University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The Cultural Institute In Mexico City As An Example Of United States Policy In Cultural Relations

(USC Thesis Other)

The Cultural Institute In Mexico City As An Example Of United States Policy In Cultural Relations

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content THE CULTURAL INSTITUTE IN MEXICO. CITY AS AN EXAMPLE OF UNITED STATES POLICY IN CULTURAL RELATIONS by Donald H. Scott A Dissertation Presented to. the FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY.OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial. Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Political, Science.) June 1959 UNIVERSITY OF S O U T H E R N C A L IF O R N IA GRADUATE SCHOOL U N IV E R S ITY PARK LOS A NG ELES 7 This dissertation, written by Donald H. Scott under the direction of]li.S.Guidance Committee, and approved by a ll its members, has been pre sented to and accepted by the F aculty of the Graduate School, in partial fu lfillm e n t of re quirements fo r the degree of D O C T O R O F P H I L O S O P H Y Dean D a te.......... JUUE-..19- 59- .......... GUIDANCE COMMITTEE hairman TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION ............................... 1 Statement of the Problem.............. 1 Importance of the Study................ 4 Organization of the Study.............. 8 The Sources of Information............ 14 Definition of Cultural Relations .......... 28 II. THE RATIONALE OF THE CULTURAL RELATIONS PROGRAM................................ 37 Introduction . . . ................... . .37 Initial Rationale of the Program....... 38 Changes During the Second World War. ..... 44 Rationale of the Post-war Period .......... 71 Rationale During the Cold War.......... 96 Summary................................ 149 III. THE ORGANIZATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT IN CULTURAL RELATIONS...... 161 Introduction ............................. 161 Private Cultural Relations Before 1938 . . . 163 The Development of the Government Program. . 179 The Interdepartmental Committee........ 193 The Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs. . 199 The Department of State................ 215 Summary................................ 247 ili Chapter Page IV. A SURVEY OF THE CULTURAL RELATIONS ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE IN LATIN AMERICA................................ 257 Introduction ............................. 257 The Cultural Attaches.................. 258 The Exchange-of-Persoris Programs .......... 266 Aid to American Schools................ 283 American Libraries ..................... , 288 Distribution of American Books ............ 294 Translations of American Books ............ 301 Exchanges in the Field of Art.............. 309 Exchanges in the Field of Music............ 314 The Cultural Institutes................... 320 Summary........................ 344 V. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INSTITUTE IN MEXICO CITY AS A COOPERATIVE, BINATIONAL INSTI TUTION ..................... 356 Introduction ............................... 356 The Founding of the Cultural Institute . . . 362 The Reorganization of the Institute in 1943 ................................... 371 The English Language Institute ............. 383 Problems of Coordination, 1944-1946.... 392 Reorganization of the Institute in 1947. . . 411 iv Chapter Page Cooperation after 1947 ................... 424 Summary................................... 431 VI. THE ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION AND PERSONNEL OF THE CULTURAL INSTITUTE................. 436 Introduction............................. 436 The Members of the Institute............. 437 The Administrative and Teaching Staffs . . . 463 The Orientation of the Staff.............. 493 The Students............................. 512 The Buildings of the Institute . 523 Summary............................... 530 VII. THE COURSES OF INSTRUCTION: REGULAR COURSES. . 540 Introduction ............................. 540 Courses and Teaching Methods, 1943-1949. . . 542 Courses and Teaching Methods, 1950-1953. . . 561 The Publication of Textbooks..............' ' 574 The Informational Content of the Courses . . 582 Summary................................... 615 VIII. SPECIAL COURSES AND ADVANCED STUDIES ....... 627 Introduction ............................. 627 Special Courses........................... 628 Courses in American Literature, History, and Thought............................. 652 Interest in Advanced Studies .............. 671 Summary................................... 690 V Chapter Page IX. SERVICES TO MEXICAN TEACHERS OF ENGLISH. ... 701 Introduction ...... ................... 701 Special Services, 1943-1946............ 704 Training Courses for English Teachers. . . . 719 Special Seminars for English Teachers. . . . '727 The Mexican Association of Teachers of English. . . . ...................... 744 Summary................................ 757 X. THE APPEAL TO THE PUBLIC THROUGH CULTURAL ACTIVITIES............................ 769 Introduction ............................... 769 The Institute's Library. ................. 775 Motion Picture Programs................ 787 Dramatic Productions ....................... 796 Music at the Institute ............. 799 Exhibits of Art and Photographs........ 814 Receptions............................ 825 Commencement Exercises ..................... 833 The Lecture Program at the Institute .... 837 Summary............. 863 XI. CULTURAL AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES FOR STUDENTS. . 876 Introduction ............................... 