and before they have learned any practical subjects. Such a method is almost reverting back to the early 19th century. In such a system the student is not supervised by trained instructors, he does not perform all tasks, he is neither fish nor fowl. He then puts in 2 more years ashore and never goes to sea again until he is graduated.

At the beginning of our Revolutionary War we had no Navy and we relied upon our merchant captains and their crews and vessels. They did a valiant job but it, even then, had long been recognized that there was a difference between a naval officer and a merchant-marine officer.

A naval officer is trained for war and to fight with ships.

A merchant-marine officer is trained for peace and to trade with ships. But wars do come and the naval commander finds that he must rely upon merchant ships for his supplies and the merchant-marine officer finds that he must rely upon the naval commander to get his ships and cargo to their destination. Perfect teamwork and coordination must exist between them. This cannot be obtained by putting a naval officer in command of a merchant ship and a merchant-marine officer in a naval uniform. Each must be left in his own field. While probably no legislation can be passed to accomplish this, it should be an announced policy of the Navy Department.

World War I also demonstrated that there must be closer understanding between merchant-marine and naval officers of their respective problems. For that reason the Navy Department orders naval officers to the maritime academies to instruct in naval science. We are not doing so to make naval officers of our graduates. That is a function of the Federal Government under our Constitution—it is a part of the obligation to provide for the common defense.

We are educating our graduates to become merchant-marine officers for the merchant-marine service which is, as set forth in the Merchant Marine Act, a private industry and the educating of our youth for private industry is a State function and right which the States did not delegate to the Federal Government.

I am in favor of our graduates being given a commission in the Naval Reserve, but it would be a great error if the Navy Department in time of war would order active merchant-marine officers to duty with the Navy. When the Korean incident occurred the Navy had contemplated doing this and I was called to Washington for a conference with the Chief of the Bureau of Personnel. We were successful in obtaining a decision that this would not be done and that our graduates could go into the merchant-marine service instead of the Navy if they so desired. Graduates not in the merchant-marine service who have a reserve officer's commission could, of course, be ordered to active naval duty without harm to the merchant-marine service and should be so ordered.

As stated above, the function of our State academy is to train merchantmarine officers. Merchant-marine officers are valuable as such to the United States in time of peace and of war. These academies are, because of their nature, expensive to maintain. There must be taught a certain amount of naval indoctrination and knowledge for cooperation and understanding in both peace and war. While the training of these officers is strictly a State function, yet the Federal Government has an interest in them, not necessarily from the point of view of possible Naval Reserve officers, but from teamwork to be obtained in time of war. It is for this reason that the Federal Government should continue to aid these State schools. It is not new in our Government for it to aid by grants State and private schools and colleges. The land-grant colleges are an example. The granting of contracts for experimental work is another example as is the sending of Army and Navy officers and other employees to State or private universities for instruction.

Congress in its great wisdom and foresight enacted a law in 1874 which, as amended, has ever since been an honored law of this Nation. I have attached to my statement and wish to make a part of the record the laws of the United States relative to State nautical academies and colleges. These are found in title 34, United States Code Annotated, sections 1121-1130. Basically these laws empower and authorize the Federal Government, in order to promote nautical education:

(a) To furnish a State a suitable vessel to be used for the benefit of any nautical school established by said State upon condition that there shall be maintained a school for the instruction of youth in navigation, marine engineering, and all matters pertaining to the proper construction, equipment, and sailing of vessels or any particular branch thereof;

(b) To repair or recondition and equip said vessel;

(c) To detail naval officers as instructors to said schools;
(d) To appropriate $25,000 for each school each year;

(e) To appropriate an additional amount of $25,000 for each school en t year provided the State agrees to admit to such schools students, residents in other States, upon such terms and in such numbers as the Maritime Coz mission may prescribe. By regulation the States do not get this amount f $25,000 in one lump sum, but only so much thereof equal to the numer of out-of-State students times certain per-capita costs.

The Federal Government has also appropriated in the last several years an annual uniform and textbook allowance and a small daily subsistence to a limited number of students.

For the fiscal year ending June 30, 1955, the Federal Government with respect to the California Maritime Academy appropriated the following:

These figures are approximate. The title to the ship remains in the United States and the annual overhaul is made in a private shipyard.

