openly waging war on Malaysia and is shipping oil and other vital supplies to North Vietnam."

In an effort to block the new military aid for Sukarno, Representatives ZABLOCKI and BROOMFIELD plan to raise the issue publicly on the floor of the House. They are rallying bipartisan support for this attack.

THE ROLE OF RAPID TRANSIT IN REVITALIZING THE CENTRAL CITY

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, Leland Hazard, a member of the board of directors of the Port Authority of Allegheny County in Pittsburgh, Pa., recently gave a stimulating address on the role of rapid transit as a means of moving masses of people efficiently and quickly and as a means of transforming the central city from its present status of being "an island of inaccessible excellence." While much of Mr. Hazard's address relates specifically to Pittsburgh and its environs, it also goes into the generalities of why communities should, in his view, develop rapid transit systems. I ask unanimous consent that Mr. Hazard's interesting and hard-hitting remarks be printed in the RECORD.

There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

THE CENTRAL CITY-ISLAND OF EXCELLENCE

THE ROLE OF RAPID TRANSIT

(Address by Leland Hazard before the 1965 Carnegie Conference, Pittsburgh, Pa.) In 1794, when Pittsburgh became a borough, one of the first acts was to post an ordinance prohibiting hogs from running in the streets. It has been said that since the hogs could not read, the ordinance was not well observed. The human rationalization for nonenforcement of such an ordinance was noted as late as 1831 by DeTocqueville in New York City. A citizen is quoted as follows:

"Well, experience, sir, has proven that the most efficacious and powerful method of keeping streets of a town in a state of perfect and refined cleanliness is plenty of hogs. And if the hogs aren't doing the trick, then you haven't got enough of them."1

The analogy of the no-hog signs at the turn of the 19th century to the noparking signs of the mid-20th century is obvious. If I make the sematic suggestion that contemporary motorists are hogging the streets, I descend, of course, to the level of punning. And do I go too far if I add that most of our modern municipalities, including Pittsburgh, are repeating the 19th century citizen's nonsense prescription: more hogs for more cleanliness (19th century); more autos for more central city mobility (20th century)?

Perhaps I do go too far, if I seek popularity in a society which still permits one person behind the wheel of an automobilewith a statistical half-person for a passenger-to invade the central city. But the mood of our cities is changing. They have been wallowing in a slough of intellectual and physical immobility. They have had building booms-20th century office housing which is not so slowly choking our 19th century transit but without rapid transit, comprehensive urban renewal will not occur. One might say that our cities go higher and higher into the air and slower and slower on

1 "Democracy in America," scripts of 14 dramatizations by Lister Sinclair and George E. Propst, based on the classic work by Alexis DeTocqueville, National Educational Television and Radio Center, New York.

the ground. All this is changing-must change-and quickly.

Los Angeles is a case in point. A number of years ago John Keats, writing in "The Crack in the Picture Window," described Los Angeles as a vast, smoke-shrouded slum in southern California, populated with 4 million automobiles. He stated the average commuting time by automobile to be 12 hours. He described luckless, local figures who sit half an hour every morning in their own driveways, foot on the clutch, engine idling fast, awaiting a chance to scuttle into a hole in the traffic.

One Los Angeles transit plan calls ultimately for a 160-mile rail network that would cost about $12 billion. But how to finance

it? Surveys have shown generally that a public transit system cannot make its way on fares alone. That means a public subsidy. sidy. But Los Angeles is confronted with opposition from automobile clubs, automobile dealers, and other groups. And so Los Angeles continues to wallow in its 19th century transit mire.

San Francisco, on the other hand, always a more civilized community than Los Anin 1962 an almost $800-million bond issue geles, has, as is now well known, approved to build a 75-mile rapid transit system. A test track of 41⁄2 miles is already laid and in operation.

Presumably a community like Los Angeles, which will not face up to financing a rapid transit program, must suppose that the private automobile and buses can provide mobility. Any city, county, or metropolitan area which is not actively planning and developing rapid transit must be indulging that same assumption. The assumption is

a delusion, and the delusion will be fatal for any community which persists in it for long.

There is a difference between mass transit and rapid transit-a simple but fundamental difference. Mass transit may mean simply that a significant number of people move in vehicles, buses for example, which will carry 50 persons past a single point per unit of time, as distinguished from the private automobile which carries an average of 1.5 persons past the same point in the same time. But bus travel commingled with private automobile and truck travel can be no more rapid than the whole assortment of low-powered, high-powered, underloaded, overloaded, flat-tired, dead-engined, longitudinal complex. And when some youth, still in his salad days, decides to share his driving responsibilities with a willowy female plastered to his right side, the community mass transit is subjected to utterly unpredictable erotic vagaries.