876 Student Councils . ....................... 884 The Student Newspaper.................. 893 Clubs and Study Groups................ 895 vi Chapter Page Social Activities. . ....................... 918 Summary. ................................ . 933 XII. COOPERATION IN SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAMS........... 942 Introduction ................................ 942 Participation in Selection Procedures. . . . 946 . Courses for Scholarship Applicants......... 962 Former Scholarship Holders ............. 970 The Institute and the Mixed Commission . . . 981 Summary......................................... 1010 XIII. CONCLUSIONS....................................... 1020 Restatement of the Problem....................1020 Conclusions.....................................1043 BIBLIOGRAPHY............... 1079 APPENDIX A................................................1132 APPENDIX B................................................1139 APPENDIX C................. 1149 CHAPTER X INTRODUCTION Statement of the Problem In the decades between the two World Wars, the for eign policy of the United States toward the Latin American states shifted away from political and military interven tion in the direction of recognizing their sovereign equality with this country. After the inauguration of Franklin D. Roosevelt as President in 1933, this policy was given greater emphasis and was labelled the Good Neighbor Policy. Although it began to develop before the threat of war made it a necessity, its usefulness to the United States during the Second World War is generally accepted as beyond question.'®' It encouraged Latin America to cooperate with the United States at a time when cooperation was most needed: The United States has never had a foreign policy toward any area that was more successful than the Good Neighbor Policy was from 1933 to 1945. This policy of the Roosevelt Administration was designed to gain the cooperation of the Latin American nations by respecting the sovereign rights of the twenty nations to the south of the Rio Grande. . . ■^Samuel Flagg Bemis, The Latin American Policy of the United States (New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1943), p. 3&9. o Edward 0. Guerrant, RooseveltTs Good Neighbor Policy (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1950), p. 2l2. An integral although tardily implemented part of the Good Neighbor Policy was the program of cultural rela tions. Although the need for national security prompted to a considerable extent both the earlier interventionist and the more recent cooperative policies, the latter was accom panied by economic, social, and educational programs designed to bring mutual benefits to both the United States and Latin America. Through these programs, the United States hoped to contribute to the solidarity of the Western 3 Hemisphere for the purpose of national security. The program of cultural relations has been viewed both as a humanitarian program for maintaining peace and as a propaganda campaign for encouraging hemisphere solidarity for defense and war. In its broader aspects, it was at first designed to establish cooperative endeavors that would provide mutual benefits to the peoples on both sides of the Rio Grande. In its educational aspects, it provided for the exchange of information through various devices. Among these were the cultural institutes established in Latin America as binational educational and recreational centers. One of the largest of these is located in Mexico City. ^Ibid., pp. 134, 160, 211-12; William Lytle Schurz, Latin America (New York: E. P. Dutton and Co., Inc., 1942), p. 291; Donald W. Rowland, History of the Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1947), pp. 3-8. 3 This dissertation describes and analyzes the activi ties of the Mexican-American Cultural Institute^ in Mexico City from its founding in 1942 until 1953. During this period of time, the Department of State, as the principal agency in the field of foreign policy, served as the chief source of financial support and guidance for the institute as an instrument of the cultural relations program.^ By studying in detail the development of the insti tute and the various aspects of its activities, the writer hoped to reveal something of its essential nature and character. An understanding of the ability of the insti tute to contribute to the cultural relations program as one aspect of the foreign policy of the United States was expected to be one of the principal results of the study. Another principal purpose in undertaking the study was to search for evidence of political values that have The official name of the institute in Spanish is Instituto Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales. Publications and official correspondence in English have sometimes used the full name in Spanish and sometimes a translated version. In English, it has been variously called the Mexican-North American (Northamerican) Institute of Cultural Relations, Mexican-North American Cultural Institute, Mexican-North American Institute, and Mexican- American Cultural Institute. For the sake of brevity, the last form has been preferred in the present study except in footnotes, where the wording of the source material has been preserved. ■*0n August 1, 1953, responsibility for the adminis tration of that portion of the program which included the cultural institutes passed from the Department of State to the United States Information Agency. become apparent through the experience of the institute over a period of more than a decade. The difficulty of determining with any accuracy the