forts you have made, along with Dr. Guy Philips, dean of the school of education, the University of North Carolina; Mr. Dallas Herring, the State board of education chairman, and your associates in the administrative field in the schools of North Carolina.

Mr. SCHWENGEL. I would like to add one statement. I am pleased, too, that you took the trouble to come here. I appreciate your statement, which was a fine one.

I think your coming here and appearing before some members of the local board might be helpful in their thinking through this problem.

We have an appointive board now. Some think it is an illegal board, some good lawyers do, but nevertheless we have an appointed board whom I understand can act on this question and perhaps your testimony will help them.

I only raise the point of the advisability of this committee and the Congress passing on this question rather than what I would prefer to be a legally elected school board.

Dr. SUGG. Thank you, gentlemen.

Mr. WHITENER. Mr. Hagen, will you take over for a moment, please? Mr. HAGAN. The next witness to appear before the subcommittee is Mr. Wesley S. Williams, President of the Board of Education, Washington.

Mr. Williams?

Are you speaking for the other members of the Board or yourself?

STATEMENT OF WESLEY S. WILLIAMS, PRESIDENT, BOARD OF EDUCATION, WASHINGTON, D.C.

Mr. WILLIAMS. For the other members of the Board so far as my prepared statement is concerned, sir.

Mr. HAGAN. You may proceed.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Whitener and the members of the committee, may I thank you for your invitation to appear and, as President of the District of Columbia Board of Education, express proper concern in relation to proposed bills H.R. 4273, amending the compulsory school attendance act, and H.R. 4274, amending that section of the District of Columbia Code that pertains to school discipline. In both of these proposed bills the responsibility of the District of Columbia Board of Education is being set aside and a precedent established that can weaken, rather than strengthen, the structure of public education in the United States.

The Board of Education of the District of Columbia under title 31, section 103, Organic Act, June 20, 1905, legally is empowered to determine all questions of general policy relating to the schools of which policies governing the dismissal of pupils of compulsory school age and policies governing disciplinary action in the schools are an inherent part. We have clearly defined written policies, based on a thorough understanding of the educational process. In formulating our policies, individuals and groups affected by our policies were consulted. We recognize that while we are a policymaking body, we properly delegate the execution of these policies to employed professional administrators and their staffs.

We appreciate the interest of the members of your committee to wish to strengthen the position of and respect for public education and for public school personnel, but we respectfully advise that any legislation which deprives the Board of Education of its rightfully constituted authority will detract from, rather than contribute toward, this desired outcome.

In the strong conviction that the American system of public education will best meet the needs of its citizenry, we function in a nonpartisan, broadly representative, and team-spirited manner. We believe that every member of our Board open-mindedly is obligated to consider the good of the entire school system, and of the community at large.

Our consideration for the overall local needs must take precedence in the Board of Education over every form of partisanship and special interest-political, racial, religious, geographic, economic, social or

other.

The legislation proposed is not, however, confined only to a matter of local significance in the District of Columbia. It is a matter of import to boards of education in all other public school districts as they responsibly assume, through oath of office, the faithful and full discharge of their official duties. The policy adopted by the National School Board Association's delegate assembly at St. Louis, Mo., April 11-12, 1962, is the position that we must support in behalf, not only of the District of Columbia but for the benefit and protection of school board members in every other city, county and State.

The policy adopted by the National School Board Association, as mentioned and to which we subscribe, is that operation and control of public schools is vested in local school boards and that this is an essential requirement for their efforts as they strive to improve the educational opportunity of the children, youth, and adults whom they serve. Our focal School Board is not unlike the local school boards in other geographic districts-except we do not possess fiscal independence.

We fully subscribe to the National School Board Association's belief that the responsibilities of local school boards include a legal responsibility for the control of public schools; that they are the only agencies in their communities invested with this responsibility. This includes civic responsibility as the controlling agency providing a basically essential service to the life of the community, social responsibility to all who look to the public schools as the center of growth and development for children, youth and adults, an economic responsibility since there is a direct relationship between good schools and business prosperity, and a moral and ethical responsibility to function courageously and impartially in order to assure the greatest good to the greatest number of lives.

As has been brought to your committee's attention, if in cities of larger size, namely, Baltimore, Philadelphia, New York, and Chicago, with more complex social problems, and with similar school situations and needs the rules of the board of education constitute the provision governing dismissal of pupils and prohibit corporal punishment, it cannot be that the Board of Education in Washington, D.C., is to be restrained from the proper formulation, interpretation and application of its own rules governing public school operation. Yet, H.R. 4273

and H.R. 4274 would abrogate the Board of Education's authority and prevent its independent functioning in the area of its authorized responsibility for local public schools.

We ask your serious attention to this effect of the legislation that is being proposed and of the implications for the civil liberty of school boards throughout the Nation. The implementation of school board policies by the school administration is conditioned by these matters about which you propose legislation. As the school administrators are the employed agents of the boards of education to carry out board policies, such legislation imposes an additional conflictual situation in relation to the local autonomy of these boards.

Therefore, sirs, we respectfully oppose H.R. 4273 and H.R. 4274. Again, thank you, gentlemen, for your interest, your courtesy, and for your sincere belief in public education as one of the fundamental cornerstones in the consistent realization and preservation of our American democracy.

Mr. HAGAN. We thank you very much for this statement. I wonder at this time if you would like to present the other members of your Board who may be present, and give each, as you present them, an opportunity to say a few words.

I see our time will not permit each of you to make the full statement you might like, but we would entertain at this time an expression from the other members of the Board as you present them to the committee.

Mr. WILLIAMS. I shall be happy to do so, sir.

