"To involve all citizens, a program in the field of international understanding must move beyond the conventional school-community relationships and organizations. In many communities economic and social groups are already at work on programs designed to increase understanding of international problems. The school, as a public agent, should seek to coordinate such efforts in order that the total impact of community thinking may be brought to bear on major issues. Such a role brings the school into working contact with those agencies in the community which are keyed to action, thus helping youth to function directly with adults and community agencies. By such procedure, too, the danger is lessened that the schools may remain ideological islands in a culture in which decisions are based on values remote from those taught in the school." Page 91: "*** How can schools organize to assume their responsibility? "Some of the elements and major tasks of developing a program of education for international understanding have been delineated in the preceding pages. The problem of organizing schools, school systems, and school-community relations must yet be considered. The principles and procedures suggested in the paragraphs which follow are not peculiar to the field of international understanding; they apply to any curriculum area." Pages 92-98: "Faculty planning. "Community participation. "Teaching aids and procedures. "Student participation. "Individual teacher initiative. "Administration and supervision." Page 98: “* * * The administrative officials, together with the interschool planning committee, should develop such guiding principles as the following: "The school system is committed to the task of educating for international understanding, which is recognized as an integral part of the total curriculum program. The task takes its place with other imperatives in the school program. "Each established part of the school system is involved. "An interdepartmental planning committee in each school is desirable for the purpose of releasing and coordinating individual school developments. "Each school is encouraged to develop individual programs as effectively and rapidly as possible. "An interschool planning committee exists for the purpose of interchange of information and stimulation. Individual school-planning committees may pool ideas through it and thus move toward more effective general school-system procedures." Page 1005: "The School in Community Organization for World Understanding "The last chapter, VI, is entitled 'Aids and Sources,' and has four sections: "Readings on the 10 marks of the world-minded American. "Reading materials especially for pupils. "Films and filmstrips. "Continuing sources." On page 217, under the first of these sections, it is stated: "Readings on the 10 Marks of the World-Minded American "This section is devoted largely to books and pamphlets, but a few magazine articles are also listed. Items in this bibliography have been selected with two criteria in mind: Authoritativeness and representativeness. Authors of works cited are in nearly all cases recognized authorities in their respective special fields. Readings listed have been chosen to represent different points of view and different facets of each of the 10 marks. No title is cited more than once in this 10-part bibliography; for, even though many of the references might contribute to understanding of 2 or more marks, each is classified under the mark to which it can make its most distinctive contribution. All readings in this section are written on the adult level and may, therefore, be expected to be of most usefulness to teachers, but many of them may also be used profitably by secondary-school students. "The books and pamphlets have not all been checked, because of the limitation of time, but a casual glance reveals such names as Manley O. Hudson, Philip C. Jessup, W. E. B. DuBois, Max Lerner, Alvin H. Hansen, Stuart Chase, Commission to Study the Organization of the Peace (Eichelberger), Maxwell S. Stewart, Mortimer Adler, Lowell Mellett, Joseph Kise as well as pamphlets from U. N. and the Foreign Policy Association, Institute of International Education, the Public Affairs Committee, and World Peace Foundation. "In a section headed 'Acknowledgments' at the end of the book, these names appear: "Chandoe Reid of the Horace Mann-Lincoln Institute of School Experimentation, Teacher's College, Columbia University, E. U. Condon, Vera Micheles Dean, Frank Fleming, Donald Stone, Quincy Wright, Harry Bard, David Adler. "In addition, Willard E. Givens, under the title Education for the New America' in the proceedings of the 72d annual meeting of the National Educational Association, is quoted as follows: ""This report comes directly from the thinking together of more than 1,000 members of the department of superintendence "A dying laissez-faire must be completely destroyed and all of us, including the "owners," must be subjected to a large degree of social control. A large section of our discussion group, accepting the conclusions of distinguished students, maintain that in our