actual effects of the institute on Mexican attitudes toward the United States and its foreign policy soon became apparent in conducting the research. It was hoped, however, that a study of Mexican reactions to the activities of the institute would provide the basis for estimating, in terms of methods of approach, its ability as an educational institution to maneuver within a political frame of reference. Importance of the Study In selecting the problem for study, the writer was motivated by a number of factors besides the requirement of the university to demonstrate a capacity to do original research for a higher degree. As a student and teacher of the Spanish language, he had been interested in the culture of Latin America for some twenty years. The Second World War brought this interest to focus on the political rela tions of the United States with Latin America, but the basic interests in the language and the culture of the region remained. Accordingly, a topic in the area of cultural relations was chosen because it appeared to pro vide an opportunity for further study in a field closely related to a combination of these basi -:iterests in the Spanish language, Latin American cultural life, and the international relations of the United States with Latin America. It was before the entry of the United States into the Second World War that the writer* like many other teachers of Spanish, first learned of the cultural insti tutes. Teaching English as a foreign language to Spanish speaking people for the purpose of making friends for the United States seemed to be not only an intriguing adventure personally, but also a worthwhile endeavor. Some consider ation was given, therefore, before and after the war to seeking an opportunity to join the staff of one of the institutes. An opportunity to do so in 1945 was missed when the writer elected to continue on active duty in the united States Navy until 1947. Reduced appropriations for cultural relations in that year made it impossible for the writes^ to enter the program on being released from active t duty, and he returned to his pre-war teaching position. Nevertheless^ his interest in the cultural insti tutes remained alive. The investigation, therefore, was intended to satisfy vicariously, through intensive research into the history and. operations of one of them, both a long-standing interest and a genuine curiosity about their methods of attempting to serve a political purpose through educational means. At the same time, the research was designed to give some further insight into the cultural relations program as a whole. The cultural institute in Mexico City was selected for study for several reasons. First, its proximity to the United States made it possible to make a personal inspec tion of the activities of the institute and discuss its operations with those actively engaged in them. In lieu of personal participation in such a program, no other way of approximating the values gained by practical experience seemed possible. Another reason for choosing this institute was a report that it had been somewhat more difficult there than in other Latin American countries to establish and operate it successfully. It was believed that a study of the prob lems involved in Mexico would provide a somewhat greater understanding of the capabilities and limitations of such institutes as vehicles of foreign policy. It was recog nized, of course, that not all that might be learned would be applicable in its entirety to all Latin American coun tries, but certainly some generally accepted principles were expected to result from the study. Mexico was chosen also because of its size and leadership in Latin American affairs. Its contiguous boundary with the United States gives it added importance in terms of the Good Neighbor Policy. In many respects, it is with Mexico that the policies of the United States 7 Government must meet their severest tests., It is axiomatic that, if the United Stages'‘ “ t f T s i i e s r _ Latin America, it must first be a good neighbor to Mexico. Cultural relations with Latin America and the Good Neighbor Policy in general were recent developments in the field of American relations with Latin America. It was believed that the investigation and analysis in some detail of one aspect of the recent relations of the United States with a Latin American country would furnish some insight into the general problems of such relations perhaps tin- attainable in any other way. Quite apart from any conclusions that may be reached, it is modestly hoped that the investigation may have some intrinsic merit of its own. McMurry and Lee dis covered in studying the cultural relations programs of the United States and other governments that . . . the wealth of relevant material in the various national archives is no less surprising than the fact that hitherto relatively little such information from official sources on cultural relations has ever been made available in any language to the general public. Although the Department of State established the Division of Cultural Relations in 1938 to implement the program of cultural relations, organized studies of the ^Ruth Emily McMurry and Muna Lee, The Cultural roach (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 777“pP. 7-8. 