Mrs. Steele?

Mrs. STEELE. I am in utter agreement with Mr. Williams, and perhaps I am saying something that is not right, but I feel it is very difficult for us to sit here and listen each time we are called here to the opinions of people from Texas, North Carolina, and others, whose problems cannot be completely similar to ours.

I do feel, too, that it is rather insulting to the Board of Education of the District to have the chairman of this committee sit here throughout all the other testimony and when the representatives of our School Board are called he walks out of the room. I am unable to express myself on that.

I

Mr. HAGAN. I want to assure you that Chairman Whitener had some other business important at the moment or he would not have left. can further assure you that he will return in a very few minutes. Mrs. STEELE. The last thing I would like to say to the members of the committee who are here is this:

It is my strong hope that this will not be the record of this committee's review of legislation for the District schools. I hope that this committee will take up legislation which eventually will help our schools, legislation on increased Federal payment, on authorization for increased borrowing, and the authorization for us to increase some of our taxes in the District which would very much affect the programs in our schools so we can have those programs which were mentioned this morning which would further meet the needs of our students.

Thank you for this opportunity.

Mr. HAGAN. Before you proceed, Mr. Williams, I must ask that other members testifying confine their remarks to the proposed bills in question.

The bills you spoke of will probably be taken up in another submittee, so in the interest of time let us confine our remarks to the two bills at hand.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Dr. McLendon, chairman of our committee on health and education.

Dr. MCLENDON. I have very few words. First, discipline is always accompanied by respect.

Secondly, I question the import of congressional control of the policies of any board of education, no matter where it may be.

However, I can see the need of Congress to protect its own domain. Mr. HAGAN. Thank you very much, sir.

Let me ask you this, and I am seeking information, too. As you well know, I am new here, but so far as any action that this Congress takes in this committee, it is certainly not something we decided to do all of a sudden. The writers of the Constitution gave that authority to the Congress and they undoubtedly had pretty good reasons for it. Do you agree on that?

Dr. MCLENDON. I do.
Mr. HAGAN. Proceed.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Carl Smuck, chairman of the finance committee. Mr. SMUCK. I want to say that I am thoroughly in accord with the purpose and intent of this legislation.

I would hope we can resolve all these matters within the framework of our Board of Education.

Mr. HAGAN. Thank you.

Mr. WILLIAMS. I think there are only four of the nine members here this morning. When this hearing began we had every member present to listen carefully to the presentation.

I thank you again for this opportunity.

Mr. HAGAN. We thank you for appearing.

Mr. SCHWENGEL. I would like to say something if I may.

Sir, I have been visiting your schools. As soon as I can get a report ready, and after I have visited some more schools, I will ask this committee to give me some time to present a case for your schools. Mr. WILLIAMS. I certainly appreciate that.

Mr. SCHWENGEL. I want to say this, Mr. Chairman. I think it unfortunate that this display of attitude we have here might reveal we are interfering, or we might interfere, with free speech.

These people on this School Board in this District have been contending with some very real problems, problems that the Congress has been responsible for, sir.

Educational institutions in this city, which should be the model to this Nation, are in many cases a disgrace. This is not because of the School Board, because they have under difficult situations done some pretty wonderful things here, and I will report on that, too.

Sir, I am glad to have your testimony. I am sorry that some of the people have been denied the right to say, or may have been denied the right to say, what they want to say before this committee. Mr. HAGAN. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. SCHWENGEL. Yes, sir.

Mr. HAGAN. That is information I certainly would like to explore as a new member of this committee.

Mr. Chairman, I will turn this gavel over to you.

My understanding is that this committee has never refused to let any citizen be heard.

This is a rather serious charge that the gentleman from Iowa has made here, that this committee refuses to let people be heard and that the committee does not believe in the right of freedom of speech.

I would like to see that documented, Fred, if there is information you have.

I shall turn the Chair back to the chairman, but I would appreciate your giving me a letter or information to that effect.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Chairman?

Mr. WHITENER (presiding). Proceed.

Mr. WILLIAMS. I have completed my statement, sir.

I have here a copy of the minutes of the Board approving a recommendation of the Superintendent on March 20, 1963, having to do with late afternoon classes.

Someone called the office and requested that I bring copies of this action taken at that time.

If it may be made part of the record I am leaving it.

Mr. Schwengel, I must thank you for the remarks you made. I am proud of our system and will match it with any system. I am proud of our system, our teachers, and our Superintendent. As you stated, our troubles do not lie in just this sphere but in many other areas. Thank you, sir.

Mr. WHITENER. Is this the statement you want to make part of the record, this 1-page letter?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, the notation of the action of the Board being at the top of the page. Someone from your office called and asked for this.

Mr. WHITENER. We shall make that part of the record. (The letter referred to follows:)

SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, Washington, D.C., March 20, 1963.

To the BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN : This is to request authority of the Board of Education to set up late afternoon and evening classes if necessary for pupils under suspension or otherwise unable to profit by attendance in the day school program.

It is understood that such classes will be staffed by full-time teachers, if and when they are set up, and that an effort will be made to extend the school use into the late afternoon and evening for community activities in connection with the extended day program now being planned.

The Superintendent recommends that the Board of Education authorize the establishment of the extended day program under a waiver of the rules of the Board of Education as contained in chapter XII, section 3, paragraphs 1 and 2; section 4, paragraph 1; section 5, paragraph 1; and section 6, paragraph 1. Respectfully submitted.

CARL F. HANSEN, Superintendent of Schools.

(Approved by Board of Education on March 20, 1963, on an experimental basis, not to extend beyond June 30, 1963.)