The total annual appropriation of all money by the Federal Government with respect to all 4 State academies for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1966 * $660,000. This was the amount appropriated for the previous fiscal year, and I am informed that the same amount has been placed by the Department of C merce in its budget for the coming fiscal year. There are a total of between 1986 and 1,100 students in the 4 State academies which is an annual cost to re Federal Government of about $600 to $700 per student, and this includes the costs of repairs by the Government to its own ship.

The long course of conduct between the Federal Government and the States having maritime academies has construed the Federal law and the intent of 12 parties and has caused each State to rely upon this aid.

In full reliance and solely upon these Federal laws, the maritime acade. ~ were founded by the 4 States, and in continued reliance upon said laws, ba expended millions of dollars in maintaining these academies year after year ad in the construction of facilities and buildings. At the California Marie Academy we just completed 2 new buildings at the sole cost to the State of C1. fornia of approximately $750,000. We have spent millions more. If it had : been for the Federal laws, we would never have founded our academy. W could not operate without a ship.

It would be a breach of faith if the Federal Government were to withdra this aid.

This brings me to an open and frank statement of our fears. I would like. point out that the members of our board serve without compensation and os v with the desire to aid in the education of our youth and to serve our State 1. country. We have nothing to gain or lose financially.

There is some reason why the Senate is making this study of the training officers for the merchant marine. We have three sources of merchant mar officers: (1) those who go to no school but come up from the ranks or, ne ise · through the hawsepipe, (2) graduates of State maritime academies and coron and (3) graduates of the Federal Academy at Kings Point.

I would rather do away with all State and Federal academies than to 7hibit our youth the right to come up from the ranks. It is the great Aren heritage. Every American boy has the inherent right to go to the top even *bhe may have been deprived by no fault of his own of higher learning. This not mean that the boy must not study and work hard. I am fully aware modern science is such that in part it can only be acquired in institut. E higher learning. But education alone does not make one intelligent.

*

Is the purpose of this Senate study to determine if the Federal Governm-should withdraw its aid from the State academies or from the Federal As 2or from both, or, on the other hand to determine if more aid should be given t State academies or to the Federal Academy, or both?

There is now pending before Congress a bill, H. R. 6043, already passe? “ the House, the purpose of which is to place the Federal Academy at Kings 1. r on a permanent basis. There are many of us who feel that if this bill is pess

here will be no further aid to the State academies. Without this Federal aid, I do not believe that the California Maritime Academy can exist.

Our fears are not unfounded.

Prior to the change in 1941 in the Federal law with respect to State academies, such academies were under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Navy. We had no troubles then with the Government. We received our ship, her annual overhaul, and $25,000 per year. The Government relied upon the integrity of the States to properly conduct these schools.

In 1941 the change in the law placed State academies under the jurisdiction of the War Shipping Administration, now the Maritime Administration. Reguations were promulgated to govern the State academies. Kings Point was commenced and was the favorite child of the Maritime Administration. We were told the Government was going to pay our students $65 per month. We said we did not want it-that we did not want to pay our boys for going to school. We were forced to take it. Like all gratuities, it had its bad effects. When Congress rightly cut out the appropriations a few years ago for this $65 monthly pay, some of our boys had to leave our school because of lack of funds to carry on.

Our troubles kept increasing, although those in charge of the State academies, in my opinion, collectively know more about training merchant marine officers than any other group in this country.

During the war, Telfair Knight, head of maritime training in the War Shipping Administration, came to my office in Los Angeles. I did not even know that he was in the city. He told me that he was on his way to San Francisco to immediately take away from us our training ship and was going to turn her over to some other Federal training activity. I told him that if he did so it would mean the immediate end of our academy because at that time we were just building our shore base and our only living quarters were aboard ship. He then told me that after the war there would be no place for State maritime academies in the training of merchant marine officers. It would all be done at the Federal Academy.

Needless to say, he did not take our ship from us, but forewarned is forearmed. His thinking expressed the ideas of the Training Division of the War Shipping Administration. I do not think it expressed the ideas of the Government or of the Administration. Thereafter we watched Mr. Knight carefully and checked continuously with the Bureau of Budget. Mr. Knight's successor was Admiral Tiedemann, and he told us that he favored the Federal Academy over the State academies, and if either were to be closed he hoped it would be the State academies. His duty was not to favor anyone, but to carry out the law.

