Statement from Joseph M. Dawson, "Why I Withdrew from the House Forum on Education"

Please Call Presidents attention to mention fhis Commission WHY I WITHDREW FROM THE HOUSE FORUM ON EDUCATION 107 Joseph M.A Dawson, Executive Director Joint Conference Committee For days following Chairman Lesinski's call for an informal con- ference of members of the House Committee on Education with leaders of citizen groups, the press stated he had invited Earl J. McGrath, Commissioner of Education; E. J. Butler of the National Catholic Wel- fare Conference; Dr. Rumsey B. Marston of the National Education Association and representatives of the CIO and AFL. It was only after complaint by members of Lesinski's Committee that no Protestant had been included that I was invited. In view of the large preponderance of Protestants in this country, it would indeed seem strange that any effort to ascertain public opinion would omit Protestants and those who think with them on church-state questions, a fact which immediately made the conference suspect in the minds of many. In my letter of acceptance I told Chairman Lesinski that I did so with misgiving, because his Committee had conducted public hearings, the results of which the Government had printed in a book of 953 pages, affording members of Congress adequate understanding of the various views held throughout the country. The unique conference called by him induced members of his own Committee, notably Repre- sentative Barden and Representative Steed, to characterize it as "an effort to get the Roman Catholics off the hook for the Catholic part in killing Federal aid to education". I consented to attend the con- ference to observe for myself whether it was to be conducted in fair- ness and good faith, resolved as a citizen to be candid. When Chairman Lesinski called the informal conference together, first of all, he announced that he was a Roman Catholic. Then he read a statement made by one of his archbishops in Rome and declared the statement we his views also. The statement predicted that eventually Americans would grant Federal aid to parochial schools on the basis of good feeling. Later I protested that the matter could hardly be settled on an emotional basis, but on the basis of the Federal Constitution, Supreme Court decisions and the Constitutions of forty-eight states. After all, for more than one hundred and fifty years this country has maintained the traditional principle of separ- ation of church and state, and enacted it into laws which required the espect of Congress. It was agreed by all that the nub of difficulty in formulating