Mr. BARDEN. They refer to Texas as being the most outlying province of the State of New York. What do you know about that? Dr. DAWSON. The thesis will be presented that Texas is the richest foreign colony owned by Manhattan.

Mr. COLE. It still is true of the State of Texas that they tax property owned by the companies.

Dr. DAWSON. They do tax them but they do not get income by property taxes. You cannot use a corporation income tax or a personal income tax. The people who get the revenue do not pay the taxes. There is a definite limitation in getting the corporation income tax because of the interstate machinery of interlocking directorates and holding companies which defeats any purposes of State legislation insofar as rates are concerned. Texas has to stay within the limits of rates levied by other States.

3. UNEQUAL ABILITY OF THE STATES

ARE THERE PARTICULAR STATES OR SECTIONS WHICH ARE UNABLE TO PAY FOR A SUITABLE EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM?

The answer to this question is that there are such great differences in wealth, income, and purchasing power among States and sections of this Nation that in a practical sense many States are actually unable to provide educational opportunities in keeping with standards prevailing in the Nation as a whole. Consequently there is no probability that suitable educational programs will or can be provided for all the children of all the States without Federal distribution of revenues for education.

This situation prevails because of two conditions:

(a) There are great differences among the States and sections in the actual per-capita wealth, income, and purchasing power.

(b) There are great differences among the States and sections in the number of children of educable age as compared to the number of adults of productive ages, there being relatively many more children in the poorer areas and States than in the richer.

DIFFERENCES IN ECONOMIC POWER

In wealth per child enrolled in school the States range from $2,819 to $21,582. There are 12 States that have in excess of $12,500 in wealth back of each child, while there are 11 States that have less than $6,000 per child.

With respect to income the States range from $495 to $3,766 per child enrolled in school. The 11 highest States have in excess of $2,500 income per child as compared to less than $1,200 for the lowest 11 States.

The purchasing power of the people of a State is perhaps best reflected by the per-capita retail sales. In this respect the States range from $71.16 to $320.05, there being 12 States that exceed $234 while 12 States fall below $148. (See table VI for data by States on wealth and income by States.)

DIFFERENCES IN THE RELATIVE NUMBER OF CHILDREN

The States differ not only in the financial resources with which to support education but also in the number of children each adult or family has to rear and educate. Almost invariably the smaller the per-capita taxpaying ability in a State, the larger is the number of children in ratio to the number of adults. For example, South Carolina, a poor State, has 928 persons 5 to 20 years old to each 1,000 persons 21 to 65 years old, the productive ages, while the ratio in California is only 399 to 1,000. For the 12 richest States the ratio is only 473 to 1,000 while for the 12 poorest States the ratio is 740 to 1,000. Thus, the education burden of the 12 poorer States is nearly 60 percent greater than the burden in the 12 richer States, while the per-capita taxpaying ability in the poorer States is only about half that of the richer States.

The farmers of the southeast section of the United States have 14 percent of the school children of the Nation, but only 2 percent of the income of the Nation.

Population experts have shown that it is from these poorer agricultural States that the richer industrial States whose birth rates are not sufficient to replace their population receive a large part of their immigrations necessary to maintain a stable population and to staff their offices and industrial plants.

It is well known that those sections of the Nation least able to support public schools are those largely devoted to agriculture. Yet these sections are producing practically all of the Nation's future increase in population and a considerable percentage of the future population of our cities. These conditions occur because of the differences in birth rate in rural and urban areas. In seven largest cities the population of which consists chiefly of American stock, the birth rate is 40 percent short of the rate required to maintain a stable population; in all cities having over 1,000 in population the deficiency in birth rate averages over 20 percent; and in the smaller cities the deficiency is about 8 percent. On the other hand, farm families are producing about 50 percent more children than required to replace the farm population and the rural nonfarm families rear children at the rate of 30 percent greater than the number required to replace themselves.

When we couple these facts with the fact that taxable wealth and income are largely concentrated in the cities and industrial areas of the Nation, and with the fact that much of our social income can be reached and distributed only by the Federal Government, it becomes apparent that the Federal Government cannot in fairness leave the whole cost of education to rural communities and the farmers in the predominantly rural States.

It has been reliably estimated that during the decade of 1920-30 the contribution of rural to urban areas resulting from the migration of persons over 15 years old to industrial cities was about $35,000,000,000, or about 32 billion dollars annually a year, which was about one-third of the average annual gross income of all farmers during the decade. Another third of the gross income was paid as wages, as taxes (excluding school taxes), and for various items, principally for fertilizer, machinery, lumber, and other materials purchased from industry.