Rapid transit, unlike mass transit, must have its own exclusive right-of-way. In contemporary urban communities only subways and an occasional elevated railway, as in Chicago, or an occasional monorail can be called rapid. And the term does not necessarily imply high speed; it does imply, and must mean, separation from all other traffic.

Increases in automobile population in this order of magnitude make the human population explosion look like a regression. So I repeat the premise: If one may enter the high-density traffic area of the central city by private automobile, then all must be permitted to enter in their "insolent chariots," to borrow again from John Keats. Take Allegheny County, Pa., the Pittsburgh I analyze the probarea, as a case in point. lem in point of space and in point of time.

First as to space. The average passenger load for the bus is 23 and for the automobile,

1.5. This ratio means that it takes 16 automobiles to do the work of 1 bus; that in linear space, to move 23 people, the automobiles require 256 feet against 40 feet required for the bus, and that the automobiles require 1,600 square feet against only 320 square feet required by the bus.

Consider now the relative efficiency of the bus versus the private automobile at the peak outbound tour 5 p.m. to 6 p.m. in the Golden Triangle area. At the peak it takes burgh Bureau of Traffic Planning.

30 passenger automobiles to do the work of 1 bus. In other words, the private automobile requires 1,000 percent of the space required by the bus and then to move only 3 percent of the people the bus will move.

Take another facet of the assumption that if one is permitted to enter, for example, Pittsburgh's Golden Triangle, then all must be permitted to enter by private automobile. This would mean 225,000 people daily. At 1.5 passengers per automobile approximately 150,000 private automobiles would enter the Golden Triangle each day and approximately the same number would leave.

If 150,000 automobiles entered the Golden Triangle without benefit of garages, they would occupy on a single-car basis all but 16 acres of the 374 acres of that now legendary area in which Carnegie, Frick, and the steel barons held their courts. In other

would be no point in coming because all of the destination would be occupied by the vehicles trying to get there.

Now any community which persists in the delusion that the private automobile and buses can move masses of people into and out of the hard-core business and shopping center of the community must be prepared to deal with the assumption that ultimately all who move will move by that method. Take a measure of that assumption:

The percent increase of families owning automobiles in the decade following 1950 (source: "Automobile Facts and Figures,

But assume now that the 150,000 automobiles will be accommodated in parking garages of 700-car capacity. This would require 214 such garages at a cost, excluding land cost, of $535 million. Now to the point: This would be approximately the cost of a rapid transit system. Come one, come all, by private automobile, and any community will spend approximately the cost of a rapid transit system; and will get for the expenditure only additional immobilization on the streets of the city's center.

2 C. B. D. Cordon Information, 1963; Pittsburgh Bureau of Traffic Planning.

Now consider the wasted time and energy. Take for an example the 15-mile distance from Monroeville, one of Pittsburgh's burgeoning suburbs-the distance from that suburb to Pittsburgh's Golden Triangle. The average speed could be 50 miles per hour either for buses or for automobiles-about 20 minutes for the trip. Actually at the peak hours the speed is cut to 22 miles per hour, and the time required is 40 minutes or more. If one assumes the 150,000 automobiles, and if one assumes, as he must, that every exit from the central city-like the parkway from the Golden Triangle to Monroeville becomes a part-time parking station at the peak traffic hours, for such is the case, and since the 150,000 automobiles will average 150 horsepower per car, we have the spectacle of 22,500,000 horses jumping up and down during half the trip-going nowhere. If the horsepower were, in fact, produced by real horses and if, in fact, the spectacle were one of that number of graceful horses dancing on a parkway, there might be some esthetic relief in the sight. But since the horses are represented only by the noxious fumes which emanate from the rear ends of automobiles, the result is nausea rather than esthetic uplift.

Nevertheless, it is said that the cost of rapid transit-by which I mean a system or systems in which the transit vehicles occupy exclusive rights-of-way and move from peripheral centers of population, and among them, right into the hard core of the central city—it is said that the cost is prohibitive. But the case of San Francisco has now become the cost model for all areas. For a three-county community the cost is calculated at $792 million. This apparently great cost is, in fact, no more than many communities are planning to spend for highways. Pennsylvania Governor Scranton's proposal for a highway program for Allegheny County postulates the cost of $1,059 million. The San Francisco Bay area district cost will be $350 per capita for rapid transit. Governor Scranton's highway program for Allegheny County, Pa., will cost $650 per capita for highways. So it is in many communities which are proposing to spend per capita almost twice the amount for antiquated and obsolete methods of mobility than the San Francisco Bay area will spend for an up-todate rapid transit system.