Admiral Tiedemann was head of maritime training in the Maritime Administration when Mr. Louis S. Rothschild became the Federal Maritime Administrator. In the fall of 1953 the State academies were informed that Mr. Rothschild had decided to withdraw all Federal aid from State academies. He made an appointment with Governor Knight, of the State of California, to meet the Governor in Sacramento in October of 1953 to so inform him. There is no question in my mind but that this opinion of Mr. Rothschild was formed from information given to him by Admiral Tiedemann and the staff at Maritime Training, because it was identical in pattern and form with the thinking of the Division of Maritime Training for many years as expressed to me by Mr. Knight, and I feel that Admiral Tiedemann was attempting to take advantage of Mr. Rothschild's lack of knowledge of the background of the matter, this lack of knowledge arising solely because Mr. Rothschild was newly appointed and necessarily would know nothing of these things. It seemed to be the predetermined stand of those in charge of maritime training in the Maritime Administration, at least up to that time, that the existence of State maritime academies was incompatible with the existence of he Federal Maritime Academy at Kings Point. This was the stand of this small group of persons in maritime training of the Maritime Administration. I do not think it represented the vewpoint of either the Republican or Democratic administrations.

Upon learning of Mr. Rothschild's thinking, representatives of the State academies contacted the Department of Commerce and let them know the errors involved. Mr. Rothschild canceled his appointment with Governor Knight.

The next thing we knew was that Governor Knight received a letter, dated November 5, 1953, from Louis Rothschild, which was followed by another letter from him dated November 10, 1953, which letters I wish to put in the record at this place.

In his letter of November 5, 1953, Mr. Rothschild stated, with respect to the intention of the Maritime Administration to substantially reduce or perhaps en

tirely omit the participation of the United States in the training program d State maritime academies, that

"A further look at the records now leads us to believe, however, that (1) education is primarily a State rather than a Federal function; (2) training tained from the State academies is generally equal to, if not superior to, that provided at Kings Point; (3) graduates of the State academies have been edr cated at a lesser cost than those federally educated.

"Our present thinking is pointed, therefore, toward the total withdrawal d the Government from this field providing satisfactory arrangements for the training of merchant marine officers in numbers sufficient to meet the countrys needs can be made with California and the three other States which have training facilities.

"Preliminary exploratory conversations have been held with officials of Mu and Massachusetts and are scheduled with New York State officials."

The letter of November 5 then requests a meeting with representatives of al State academies with Mr. Rothschild in Washington on November 23, 1953 In his letter of November 10, 1953, Mr. Rothschild wrote Governor Knight whet was intended to be discussed at the meeting in Washington, said letter stat: as follows:

"Your people might want to be thinking meanwhile about our general ra which looks toward the elimination of the Merchant Marine Academy at Ks Point, N. Y., as of the end of this scholastic year, in exchange for which "e State maritime academies would undertake to do the whole training job at the officer level. The Federal Government would, of course, continue to fame the States with training ships and their upkeep. In addition thereto, the Navy would furnish enough personnel to continue military tactics training.

"The obligation to the boys now enrolled in the Kings Point Academy work be met by allowing them to complete their courses of 3, 2, or 1 years at the St academy best suited to their choice and possible of taking on these add ficta students. The Federal Government would expect to reimburse the States or 12 equitable basis for this service.

"Our studies indicate that there are now being produced more merkez marine officers than can be absorbed by the industry. Hence, the reason for the above proposal. Indications from Maine, Massachusetts, and New York » favorable, and it appears that we shall be able to make satisfactory arras ments, but failing these, there is only one course open to us, and that win be to withdraw Federal support from the State academies in lieu of a consol.d.” of the services."

Pursuant to these letters, representatives of all four State academies met w Mr. Rothschild in Washington on November 23, 1953, and I was there repressering the California Maritime Academy and the State of California, at the repet of Governor Knight.

The State academies told Mr. Rothschild that they could undertake t'e et gestions as made in his letter of November 10, 1953, and that the State acader would take on the then students enrolled in the Kings Point Academy so they could complete their education, started at Kings Point, and that the Sta academies could thereafter undertake the complete program of training chant marine officers for the United States merchant marine. Each State* Mr. Rothschild the number of students they would take, and we told him, the to the Government to complete the education of the students then enrolled a Kings Point would be about $1,500 per year to be paid to each State per sm The States would naturally have to increase their staff of instructors and e of feeding, etc. There were at that time approximately 52 students at Kis Point from the 11 Western States and the California Maritime Academy cas they would take in all of said students, and more if required. At this mega complete answer was given Mr. Rothschild to all of his questions and, as far i the States were concerned, they had obligated themselves to undertake : « training.