8 7> •subject are rare./ Graduate students have only recently begun', to explore the-* field as a topic for research., Some attention has been, given to the multilateral approach to cultural relations because of interest stimulated by the activities of UNESCO,, but, little, if any, has been given, to the study of, bilateral cultural relations„ A search of available publications before beginning, the study, wide reading, in the field, and many contacts with present and former employees of the Department of State have failed to reveal that any academic investigation has. been made of the cultural institutes as. an instrument of the bilateral cultural relations program.. The present investigation,, therefore,, is considered unique. Organization of the Study The study first surveys government-sponsored cul tural relations in Latin America in terms of their ration ale,. their origins,, and, their operations from 1938 to 1953.. The activities of the cultural, institute are then reviewed in. closer detail from the, time of its founding in 1942, until the close of the period of research in the summer of 1953. There were several, reasons for this approach. The changing, nature and objectives of the cultural relations program from the point of view of its adminis trators in Washington suggested a study of this type., It ^Guerrant,,, op. cit.. p. 128. o a was- believed that; the; cultural institute could be viewed more effectively from! within the frame of reference of the rationale and activities of the whole program.-, Furthermore.,, the; activities of, cultural, relations have generally been classified by propagandists as "slow media" in contrast with the "fast media." of the unilateral information program.# Although this classification has proved to/ be an over-simplification, it suggested that only a study covering; a substantial period of time would- prove adequate in terms, of the objectives, sought and the methods used,. i Another reason, for this approach is found in the development of the: institute itself. The difficulties, en countered in. establishing and operating the institute during the first five years of its existence present a .sharp contrast with, the more successful record, of the second, five years, yet the effects of the earlier period ar;e felt in the later. To omit either in a purely topical study over a short period of time would be, inaccurate ■ and, incomplete., The contrast between the two major segments of time in the history of the; institute provides an oppor tunity for making some comparisons that facilitate the task of establishing reasonably valid conclusions. The selection of topics for study within this frame work was governed primarily by the nature of the activities . in which the institute engaged or which had, some, relation" ship to other portions, of the cultural relations program., Since the research relied heavily on original documents, made available by the Department, of State, it was. believed that a description of the institute's development and operations was, basic to any analysis that might be made,, The study is primarily,, then, an account of the various activities of the, institute arranged according to the operational patterns, that developed. These are exam ined to determine the nature of the relationships between Mexicans and Americans,, the Mexican reactions to the activi** ties, the cultural information disseminated, and evidence of political significance® This information is then pre sented in summary, form at the end of each chapter.. Organization by chapters.--A descriptive definition of cultural relations is given at the close of the present chapter. The development of the rationale of the cultural, relations program; is, described in the second chapter.. The third chapter describes in survey, form the his torical background for; cultural relations, the work of private foundations and learned, societies,, the assistance, of the Pan American. Union,, and the developing interest of the United States Government in cultural relations before 1938. This is followed by a description of the organiza tional patterns and a survey of the activities of the 11, Interdepartmental Committee on Scientific and Cultural. Cooperation and the Coordinator of Inter-American; Affairs;.. The. remainder of the chapter is then devoted to the. develop ment of the program, and the administrative organizations, in the Department of State that were concerned with cultural relations from 1938 to 1953.. The fourth chapter surveys the cultural relations program of the Department of State in terms of operations in Latin America.. This includes the work of the cultural attaches, the exchange-of-persons programs, aid to American schools, the establishment and operation of American libra ries, the exchange of books, the translation of American books and other publications, and exchanges in the fields r of art and music. The chapter closes with a somewhat more extensive survey of the cultural institutes in Latin' America. The remaining, chapters are then devoted to Mexico,.. The fifth chapter begins with, a brief survey of the develop ment of American organizations for both the informational and cultural activities, in Mexico City from 1942. to 1953 in order to provide a frame, of reference for the description of the activities of the, cultural institute., The remainder of this chapter is then devoted to the founding of the institute, its objectives and’ initial program, of activities, administrative difficulties, problems of coordination, with, 12 other cultural activities, its struggle for survival* the acquisition of additional, functions, and its final achieve ment of. stability as an institution* The sixth chapter is concerned primarily with the internal administrative organization, and personnel of the institute*. It includes, a description of the members,, board of directors,, administrative, and teaching staffs* and stu dent body,, as well as their purposes and functions. One section is devoted