fragile, interdependent society the credit agencies, the basic industries, and utilities cannot be centrally planned and operated under private ownership. "Hence they will join in creating a swift nationwide campaign of adult education which will support President Roosevelt in taking these over and operating them at full capacity as a unified national system in the interests of all of the people. "Mr. Givens became executive secretary of NEA in 1935 and remained in that post until 1952 according to Who's Who. Briefly he has a 'diploma' from Union Theological Seminary, A. M. from Columbia, was a fellow of Educational Institute of Scotland 1947, was a member of the American Youth Commission of the American Council on Education, member of Educational Policies Commission of American Academy of Political and Social Science, member of United States education mission to Japan, 1946, Board of Visitors, Air University, 1946-50; member, combined Armed Forces educational program, 1949-53; chairman, National Conference for Mobilization of Education, 1950; chairman, second United States educational mission to Japan, 1950. "This organization began back in 1865 as the National Association of School Superintendents, and 1870 became one of the four original departments of the NEA. Under the act of incorporation (1906) it was called the department of superintendence, and in 1921 was reorganized with a full-time executive secretary at NEA headquarters. In 1937 the department adopted a revised constitution and bylaws, and its name was changed to the American Association of School Administrators. According to the NEA Handbook, 1953-54, it has a membership of 8,700" (p. 290). Mr. WORMSER. That is all we have to offer you today, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Dodd has been on the stand almost 2 hours. The CHAIRMAN. There may be some questions. Mr. HAYS. I have a whole series of questions. I hope they will not take as long as Senator McCarthy is taking with Mr. Stevens. I think I can do it in an hour or less. I think in view of the fact that it is almost time for the House to go into session we might defer them until the morning. I can start. The CHAIRMAN. We do have 15 minutes, but that is entirely with the convenience of the committee. Then if agreeable we will resume Tuesday morning, concluding with Mr. Dodd, and then having the other witnesses. So we will tentatively schedule the hearing for the Public Works Committee room on Tuesday, at 10 o'clock. The committee will be adjourned. (Thereupon at 11:55 a. m., a recess was taken, the committee to reconvene in the Public Works Committee room, on Tuesday, May 18, 1954, at 10 a. m.) TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS TUESDAY, MAY 18, 1954 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D. C. The special subcommittee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to recess, in room 429 of the House Office Building, Hon. Carroll Reece (chairman of the special committee) presiding. Present: Representatives Reece (presiding), Hays, Goodwin, and Pfost. Also present: Rene A. Wormser, general counsel; Arnold T. Koch, associate counsel; Norman Dodd, research director; Kathryn Casey, legal analyst; and John Marshall, Jr., chief clerk of the special committee. The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. I think Mr. Dodd remained to be questioned. Will you take the witness chair, Mr. Dodd? Mr. WORMSER. Before Mr. Dodd starts, may we introduce a composite copy of the Cox committee record and their report? I certainly hope it does not need to be reprinted, but I think it ought to be part of our record. The CHAIRMAN. It is submitted to be a part of the record but not for printing, you mean? Mr. WORMSER. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. I see no objection to that. Without objection, it will be accepted. (The documents referred to are on file with the committee.) TESTIMONY OF NORMAN DODD, RESEARCH DIRECTOR, SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS— Resumed The CHAIRMAN. Congressman Hays had some questions he wanted to ask you. Mr. HAYS. The record will show that Mr. Dodd is still under oath; is that right? The CHAIRMAN. Oh, yes. I am assuming that is the case. That is the case, is it not, Mr. Wormser? Mr. WORMSER. Óh, yes. Mr. HAYS. Mr. Dodd, I would like to ask you if you prepared the statement that you made to this committee on Monday and Tuesday, May 10 and 11? Mr. DODD. Did I prepare it, Mr. Hays? Mr. HAYS. Yes. Did you prepare it? Mr. DODD. Yes, sir; I prepared it, sir. Mr. HAYS. Do you have a copy of that statement in front of you? Mr. DODD. I have. Mr. HAYS. You may want to refer to it. Mr. DODD. I have a mimeographed copy right here, Mr. Hays. Mr. HAYS. On page 14 of the prepared statement, you said, and I quote: We have used the scientific method and included both inductive and deductive reasoning as a check against the possibility that a reliance upon only one of these might lead to an erroneous set of conclusions. Is that true? Mr. DODD. That is true, sir. Mr. HAYS. In the foreword of the same document, you expressed the hope that your