Or consider another typical case: In the 10-year period expiring in 1963, the Pennsylvania Department of Highways expended in Allegheny County a total of $334,465,213. This was an expenditure which has resulted in moving into the hard core of the Pittsburgh central city about half of the people who could come there by automobile and that but haltingly. It is a fair assumption that to move all the people by automobile would involve an expenditure of at least double that amount. Four-lane highways would become eight-lane highways and the like. This would mean an expenditure of an amount substantially as Governor Scranton has projected-something in the area of magnitude of a billion dollars (inflation considered). Add to this figure the cost of the parking garages estimated above, and we have a figure of $12 billion. This figure is about three times the roughly estimated cost of a rapid transit system.

Of course, a rapid transit system will not eliminate wholely the necessity for a highway complex for motor vehicles-private passenger cars, trucks and buses. But the comparison in costs is really shocking: An eightlane freeway has a person-trip capacity of 9,000 at a capital cost of $1,600 per person. A subway or elevated, express or local, has a person-trip capacity of 50,000 at a capital cost of $440 per person.3 Rapid transit

3 Traffic Quarterly, April, 1962.

does five times the work at one-fourth the cost. What are we waiting for; or should we have our community heads examined?

I do not foresee rapid transit as the liquidation of the private automobile industry. Quite the reverse. For example, in New York City, 61 percent of employed persons use public transportation. Nevertheless, in New York City in the period from 1954 to 1963 passenger automobile registrations have increased 13 percentage points. In Chicago, where 39.5 percent of employed persons use rapid transportation to get to work, automobile registrations have increased 41 percent. And by contrast in Los Angeles, where there is little if any rapid transit, the increase in automobile registrations is slightly less than in Chicago; namely, 40 percentage points. Strikingly enough, in York County (Toronto, Ontario), where there is one of the finest demonstrations of what rapid transit can do for a community anywhere in the world (of this, more later), the increase in private automobile registrations in the period of 1954 to 1963 has been 72 percentage points. In Allegheny County, County, Pa., where only 24 percent of the employed persons use public transportation, the increase in automobile registration has been no more than in Cook County, where a higher percentage use rapid transit.

Henry Ford once said, "I will build a motor car for the great multitude *** so low in price that no man will be unable to own one-and enjoy with his family the blessing of hours of pleasure in God's great open spaces." 5 Obviously, not even Henry Ford thought that the automobile should invade and preempt God's great closed spaces-our central cities.

Let me go now to the proposition that not only can we afford rapid transit but also we cannot afford to be without it. The most spectacular proof of this fact on the American continent, perhaps anywhere in the world, except Tokyo, Japan, is Toronto, Ontario, Canada. About 10 years ago Toronto began construction of its Yonge Street subway. There were opposing points of view. Some people said that the subway wouldn't make much difference to the area involved, that the downtown was on the decline anyway, and that the fact of people traveling below ground wasn't going to cause any more significant property development than if people continued to travel on the surface.

Others had a different view. They predicted fantastic changes in the city and a drastic upgrading in both value and use of the land adjacent to the subway.

The prophets of gloom were wrong.

Toronto's new east-west subway-scheduled to open in early 1966-is adjacent to properties presently valued at $250 million. Mr. G. Warren Пleenan, president, Toronto Real Estate Board, predicts that these same properties will double in value to $500 million in a few years. He predicts that the subway will generate approximately $2 billion in new developments along its route.

The City of Toronto Planning Board recognized the heavy impact on the value of air rights and land use adjacent to the new subway and developed a comprehensive report recommending significant zoning changes. These changes, when carried out in full, will double, it is estimated, possibly triple, the market prices of the adjacent lands.

Toronto's original Yonge Street subway, which cost $67 million, sparked an increase of more than $5 million worth of tax revenues over and above what would have occurred

Editor and Publisher Market Guide, 1956 edition; 1965 edition.

5 Peter Blake, "God's Own Junkyard" (New York: Holt-Rinehart Publishing Co., 1964).

under normal development conditions—more than enough to cover amortization. Although it is usually said that a rapid transit system cannot pay for itself out of the fare box, Toronto's system has been earning not only its out-of-pocket costs but also its depreciation-and all of this with only a 15cent fare.

Our cities are on the move toward rapid transit; no doubt of that. But there is a great danger that people will assume that we have rapid transit in given situations, Pittsburgh, for example, before we actually have arrived. To illustrate: Both Los Angeles and Pittsburgh and Allegheny County have recently consolidated ancient, mostly decrepit, multiple streetcar and bus lines and systems into one integration owned by public authority. The first danger is that the public will think that just by changing the ownership some magic will be worked. This is not the case.