especially to the background, prepara tion, and orientation of the staff.. The chapter closes with a description of the buildings and the growth of the institute* Chapter VII describes and analyzes the regular courses of instruction in English., It is particularly con cerned with a study of the curriculum, academic standards and regulations, teaching methods, and textbooks in rela tion to the institute's objectives. The final section of the chapter analyzes the cultural content of the.courses,, the treatment of controversial, material, and the effect of student enrollment, patterns, on the dissemination, of in formation, on American culture., Chapter VIII is devoted to' courses for special, groups,, courses given by radio, courses in commercial English,, and Spanish classes.. Because of their emphasis, on, ° American culture and their, lack, of similarity - to each other* 13 individual, descriptions, are; given of, special courses, for advanced students in American Literature,, history and thought., Efforts to increase the cultural, offerings, of the institute through a creative writing center and the forma,-* tion of a center for higher Mexican-American, studies are described in the last, section of this chapter* The ninth chapter discusses special services to Mexican; educators through advisory and extension services,, teacher training courses, seminars on language, culture and teaching methods, and an association for Mexican teachers of English., The tenth chapter presents a description of the cul tural services and activities intended primarily to attract the public* These consisted of a library, motion pictures,, musical concerts, dramatic productions, art and photo graphic exhibits, receptions and ceremonies, commencement exercises, and lectures., The eleventh chapter describes the social programs and activities of interest chiefly to the students of the institute.. These included organized student activities such a s . , student government,, a student, newspaper, and a num ber of clubs,, as well as such purely social activities as dances.,, parties,, receptions,,, and open, houses,., Chapter XII discusses the activities of the insti tute in the field of the exchange of persons, its partici pation in the selection of applicants for scholarships, for 14 study in the United States,, its relationship to an. associ- ation of former scholarship holders,, and its contribution tct the development of the Mexico-United States, Commission on Cultural, Cooperation.. At the end of each chapter a summary of each activi- ty and any conclusions pertaining to. it are presented. The conclusions based on the study are assembled,, analyzed* and evaluated in the final chapter. The Sources of Information Most of the data for the study was collected be tween June, 1952, and September, 1953, during which time the writer traveled more than 10,000 miles in the United States and Mexico in a search for materials and people con*4 cemed. with cultural relations. The information that was finally assembled was, derived to some extent from such standard sources as books* periodicals, government publica- tions, and newspapers,, but the principal sources were the files of the Department of State,, mimeographed documents at the Universities of Denver and of Michigan,, the files of. the cultural institute, Of the Benjamin Franklin Library,, and of the American Embassy in Mexico City, two private collections of. papers,, and personal interviews, and observa tions., As to be expected in. a, study of this type, much of the needed information,, both written and oral, was available only in the Spanish language., The necessary translations 15 to English were made by the present writer., A more de tailed description of the nature and location of the sources is given in the following paragraphs. Books."--In making a search of bibliographies and library catalogues, no recent books on the subject of cul tural relations were found. The only book discovered that is completely devoted to the subject is that by Ruth Emily Q McMurry and Muna Lee, The Cultural Approach. Although it was written by two officers of the Department of State who had access to departmental files, its sources were chiefly previously published materials. One chapter proved useful as a survey of the program of the United States in cultural relations up to 1946, but, since six of its nine chapters are devoted to the cultural activities of other govern ments, its usefulness in terms of details regarding the program of the United States was limited. Furthermore, in terms of critical analysis or evidence of political effec tiveness, the book leaves something to be desired., The only other post-war book which discussed to any extent the subject of the participation of the United States Government in cultural relations was written by Charles A., H. Thomson under the title, Overseas Information ^Chapel. Hill: University of North Carolina Press,, 1947, 280 pp., 16 g Service of the United States .Government. , Published in 1948,. it likewise fails to cover the whole period under consideration. Furthermore* it places most of its emphasis on. the information programs of the Office of War Informa tion* the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs.,, and the Department of State* It is concerned, with administrative structures* relationships, problems, and policy matters.., Written largely from the point of view of a propagandist who favors the press, radio, and motion pictures as his principal media, the book devotes little attention to cul tural relations. Little, if any, insight is given into the reactions abroad to either type of