A comparison of the proportionate number of children in the total population with the expenditures per pupil for education shows clearly that as a Nation we are bestowing educational opportunities upon sections that have the fewest children and upon children who in turn will produce the fewest children. Although this policy may not be intentional, it is a very successful method of committing cultural and economic suicide.

1 Found by dividing the numbers for each State shown in column 2 by the number for California, the lowest State.

TO WHAT EXTENT ARE THERE INEQUALITIES OF EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES AMONG THE STATES?

Without exception States that rank relatively low in economic ability and relatively high in the proportionate number of children rank correspondingly low in the quality of educational opportunity offered.

(a) The average school term ranges from 912 months in the highest State to 62 months in the lowest State. In fact, in eight States the average number of days attended by rural pupils is less than 612 months.

(b) If high schools were universally available and attended, the maximum high-school enrollment would constitute about 33% per

cent of the total elementary and secondary enrollment. In the highest State the high-school enrollment is now 30.9 percent of the total enrollment, while in the lowest State it is only 10.6 percent. There are 12 States that have high-school enrollments exceeding 25 percent of their total enrollment, while there are 11 States that have less than 16 percent.

(c) There are in the Nation about 2,750,000 children for whom there are no public-school facilities provided. There are nearly another 2,750,000 that are attending school only part-time because of inadequate building facilities or are attending school in temporary structures and buildings that are unsanitary and unsafe.

(d) In one State only 0.8 percent of the population over 10 years of age are illiterate, while in another State 14.9 percent of the population over 10 years old are illiterate. It happens that the first State has for decades spent approximately three times as much per child for public schools as the second State has spent. The differences in per-capita wealth and income of these two States are about as great as the differences in public-school expenditures.

(e) Average annual expenditures per pupil for current operating costs in the highest State $137.69, and the lowest State $24.50. In this respect there are 13 States in which the average expenditure per pupil exceeds $85, while there are 12 States that fall below $50.

(f) The average annual salary per teacher in the highest State is $2,361, and in the lowest States $465. In this respect there are 11 States that exceed $1,400 and 12 States that fall below $750.

(g) The value of public-school property per pupil attending school is $570 in the highest State and $62 in the lowest. There are 16 States that have school property exceeding a value of $300 per pupil, while 11 States below $150.

(h) The differences in the breadth of educational opportunity, resulting from the differences reflected by the statistical data cited above, are correspondingly great.

In the year 1934 there were more than 600,000 children in the United States that were attending schools that were in session less than 6 months. There were more than 100,000 in schools that were open 3 months or less; 148,000 in schools that were open between 3 and 42 months; nearly 488,000 in schools that were open from 52 to 62 months; and nearly 705,000 in schools that were open from 62 to 72 months. Thus, nearly 1,350,000 children were in schools open less than a minimum standard term of 8 months. Almost without exception these children were in rural schools.

EFFECT OF THE DEPRESSION ON EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES

The inequalities in educational opportunities just described are of long standing. There is no period in our national history when similar inequalities could not have been described.

Within recent years inequalities have tended to become even greater. Since 1930, in several States that have always spent most for education, the total expenditures for that purpose have increased, but in the States where expenditures have always been comparatively small great reductions have been made. Consequently, inequalities are probably greater than at any other time in our national history. For example, contrast the States of New York and South Carolina. From 1930-32 total expenditures for schools in New York in

creased 5.3 percent, while in South Carolina, which in 1930 was spending only about one-fifth as much per pupil as New York, publicschool expenditures have decreased 21 percent. During this time the number of pupils attending school in New York increased 4.9 percent and the number of teachers employed increased 6 percent, while in South Carolina the number of pupils increased 7.2 percent and the number of teachers decreased by 2.6 percent. In other words, the general tendency has been for the rich to become richer and the poor poorer during the depression. Inequalities in educational opportunities are becoming greater as time goes on.

From 1930-34 expenditures for all governmental purposes in the entire Nation increased 20 percent. When broken down into Federal, State, and local expenditures it is found that Federal expenditures increased 109.6 percent, State expenditures decreased 5.8 percent, and local expenditures decreased 15.2 percent. During this same period expenditures for all public education decreased 25.6 percent. The total amount of decreases in educational expenditures since 1930 has been over $665,000,000 annually. Thus, the schools have suffered greater decreases in expenditures than other types of Government. This has occurred in spite of the fact that school enrollments constantly increased during the same period of time. During this same period the number of children enrolled in schools increased by more than 756,000. All of this increase, however, was in the high-school grades. The number of students in public high school was almost one-third greater in 1934 than in 1930. (See charts IV and V.)

The extent to which each of the States has been effected by decreases in public-school revenues is reflected in table attached hereto. TABLE V.-Current expenditures per pupil and the percentage of decreases in current expenditures for schools, 1930-34