Then there is the danger that because large sums of money are being expended for new buses, the community will think it is getting rapid transit. Again, such is not the case. A new bus is just as immobile on an expressway where traffic goes single lane because of an accident or a flat tire as the oldest, foulsmelling wheezer of the fleet. Expenditures for new buses to travel nonexclusive rightsof-way are just treadmill expenditures-necessary to keep a bad condition from getting worse. For example, the Port Authority of Allegheny County will spend in the next 5 years a total of some $25 million just to keep the mobility of the community at its present state of mediocrity. The worthless streetcars and the old buses acquired from private companies will be replaced, it is true. Defunct facilities will be renewed, true enough. All this will cost $25 million of capital investment in the next 5 years, but the transit services in Allegheny County will be essentially just what they are now. We will have simply maintained status quo. There is a danger that because so much money is being spent, it will be thought that something new and better is coming about. Again, such will not be the case.

There is an even greater danger. To operate the present system in Allegheny County-really scarcely better for its time than the horsecars at the turn of the century-there will be out-of-pocket costs to the community, too. This is because transit vehicles running on nonexclusive rights-ofway cannot hope to recover costs of operation out of the fare box. They cannot provide the rapid service which would justify requisite public patronage. The difference between the amount the fare boxes take in and

the amount which must be paid out in cost of operation in a given period-conventionally a month, quarter-year, year-is called a loss. The term loss is used because of a cultural lag: Actually the publicly owned system of mass transit can have neither a profit nor a loss. If the fare box takes in more than the cost of operation and replacements, as in Toronto, the surplus is turned back to the taxpayers; if less, the taxpayers pay the deficit.

No

Now the danger is that by publicizing socalled losses every month or every quarter or every year, the public will get the impression that rapid transit is beyond the ability of the public to support. Such is not the case. such psychology applies to paving streets or maintaining a fire department or a police department. No such psychology applies to a highway program scheduled to cost far more than a rapid transit system. I have made an estimate of what the difference will be between what the fare box for the Allegheny County existing system takes in over the next 5 years and what will be the cost of operations: about $17 million. This will be the so-called loss over the next 5 years. The

$17 million is the cost which must be added to the costs which have already accumulated for the community's failure to modernize its transit system.

It is really so much foolishness for any community to look every month at a figure of alleged losses as if that figure were news. There is no likelihood that the figure can vary much in one way or another. It would be better to report the figure once a year and then with the kind of explanation which I have given here. We shall stop these socalled losses only when we make the new capital investment in a new system adequate for contemporary needs.

If we had no other reason to accelerate the progress of our communities toward rapid transit and exclusive rights-of-way for all mass transit-the objective of stopping the losses would be sufficient. Every automobile owner-villain though he may be in insisting upon driving his car right into the parlor of any place he wishes to go, pigs in the parlorevery automobile owner knows that the time comes when it is wasteful to keep repairing the old car. He must put up new capital for a new vehicle. It is no less wasteful for a community to hang on to outmoded transit systems and traffic equipment. Only by new investment can the community's cost of transit be kept within bounds.

At this point the question always arises: Must the community forever move people around at the cost of the taxpayers-as if the taxpayers were other than those who are to be moved around? Well, one answer is "Why not?" We move human waste through pipes to disposal plants at the cost of the community. Is it less valid to move human bodies around? I know what sullen expressions will usually greet this argument. Again, we have a cultural lag. In an agrarian society it is a virtue to stay on one spot of land; to tend it and its crops and its animals. To leave that spot of land is irresponsible and wrong. But now our society is not agrarian, it is urban; soon 8 out of 10 people will live in big cities. They must move about those cities to work; to garner food and supplies; to pay bills; to see doctors; to go to hospitals; to find places to meet, to play, and to learn; to be spiritually revived; and even to see the sunset, which in earlier times our ancestors saw in "God's great open spaces." Yet the agrarian psychology persists.

When Pittsburgh and New York drove the hogs off the streets, then the streets were paved at the cost of the taxpayer. Why? To provide mobility. Indeed the hogs were separated from the people so that the people might have mobility.

But now that the streets are cluttered with pedestrians and their natural enemies, the automobiles, a new need arises-one as persistent and insistent as the original need to get the hogs off the streets and to pave them. If something more than paving is needed to provide mobility in the mid-20th century, why should that shock us?

I have long since raised the question whether public transit should be free. But I do not press that question now. Suffice it now to ask: What fare is best administered for the purpose of avoiding irresponsible use of public facilities; and at the same time what fare is most appropriate to, and compatible with, the most extensive use of public transit? Certainly it would seem that on the basis of today's currency value, a fare of 15 cents in Toronto is more appropriate than Pittsburgh's fare of more than 30 cents for service not half so good as Toronto's. Pittsburgh's high fare is just another evidence of the high cost of our obsolete transit system.