program. Nevertheless, the book proved useful for its critical, approach to both the information program and cultural relations* A section on cultural relations in William Lytle Schurz,, Latin America,^ provides an account of the de velopment and a survey of the program. Written by a man who has devoted his life to a study of Latin America and who served during the Second World War in the cultural field in the Department of State* it is brief in terms-of details but comprehensive and accurate in terms, of its approach and broad view* Soma assistance was obtained, ^Washington: The. Brookings Institution, 1948/ 397 pp., ^®New York: E . . . P . , Dutton and Co.., 1949, 3,86 pp. 17 too, from Samuel Flagg Bemis,. The Latin American Policy, of 11 the United Statesin the historical development of cul tural relations and from Edward 0. Guerrant, Roosevelt *s 12 Good Neighbor Policy,, in a chapter devoted to cultural and scientific relations with Latin America during the war years,« Other books on foreign affairs were not very fruit ful In this field* Several authors on Mexico were con sulted for information about cultural relations with Mexico but without results* Periodical literature.--The periodical material in standard popular, professional, and scholarly publications is difficult to classify. Of particular interest and assistance was a series of articles in The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science of Septem ber, 1944, which was devoted to international cultural relations. They were written by lay scholars and by mem bers of the Department of State who were in a position of leadership in establishing policies under which this and other cultural programs were founded and conducted* These articles were particularly useful from the point of view of ■^New York; Harcourt, Brace and Co.,. 1943, 470 pp. I 9 •^Albuquerque:, The University of New Mexico Press, 1950, 235 pp. It was while studying this book in a course on Latin American diplomacy under its author that the writer first became aware of the fact that the cultural relations program had not been thoroughly investigated by scholars., Pp. 126-28* 18 policies and concepts., Some materials were located in a variety of publi cations which were written by those who participated in the program, particularly at times, when they were seeking public supporto Some information was discovered also in periodical articles written by journalists after interviews with persons active in the program. Such material, how ever, was seldom critical or analytical and frequently was written from a superficial point of view.. It did supply some useful surveys and occasional details on operations, however. Newspaper articles in both the United States and Mexico supplied much basic information written when certain issues or activities were current. Newspaper clippings, many of them preserved in scrapbooks by the Benjamin Franklin Library, the cultural institute, and by Mr. Philip Raine, Cultural Attache in Mexico City from 1948 to 1951, proved particularly helpful. Occasional clippings for warded to the Department of State and preserved in official files, also proved, of value,., A search of the newspaper files of, the Hemeroteca, Nacional in Mexico City yielded some; information,, as did, current issues of, newspapers, pub lished, while the writer was in Mexico.. Occasional artieles- published in The New York Times and the Christian Science Monitor by their correspondents in Mexico City provided some additional information., Publications of the Department of State.,--A con siderable quantity of information was gathered from the publications of the Department, of State. The Department of State Bulletin was reviewed from its first volume in 1939 until 1952. It contained much material on organizational matters, statements of policy,, and some general data on activities. Another periodical publication of the Depart ment of State that proved particularly useful was The Record. This publication was issued from 1945 until 1952 and was devoted exclusively to technical, scientific, and cultural relations. It provided much material covering the program as a whole and some specific information on activi ties in Mexico City. It was succeeded by the Field Reporter in 1952. After the passage of the Smith-Mundt Act in 1948, the published semi-annual reports of the Advisory Commis sion on Educational Exchange, the Advisory Commission on Information, and the reports of the Secretary of State to Congress supplied some insight into policy matters through their recommendations and some specific details on. opera-’ tions, although the latter: were usually in general terms,, rather than on Mexico alone.. The Department of State also issued a number of, occasional pamphlets describing the activities of cultural 20 relations., Of particular interest was The Cultural- 13 Cooperation Program 1938-1943., by Haldore Hanson. J It provided a general survey as. well as specific details for the first five years of government,-sponsored cultural rela tions., After the war, the department issued a number of such publications. One of these, The Program of the Inter departmental Committee on Scientific and Cultural Coopera tion, proved particularly useful for its articles on the Benjamin Franklin Library and a survey of the cultural institutes in Latin America, including the one in Mexico City.