I don't want to go into them but I suppose you mention them in your brief.

Dr. WILKERSON. I mention them here; I don't go into great detail. I would like to cite one fact which is illustrative in this regard. Take the 1935 expenditures under the Smith-Hughes Act, for vocational education. Some three and a half million dollars was spent in the 18 States with completely separate schools. These funds were apportioned among the States on the basis of their respective populations, including their Negro populations. Although Negroes constituted 21.4 percent of the aggregate population, only 9.8 percent of these Federal vocational funds was spent on Negro schools. On the basis of population ratios, Negro schools should have received $777,735. They actually received $354,934. Thus, the amount diverted from Negro to white schools-$422,801-was greater by more than $67,000 than the amount actually spent on Negro schools. Trends over a number of years reveal that this margin of financial discrimination varies directly with the amount of Federal funds available. The sole exception to this generalization, out of a dozen or more Federal educational subsidies, is found in case of the MorrillNelson funds for land-grant colleges. The act authorizing these funds requires that there be a "just and equitable" division of funds between white and Negro schools.

Thus, funds which S. 1313 would make available for public elementary and secondary education could be expected to be divided equitably between separate white and Negro schools only if the legal provisions governing the expenditure of funds expressly so require. It is for this reason that we believe the safeguards included in the bill are absolutely essential.

I would like to call brief attention to several of those safeguards, and why we think they are particularly important.

In the first place, the apportionment of funds is to be based, in part, upon

the financial implications of Federal court decisions interpreting the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution * * * as it relates to equal rights to educational opportunities.

Reference of course is to such things as the Gaines decision, salary fights, and various other matters. We think that is very wholesome because it expressly enunciates a Federal policy which ought to give marked impetus to the correction of the long-standing neglect of Negro education.

In the second place, this bill requires that in order to get funds, Southern States must set up a plan for the "just and equitable" division of the funds between white and Negro separate schools. That phrase "just and equitable" has a long legislative history with

regard to Federal subsidies for education. It was used in the second Morrill Act, and over the period of half a century has been so administered that that is the only Federal education fund out of a dozen or more, in which Negroes have shared with any degree of equity. In applying that formula to this bill we think we are doing something which is tremendously important and it is certainly a provision that needs to remain in the bill.

It is required, thirdly, that in providing for an equitable division of Federal funds, the States shall not reduce proportionately their own expenditures for Negro schools. That, of course, is necessary because otherwise, even though Federal funds are equitably divided, there could be a corresponding reduction in State and local funds, the net effect of which, of course, would be to leave the Negroes precisely where they are now.

A fourth provision here that we want to call attention to is the requirement that "State plans", on the basis of which funds are allotted, make definite provision for reducing inequalities in educational opportunities for schools serving minority racial groups. The "State plan" technique is something that characterizes other Federal legislation, and having had an opportunity to examine many of those plans, there is no inclusion in those plans of a provision tending to equalize school facilities for white and Negro children. We think that in expressly requiring that State school officials undertake planning to reduce these inequalities, this bill would stimulate a type of policy that ought to be tremendously wholesome, even beyond the effects of this particular Federal money.

It is also provided that there shall be a Federal audit of State expenditures, and a Federal review of audits of local expenditures. I want to comment on the latter, which is particularly important. We have found that in most of the Southern States, even though the State office disburses the funds with a fair degree of equity, the local school jurisdiction tends to divert funds received on the basis of Negro schools, and to spend them on the basis of white schools; and the review, not only of State, but of local expenditures, to see to what extent the purposes of the act have been carried out, we think is tremendously important.

Finally, it is provided here that reports on the use of this money must present separate data for white and Negro schools in States where there are separate schools. There are now many official Federal reports on education in which such data are impossible to get. Take again this large subsidy for vocational education under the Smith-Hughes and George-Deen Acts, it is impossible, from the published reports of the Office of Education, to find out if any, and how much, money in the Southern States was spent on white and Negro schools. Thus, such inequalities as there are, certainly are effectively concealed. We think one of the most important provisions of this bill is the requirement that these reports make detailed differentiation between expenditures for white and Negro schools, so that the public can know how the money is being used.

This brief review of the safeguards included in this bill reflects, we think, a very wholesome policy for the administration of Federal educational subsidies in States with separate schools. Each of these provisions, like the bill as a whole, should be enacted into law.

Achievement of this objective should be considered, however, only as a first step to the modification of Federal practices in this regard. It should be followed by amendments to existing Federal education laws to the end of incorporating in them such safeguards for Negro schools as are here proposed.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Dr. Wilkerson.

Senator HILL. Mr. Chairman, I take great pleasure in presenting to the committee, Dr. Charles B. Glenn, Superintendent of Schools of Birmingham, Ala.; former president of the American Association of School Administrators-in fact I think he has been the recipient of every honor that could come to an educator in the field of education in Alabama. He has just returned from the Pacific coast where he has been, with a group of educators, studying occupational education, and more particularly our educational problems today in connection with our defense program.

Dr. Glenn is one of the wisest and most outstanding educators in the country; has devoted all of his life to the cause of education and to the service of our people; and as an Alabamian I am very proud to present him here today to this committee.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Hill. Dr. Glenn, please proceed as you wish.

STATEMENT OF DR. C. B. GLENN, SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, BIRMINGHAM, ALA.

Dr. GLENN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would express to you my appreciation of the privilege of being here for this committee's study. My board of education, when I referred to them the request to appear before your committee felt that it was highly important that I should come and endeavor to bring to you their feelings about this matter of Federal aid at this particular time.

I gathered from the invitation which came to me that you did not desire that I should come to discuss the merits or demerits of the question in its general or broader aspects. You have had these presented to you many times. You are familiar, no doubt, with the need that has arisen in this emergency for caring for the unexpected increases in population due to defense industries that are opening up. I feel that the South, because it is not so highly industrialized, is not as much interested in that problem, as serious as it is, as some other sections, certainly not as much as the Pacific coast which I have recently visited.

But we are deeply interested in one phase of it, the need of Federal aid in order to provide adequate and equal educational opportunity for whites and Negroes in line with a recent decision of the United States Supreme Court, and I am very glad to speak to you on that, although, as you will appreciate, I have no authority to speak for our State-I believe our State superintendent has been before you or is to be I haven't even the authority to speak for the city of Birmingham or its board of education; but I can speak definitely for the school administration of the city of Birmingham, and what recommendations it would make to its board of education touching this matter.