I come now to a final and all-compelling reason why every community must press for rapid and mass transit and with all sensible speed. We now know that rapid transit

routes shape the community and determine values in proportions of great magnitude. It is more important that the routes of rapid transit get settled than that those routes be impeccably located. The whole process of urban and community planning is arrested until rapid transit routes are laid out.

Take an illustration in Pittsburgh. There is currently proposed a 60-story building to be located at the very base of the Golden Triangle. Roughly a $60 million investment is involved. There is an existing railroad tunnel under a portion of the site for the proposed building-the tallest in Pittsburgh. The tunnel is actually in use at the present time by the Pennsylvania Railroad; but after the manner of all railroads these days, the Pennsylvania may give it up at any time. Railroads, because of the private automobile and the airplane, both of which will run out of space presently, now find that they can haul hogs, but not people, with a profit. Now the immediate question: Is this tunnel to be preserved, or is it to be destroyed and lost for any future rapid transit use?

Take another case. The whole lower end of the Pittsburgh Golden Triangle is now open for private development, and the pressures are mounting. If buildings go up now without regard to an underground traffic system, then the future costs of a possible subway might be prohibitive. If, on the other hand, the city knows now that there will be a subway, then the city can proceed to acquire necessary necessary rights-of-way, require new buildings to be set back and have the best of two possible worlds.

Another question. How much more parking will be required in the Golden Triangle. The master plan calls for many more parking spaces. But if the port authority provides rapid transit which will attract 60 percent of our people, as in New York City, then much less automobile parking space would be required. If, on the other hand, public transit pursues a dreary, downward spiral, then this means more and more parking, requiring more and more expropriation of downtown land for parking facilites, with more and more loss in tax revenue, greatly increased congestion, if that be possible, and relative deterioration of the central city-a grim prospect, but the only outlook for Pittsburgh or any other city which will not grasp the transit nettle.

And why is rapid, comprehensive transit so important? Because only as we decrease distances by the speed, low cost, comfort, and dependability of rapid transit can we recapture for central city excellence the dispersed people of our modern, confused, uncertain age.

The loss to the central city has occurred because good citizens who cross the imaginary line from city to suburbia in search of the open places appear to lose all loyalty to the city. Once ensconced in suburbia all sense of responsibility to the central city seems to vanish. Thereafter the city is regarded merely as a place to get to on time in the morning and to get out of on time in the evening-the day's living earned, all else forgotten.

And there is another ominous prospect for our cities unless by rapid transit we create, in effect, new communities and a new integration of old communities. The people who have crossed the antiquated, artificial boundaries from our cities to suburbia have been white people. Consequently, the proportion of Negroes in our cities has sharply

increased.

Even more striking is the percentage increase of Negroes in the public school population. During the past 25 years, from 1940 to 1964, the enrollment of Negro children in public schools has jumped out of all proportion to even the percentage increase of Negro population in our cities.

1 Source: World Almanac, 1964; p. 256.

In Washington, D.C., the percentage of Negro children in public schools has risen from 53 in 1954 to 86 today. Washington, D.C., can bus Negro children and white children around until the poor dears are giddy with busing; but that will not affect significant integration where the Negro school population is so close to 100 percent of the whole.

Rapid transit will not only open new territories for new starts. It will also do something electrical to old psychologies; to old patterns of hate and fear. We are trying to divide up cultural scarcity instead of creating new spiritual wealth out of new techniques for achieving anew the good life.

So long as programs of integration must stop at city boundaries, we are headed for frustration and defeat. A simple worddilution-is the key. Dilution is affected by mobility; mobility is accomplished by rapid transit.

Now while a department store may pursue its customers into suburbia with a branch or branches, or even with completely stocked establishments the equal of the original in the central city (although this would be the exception), and while filling stations and cleaning establishments and all of the service institutions can do likewise, the sad fact is that cultural institutions cannot reproduce themselves for all out-of-the-city real estate developments.

Let me illustrate. In a community like Pittsburgh, with substantially 605,000 people in the central city and that number again in the environs and suburbs, there can be only one symphony orchestra; only one central library; only one Point Park at the confluence where the Allegheny and the Monongahela form the Ohio; only one gothic tower reaching for the heavens from the beautiful greensward of the University of Pittsburgh campus; only one county courthouse of such sturdy grace as that one done by Richardson in the last century; only one art museum with its growing collection of colorful, sometimes disturbing, examples of contemporary art; only one museum of natural history with its world-famous collection of prehistoric mammals; only one children's zoo to create young wonderment; only one community playhouse with its sometimes experimental offerings; only one cathedral with notably beautiful towers in a Presbyterian community; only a few architecturally beautiful churches; only one area like that around Phipps Conservatory with its cherry trees, plane trees, lily pools, azalea and pyracantha-old and mature enough to seem rightly there and properly a part of the whole city. And when people leave for suburbia, never to return save only in that mad daily rush of starts and stops, alterations between throttle and brake-bent only on getting and spending-something goes from their lives, something of the spirit which we call cultural; and gone, leaves them less worthy of the city and the city less worthy without them.