^ In general, these publications of the Department of State were useful for statements of policy and a general survey of cultural relations activities. The irregularity of their publication, the lack of uniformity in presenting data both historically and topically, and the absence of specific details after 1950, combined with the general absence of critical evaluations and frank admissions of problems leaves the investigator with a desire to probe further Into his subject. Congressional hearings. , — A series of government publications which provided mote extensive information was •^Department of State Publication No. 2137 (Wash-1 ington:; U.> S., Government Printing, Office, 1944),. 71 pp., ^Department of State Publication No. 2994 (Wash-1 ington: U., S. Government Printing Office, 1947), 41 pp.. 21 the public hearings before the Appropriations Committees of both the House of Representatives and the Senate of the United States Congress. These were reviewed systematically from the beginning of the cultural relations program to 1953. The hearings before the Committee on Foreign Rela tions of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House at critical periods in the history of the program were also reviewed. A reading of the hearings produced a considerable quantity of statistical information and criti cal examination of the cultural relations program not to be found elsewhere in government publications. A major diffi culty in using the hearings, of course, is that the material is given verbatim as it was presented either orally or in reports to the congressional committees, It thus often lacks organization and locating it involves searching through many thousands of pages for specific material desired. Other government publications.--Useful for histori cal background were the reports of the American delegations to the Inter-American Conferences,, particularly those of 1933 in Montevideo, 1936 in Buenos Aires, and 1938 in Lima. Especially useful for a presentation of wartime activities was Donald W. Rowland, History of the Office of the Coordi nator of Inter-American Affairs.^ Written from basic •^Washington: U . . - S. Government Printing Office, 1947, 284 pp. 22 documents found in the Coordinator's files,, it was used extensively for policy statements,, a general survey of activities, and many details., Unpublished government documents."-The most fruit ful source of information for both statements of policy and specific details was a great volume of unpublished govern ment documents. These were found in several locations. The first collection of any size and value that was discovered was found in the International Relations Library of the Social Science Foundation at the University of Denver. These had been collected systematically and bound by Dr. Ben M. Cherrington, who served as the first Chief of the Division of Cultural Relations from 1938 to 1940 and then as a member of the division's General Advisory Com mittee until 1944. The collection contains the monthly reports of the division from December, 1941, through December, 1943, and a complete record of the minutes of the committee from 1938 to 1944. The minutes provide a behind- the-scenes record of the philosophy and critical thinking of the men who founded the Division of Cultural Relations. and planned its early operations, as well as reports of 16 activities as, the program, developed., ' 1 6 -These minutes not only provide information on bi“> lateral cultural, relations with Latin America,, but they also contain source material on planning, for the future, establishment of an apolitical multilateral program, which , finally emerged as UNESCO., They also provide some insight 23 The second important collection of government re- ports, was found in the Department of Library Science of the University of Michigan* These consisted of a nearly com plete collection of all monthly and annual reports made by the directors of the Benjamin Franklin Library in Mexico City from its founding in 1942 until June, 1950, when public distribution was discontinued. A similar collection 17 was found in the New York Public Library. While these reports are chiefly valuable to those interested in the history of the Benjamin Franklin Library, a research pro ject by itself, they did contain much information on the activities of the cultural institute until the two institu tions were separated in 1947. Most of this was operational in nature. The third, and by far the most important, collec-1 tion of government documents was made available by the Department of State through its Division of Historical into the thinking of those who advocated a stronger uni lateral approach for the political purpose of building up the power of the United States.. Something of this same conflict in views within the Department in the post-war years has been described in Thomson, op. cit. (Supra, pp., 15-16.) The conflict has continued to the present day., ■^Dr. Harry M„ Lydenberg,, who had retired from a lifetime, of service with the New York Public Library, established the Benjamin Franklin Library in Mexico City in 1942 and was its first director. Dr. Rudolph H. Gjelsness,, Director of the Department of Library Science at the Uni versity of Michigan, was its second director, serving from, 1943 to the end of 1944., 24 ■ Policy Research and the Information Center Service of the International Information. Administration., These consisted of a nearly complete set of instructions from the Depart ment of State to the American Embassy in Mexico City, des patches from the embassy to the department, exchanges of personal letters during the war, monthly and quarterly reports of the cultural institute after 1947, quarterly narrative and statistical reports beginning in 1950, and semi-annual survey and evaluation reports prepared by the staff of the embassy after December, 1949, for both the information and cultural relations programs. These