It must be remembered that this was all unsolicited by the States and done at the direct request of the Maritime Administration.

After the conference with Mr. Rothschild, nothing further was done br Maritime Administration and the next thing we knew was that there was 'I.— duced in Congress the bill to make Kings Point permanent, being H. R. 43 It is the belief of many of us that if this bill is passed by Congress, it r** deal a death blow to the State maritime academies, and for that reason it be opposed. We know that we cannot compete with free education. The Nor who goes to Kings Point will pay nothing and will receive his transportat

free. We also know that within a short time after this bill is passed, appropriations will be asked of Congress to pay each boy who goes to Kings Point a monthly salary equal to that of Annapolis and West Point.

It must be understood that the youth of our country are not clamoring to become merchant-marine officers. They read in the paper about strikes and work stoppages and that the number of vessels of our merchant marine is declining and that the industry is in a precarious position, and they gain the impression that it is not a vigorous industry with a great future, except an expansion in time of war, during which life on the merchant ship is far more dangerous than one on a battleship.

In 1954 Kings Point graduated 156 students and the 3 State academies graduated about 255 students, or a total of approximately 411 students. Under the pending bill, more students would be admitted to Kings Point than as of today. The number desiring to go to all of the academies is not large, and with the free education, transportation, etc., offered by the bill, I believe that any of the youth who desire to become merchant-marine officers would accept the free education rather than pay to go to State academies.

I feel that those who voted for the bill as now constituted in the House did not have all of the true facts before them. I would never believe that Representatives in Congress from the States having maritime academies would deliberately vote for a bill in Congress that might have the effect of closing State academies. I do not believe that any member of the Senate would do so.

I personally agree with Mr. Rothschild when he stated in his letter of November 5, 1953, to Governor Knight that "(1) education is primarily a State rather than a Federal function; (2) training obtained from the State academies is generally equal to, if not superior to, that provided at Kings Point; (3) graduates of the State academies have been educated at a lesser cost than those federally educated."

The Merchant Marine Act of 1936, in its declaration of policy, states that it is necessary for the national defense and development of its foreign and domestic commerce that the United States shall have a merchant marine owned and operated under the United States flag by citizens of the United States. This in no uncertain terms means that the merchant marine of the United States is and should be a private industry, privately owned.

Education of our youth for private industry is a State function, as recognized by Mr. Rothschild. The Academies at Annapolis and West Point are constitutionally established as part of the duty of the Federal Government to provide for the common defense. They are integral parts of the Army and Navy. There is no comparison, and there should be no comparison, between Annapolis and Kings Point. Students at the Naval Academy are trained solely to be naval officers, and students at any merchant-marine academy should be trained solely to be merchant-marine officers. The Federal Academy at Kings Point is the only school of learning besides West Point and Annapolis wholly owned, controlled, financed, and directed by the Government of the United States.

It is my opinion that it is contrary to the Constitution of the United States for the Federal Government to expend Federal money, taxpayers' money, for the maintenance, operation, and control of any school, college, or university, or any other institution of learning, the purpose of which is to educate our youth for private industry.

Education for private industry is a State function, and rightly so. It is difficult for me to picture a situation where all trained officers for the merchant marine are educated at a solely owned, operated, and controlled Federal institution. The attempt on the part of governments to control education of the youth of a country is not new. We can all remember how we condemned Hitler and Mussolini for indoctrinating and training the youth of their respective countries in thinking along the same directed, contorted lines. Voltair, in his struggle for more freedom in France, said, a few hundred years ago, that one of the difficulties in France was that the children in the schools of France only learned what Louis XIV wanted them to know. We can glibly say that that will never happen in the United States. Even if this were true-which I doubt-we should never permit the Federal Government to be put in such a place that it has the opportunity to educate our boys for private industry. Today, it seems that too many people are forgetful of their constitutional rights and that our Constitution is the basis of, and has been the reason, why our country and its citizens have reached the great degree of success now present. When our Constitution was first adopted and the citizens given a vote, other nations laughed and said that it would never work because people by their inherent nature could not