The city is 5,000 years old in man's culture. It came next after the agricultural revolution in which man ceased to hunt for food in an environment thought to be given. The urban revolution came because of, to enable, to justify the specialization which

changed man from a nomad to a citizen. Our cities are an ancient heritage-islands of excellence-whose excellence we are challenged now to make ubiquitous in our national community.

How do we get rapid transit to tie our Allegheny County and western Pennsylvania communities into a new and vital area in which Pittsburgh is no longer an island of inaccessible excellence? We will get rapid transit by leadership. Fortunately we have our county government already. Recently, when our county commissioners traveled to Toronto to see the thrilling changes which rapid transit produced there, they learned that 12 municipalities had to be forced, in effect, by the Ontario Legislature to consolidate for the function of transit. That will not be necessary in Allegheny County. Our commissioners need only take the lead to bring Allegheny County back into the rank of great modern communities-a hub from which all of western Pennsylvania can radiate into new economic and cultural excellence.

Our Allegheny County Port Authority has launched the necessary rapid transit study and the requisite planning. The work is going forward. City, county, and southwest regional planning organizations are working cooperatively in a committee of high technical competence. In about 18 months, perhaps a little earlier, a report will be ready. Then will come the testing time for Allegheny County. A bond issue of unprecedented proportions will be submitted. The citizens of Allegheny County will be asked to vote whether "to be or not to be"-that will be the fateful question.

THE ART IN THE EMBASSIES PROGRAM

The art in the Embassies program is based upon the belief that it is important for Embassies of the United States to reflect current and traditional culture of this country in an effective manner. One way to present the high level of American cultural attainment is through visual arts. Consequently, this program plays an integral role in the building of an improved U.S. cultural image abroad.

The art in the Embassies program is a service of the Department of State, the purpose being to provide art appropriate for the representational rooms of Ambassadors' residences and chanceries.

We think of this program as cultural diplomacy in action.

Scope

I can think of no more effective approach to cultural diplomacy than that which the State Department is presently engaged in-the art in the Embassies program.

The art in the Embassies program involves the loan of representative paintings, scultpures, carvings, graphics, ceramics, mosaics, wall hangings, and photography by private sources for display in our embassies and chanceries abroad.

I salute the members of the national committee and the executive committee of this program for their superb efforts in presenting our accomplishments in the field of art for viewing throughout the world. This is a fine example of how government and private interests can work together in removing shadows which cloud our image abroad.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a description of the art in the embassies program along with a feature article from the September 6 Washington Daily News on the adviser for this outstanding program, Mrs. Nancy Kefauver, wife of our beloved former Senate colleague and my good friend, the

5. To insure conservation of the art, climatic conditions must be taken into account.

6. In the placement of art, the architecture and interior design of the buildings should be given consideration, for this art is intended to enhance the overall atmosphere of the buildings.

Operating procedure

This is a program of cooperation between Government and private interests. The art is on loan to the Department of State, preferably for a minimum period of 2 years, from museums, galleries, private collections, corporations, and individual artists. The Department of State underwrites the packing, transporting and insuring of the art on loan.

After a loan or outright gift, has been agreed upon, following receipt of specifics as to the art title, artist, dimensions, evaluation-the Department of State will initiate the packing, shipping, and insurance arrangements for the works concerned. These aspects are covered for the period from the time the art leaves the lender until it is returned.

Outright gifts are most acceptable, subject as are loans, to approval by the executive committee. These may be presented either to the Department of State or to the National Collection of Fine Arts of the Smithsonian Institution for use in the art in the Embassies program.

The National Collection of Fine Arts, Smithsonian Institution, serves as a repository for works shipped to Washington, D.C. The art is inspected upon receipt, and placed in a humidity and temperature controlled

area, under 24-hour security guard. Should the need arise, the Smithsonian will supervise restoration of the art, if the lender desires.

The Department of State registration system provides:

1. For a detailed condition report upon receipt from the lender.

2. Location records which show at all times where a given piece of art is located. 3. Annual inventory and condition report from the Embassy.