research report would be determined by this committee, the foundations, and the public to be "constructively critical,” and I quote the last two words, is that true? Mr. DODD. That was my hope; yes, sir. Mr. HAYS. The research report which you presented was your personal report based on the work of the research staff under your direction, is that true? Mr. DODD. Yes, sir. Mr. HAYS. Conclusions of your report are presented therefore and represent your personal honest conclusions as to the results of the research work done under your direction? Mr. DODD. In a descriptive sense, yes, Mr. Hays. Mr. HAYS. You have not by omission or alteration set forth these conclusions in any way so as to mislead this committee or the public with respect to your findings? Mr. DODD. On the contrary, I have done everything that I could do to make it helpful to the committee. Mr. HAYS. I have some notes being typed up which I thought would be here by this time. I have been a little handicapped by not having a complete staff, and there are two quotations in those notes that I would like to read to you from your report. Perhaps I can find them before the girl gets here. While I am waiting for that, looking for that, have you been able to get together with the staff on a definition of what you mean by pro-American yet? Mr. DODD. I have, sir. Mr. HAYS. Could we have that definition at this point? Mr. DODD. A working definition for this purpose would to me be that which fosters and furthers the principles and the form of the United States Government and the constitutional means set forth to change those principles. In other words, it would be the reverse of the definition which we used as to what was un-American. The CHAIRMAN. And the institutions under which we have prospered for some 160 years. Mr. DODD. I have confined it entirely to the Government, for working purposes, Mr. Hays. Mr. HAYS. Well, that is merely a working definition, so that we have it in there when we talk about this term and we will have a general idea what is meant by it. Mr. DODD. I would like to feel that we were very specific in that sense and we knew that we didn't mean something else. The CHAIRMAN. While you are waiting, would you permit an interjection? Mr. HAYS. Surely. The CHAIRMAN. I might ask, Mr. Dodd, if any efforts to influence. you or the research staff have been made by the chairman or, for that matter, any other member of the committee? Mr. DODD. On the contrary, sir, I know of no such efforts to influence, if I understand the word "influence." Mr. HAYS. I might ask a question right there which is brought to my mind. Have you had very much direction from the chairman or any member of this committee in the way your research would go? I mean, have you been told what general lines to follow, or have you just, more or less, gone on your own? Mr. DODD. I think it has been a matter of complete freedom of exchange, and keeping the chairman absolutely informed, Mr. Hays. The CHAIRMAN. But has not the chairman, from the very beginning, advised the staff, as he so advised the committee, that his hope was that the study of this committee would be completely objective in an effort to draw a picture of the whole foundation question for the benefit of the Congress and the people in the years to come? Mr. DODD. Mr. Chairman, everybody with whom I have had contact in this has taken that exact stand. Mr. HAYS. I thought I would have these questions typed. But in the meantime I can ask you a couple of others and then we will go back to this original group. I have here an editorial from the New York Herald Tribune of Saturday, May 15, and I will quote you a statement. It says: The assumption seems to be referring to these hearings The assumption seems to be that there is a public interest or an American idea or an accepted body of dogma to which the facts must be made to conform in these hearings. Now, do you take that attitude, that there is a definitely outlined public interest, and this is in quotes "or an American idea," or an accepted body of dogma that all things must conform to or else they are not in the public interest, and un-American? Mr. DODD. No, sir. I felt, Mr. Hays, that there was an accepted body of principles which were traditionally American to which these facts, as they unfolded, should be related. It is not made to conform, if I understand what you mean correctly. Mr. HAYS. You say that you think there is an American body of principles. That is a kind of vague term. I do not exactly know what you mean by that. Could you define that a little more? Mr. DODD. I can define it by describing exactly how we approached this matter. Starting with the obligations set forth in the resolution, it seemed to me that the committee was obliged to look over a set of facts against a background of those elements which were used as the basis for a definition as to what was un-American or subversive. Now, that working definition referred us to the Constitution and a set of principles. Only to that extent do I believe that there is a definable basis against which these facts must be looked at. 49720-54-pt. 1——6 |