A kit is made up to accompany each collection. This includes a brochure on the program; a letter from Mrs. Kefauver containing general information regarding the collection, with precautions for conservation of the art; placement suggestions; a set of registration-location-condition-receipt

rec

ord cards; biographic data on the artists represented in the collection; information on types of art; unpacking, as well as packing and shipping instructions for the return trip.

Recognition

International recognition is afforded the lender and the artist, as all publicity regarding the art on loan refers to both parties. Brochures printed by the embassies for use in connection with the art on display give reference to lenders and artists. Plaques will be used when appropriate.

Committee responsibilities

A geographically representative group of knowledgeable people in the art field compose the national committee. The members assist in the finding and initial screening of art.

The executive committee is responsible for the overall decision as to acceptance.

FROM THE SECRETARY OF STATE

"In the world of today, international relations are no longer exclusively, nor perhaps even primarily, relations between governments. They have become increasingly relations among peoples. Important among them are the great international communities of the arts. I am proud of the art in the embassies program, both because it represents important aspects of our national culture and because it is a cooperative enterprise which blends the ideas and energies of government and private citizens and organizations interested in the visual arts. "DEAN RUSK."

NATIONAL COMMITTEE MEMBERS Mr. Richard Collins, director, arts and sciences department, International Business Machines Corp., New York, N.Y.

Mrs. Dorothy Dunn, honorary associate in Indian arts, Los Altos, Calif.

Mr. Norman de Haan, architect, Chicago, Ill.

Mr. Donald Goodall, chairman, University of Texas Art Department and director, University Museum, Austin, Tex.

Mr. Eugene Kingman, director, Joslyn Art Museum, Omaha, Neb.

Mrs. Katharine Kuh, art editor, Saturday Review, New York, N.Y.

Mr. Robert H. Thayer, director, Governmental Relations, American Field Service International Scholarships, Washington, D.C.

Mr. Thomas W. Leavitt, director, Santa Barbara Museum of Fine Arts, Santa Barbara, Calif.

Mr. Paul Mills, curator, Oakland Art Museum, Oakland, Calif.

Mr. Roy Moyer, director, American Federation of Arts, New York, N.Y.

Mr. Perry Rathbone, director, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Mass.

Mrs. Janet Rubin, director, Obelisk Gallery, Washington, D.C.

Mr. Edwin C. Rust, director, Academy of Art, Memphis, Tenn.

Mr. Rexford Stead, director, Museum of Fine Arts, St. Petersburg, Fla.

Mr. Otto Wittman, director, Toledo Museum of Art, Toledo, Ohio.

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS Dr. Richard F. Brown, director, Los Angeles County Museum of Art, Los Angeles, Calif. Mr. Lloyd Goodrich, director, Whitney Museum of American Art, New York, N.Y.

Mr. Bartlett H. Hayes, Jr., director, Addison Gallery of American Art, Phillips Academy, Andover, Mass.

Mrs. Nancy P. Kefauver, advisor on fine arts, Department of State, Washington, D.C.

Mr. David Scott, director, National Collection of Fine Arts, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Mr. Laurence Sickman, director, William Rockhill Nelson Gallery of Art, Kansas City,

Mo.

Persons interested in participating in the Art in the Embassies Program may either contact a National Committee member, or write directly to: Nancy P. Kefauver, advisor on fine arts, Office of the Deputy Under Secretary for Administration, Department of State, Washington, D.C.

NANCY KEFAUVER THRIVES ON KEEPING BUSY HERE SHE HAS TWO JOBS: CHILDREN AND STATE DEPARTMENT WORK

(By Wauhillau La Hay)

Nancy Kefauver hadn't the remotest idea of leaving Washington when her husband,

Senator Estes Kefauver of Tennessee and

Democratic vice-presidential candidate in

1956, died in August 1963.

"Estes transplanted me from Scotland to Chattanooga when we were married, then from Tennessee to Washington," said the tall, good-looking Scottish redhead. "Our four children were born here and right here in Washington is where my jobs are."

Jobs-plural. Nancy has two, plus the obvious one of raising her son and daughters and keeping their attractive home in Georgetown and the carriage house of the old Sumner Wells mansion on Massachusetts Avenue.

Nancy is an artist of ability. Graduated from Glasgow School of Art, she studied in Paris, London, and Washington. Now she has no time to paint, but "I have classes at the school Wednesday night and Saturdays. And they are a labor of love," she said firmly.

Her second job is a partnership in a successful art school. With her closest friend, Byrd Farioletti, she founded the school 11 years ago. It has grown from 6 students to 100; from a garret studio in Institution. Nancy spends a day a week there.

A newly appointed ambassador, usually accompanied by his wife, calls on Nancy. They discuss personal likes and dislikes. In the meantime, Nancy knows what is needed in color and size and shape, for she has in color and size and shape, for she has detailed descriptions, dimensions, color color schemes and even fabric swatches of each schemes and even fabric swatches of each residence and chancery.

She consults with the State Department desk officer of the particular country and always see the cultural attaché of that country to find out climatic conditions, local taboos and national preferences in art. It is a lengthy, complicated procedure, but Nancy Kefauver and her staff have, as she says, "whipped it down to size."

PLAN AFRICA TRIP

This autumn she and her assistant, Carol Harford, plan to go to Africa. Although she has traveled extensively, she has never visited Africa.

"It's wonderful to keep so busy," Nancy said happily. "The children are grown-or almost. I've just put the youngest 14-yearold Gail, on a plane for England and Scot

land to visit relatives.

"Lynda, who is 23, is doing art research for a New York magazine. David, 19, enters Colorado State University this fall. He's going to be a large-animal veterinarian. Diane, 17, has another year at Madeira School. I need to keep busy. I thrive on

THE NATIONAL HARDWARE SHOW

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, I take this occasion at this point in the RECORD

to call to the attention of Congress the National Hardware Show which will be held from September 20 to 24 in the New York Coliseum, which in 1965, is celebrating its 20th year of service to the industry.

Over 1,000 leading manufacturers of hardware, housewares, allied products and lawn and garden equipment exhibit annually in this trade show which now represents a $15 billion industry. Exhibitors are from every State in the Union, and more than 45,000 buyers attend each year.

These buyers come not only from 50 States, but from 41 foreign countries as well. Over 10,000 people are required to set up and staff the exhibits at this mammoth trade show, and over 75,000 packages and crates are received from

exhibitors.

I am happy to say, Mr. President, that my State of Pennsylvania plays no small part in this great industrial enterprise. This year 91 Pennsylvania producers of hardware products manufactured from steel, aluminum, oil and other raw materials of the Commonwealth are exhibiting. An estimated staff of 2,800 persons will handle these exhibits. Last year, some 5,000 Pennsylvania buyers purchased over $100 million worth of

business for resale from manufacturers exhibiting at the National Hardware Show, and it is expected that a similar level of business again will be transacted. Pennsylvania manufacturers already have invited buyers from 37 foreign countries to their exhibits.

The National Hardware Show, Mr. President, was founded in 1946 by the Charles Snitow organization and is still under the same management. It is the only show to utilize every square foot of exhibition space at the huge New York Coliseum. This great enterprise is a noteworthy example of the contributions made by industry and labor to the American economy, in which the State of Pennsylvania plays such a large part. Pennsylvania is proud of the role it has taken in making this one of the world's truly great industrial shows.

MARYLAND YOUNG DEMOCRATS

PRAISE ADLAI STEVENSON Mr. TYDINGS. Mr. President, several weeks ago the world lost a man who had devoted his life to the preservation of peace in our time. Many words have been written since then and many more will be written. This month's issue of the Burro, the monthly publication of the Young Democratic Clubs of Maryland, included a particularly touching eulogy written by Carl R. Tuvin, former northeastern conference chairman of the Young Democratic Clubs of America.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have inserted at this point in the RECORD Mr. Tuvin's moving memorial.

There being no objection, the eulogy was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

IN MEMORIAM: ADLAI EWING STEVENSON OF ILLINOIS, 1900-65

Final goodbyes are always the hardest. It

is especially hard when it is for one whom all us found to be quite true as we silently filed past the flag-draped coffin of Adlai Ewing Stevenson when his body lay in repose at the National Cathedral in Washington, D.C., a few weeks ago. It was hard to conceive that at a time in world affairs when his powerful voice with its provocative thoughts

held so dear to their hearts. This, many of

were so dearly needed that he was gone from us forever.

Adlai Stevenson had eloquently eulogized Dag Hammarskjold, John F. Kennedy, Jawaharlal Nehru, Eleanor Roosevelt and Winston Churchill. The words that he used to eulo

gize these world figures could very well serve

as his own eulogy. The eloquence of his oratory will be sadly missed with the passing of this great world statesman.

Fate had it that that Adlai Stevenson's life would end with this man toiling ever so hard in the cause of world peace. Twenty years earlier, in 1945, he had helped in the forma

tion of the United Nations and served on the first U.S. delegation to the world body. when his end come he was once again serving his country as Ambassador to the United Nations, a position in which he served with great distinction.

The years between 1945 and his demise were packed with adventure for this man of great vision. He emerged as a candidate for

the Governorship of Illinois in 1948. He won a tremendous victory and became a great Governor. President Truman urged Adlai Stevenson to run for the Presidency in 1952. The Governor was reluctant for several rea