were carefully reviewed for policy statements, organizational patterns, operational information, and miscellaneous data for the entire period tinder study. In addition, files on activities involving the cultural institute were surveyed for supplementary material. Enclosures, marginal notes on the documents, inter-office memoranda, and unpublished departmental, studies of the program completed the collec tion.,"^ No more authentic or complete source of informa tion exists than the record in the Department of State. A fourth source of unpublished government documents ^The Department of State also made available after the period of research was completed an analytical report of a survey of public opinion on the work of the United States Information Service in Mexico, including the cul tural, institute, which was undertaken in 1952 and completed in 1953.« 25 was found in Mexico City in the files, of the cultural, institute, of the Benjamin Franklin Library, and of. the American Embassy, Some information unavailable in the Department of State was found here. This consisted of the minutes of the meetings of the boards of directors of both the institute and the library, memoranda from the directors of both institutions to embassy officers, and miscellaneous material not discovered in Washington or which had not yet been forwarded. Some further information was also found in the American Consulates in Guadalajara and Monterrey. Unpublished studies and private papers."-Nearly a dozen unpublished graduate studies on subjects related to the research were consulted. Only one which bore directly on the subject proved to be of significance for the present study. This was Ralph Rogers David, "The Development of Activities and Policies of the United States Government in Inter-American Cultural Relations.,." an unpublished Master's thesis accepted at the University of Denver in August,, 1951. Written from the basic materials collected by Dr., Cherrington and under his. direction, this thesis, was, highly useful in surveying the background and early poll-' ciea in the Department of State* Twoi collections, of private; papers were located* The, first; of these was a. file, of, correspondence and, copies; of reports prepared by Dr* Albert: H« Marckwardt;,. Professor of English, at the University of Michigan, who, was the; 26 Resident? Director of th© EngLish Language Institute in Mexico City.. These papers proved invaluable in shedding a. great deal of light on the problems of establishing the program during the Second World War and on local policies and activities. Another collection was the file of per sonal letters exchanged between Dr. Harry M. Lydenberg, the first Director of the Benjamin Franklin Library, and his successors until 1952, which were found in the archives of the New York Public Library. They were chiefly useful for their intimate view of problems of policy in connection with the Benjamin Franklin Library in Mexico City, but they provided some background information of interest to a study of the cultural institute. During the course of the research, numerous letters were exchanged with those active in cultural activities affecting the institute from its beginning to 1953. Several of these proved particularly helpful as orientation and, confirmation of other sources. Among these were letters from Dr. John W. Studebaker, former Commissioner of Education; Mr. Kenneth Holland, former official in the Office of the Coordinator and. in the Department of State and later President of the Institute of International Edu^ cation;, Dr. Clifford Prator, formerly with the Office of the Coordinator and subsequently Foreign Student Adviser at the University of California, at Lqs; Angeles;, Mr., Morrill Cody,, Cultural Attache in Mexico; City from 1946; to 1948;, 0 ,27 Mr.’ , , Andy/ G. Wilkison, Director Q ' f ; the Benjamin Franklin Library' in 1947 and 1948.;, Mr., Carl A., Sauer* a program officer of the Department of State concerned with the operations of libraries and institutes in Latin America from 1943 to 1950; and Miss Doris Havener* a grantee teacher in the cultural institute in Mexico City during 1949 and 1950. Interviews and personal observations.--Purina the course of the research, personal interviews were obtained with more than fifty individuals intimately connected with 19 cultural relations over a ten-year period. These in cluded previous and current officers in the Department of State at both policy and operational levels, every cultural attache in Mexico City but one and two cultural assistants, every living director of the Benjamin Franklin Library, all but two of the directors of the English Language Institute and the cultural institute, seven former and current Ameri can grantee teachers in the institute, and five foreign student advisers in the United States. Many other contacts were attempted but could not be realized because of over- .seas residence, lack of a forwarding address, or; failure to respond to correspondence* The interviews were highly useful for purposes of, orientation, basic philosophies, ^Qne of them, Dr., Cherrington,, had, been actively associated with cultural relations, for fifteen years. 28 ' personal, experiences,, clarifl.Gati.oru of difficult point,a of information,, and suggestions for further research:.) In addition to personal interviews.,, several oppor tunities were made available to see the cultural program in operation in the summer of 1953* These included the par ticipation in a public ceremony by the cultural attache, a meeting of the project committee of the Mexico-United States Commission on Cultural Cooperation, inspection of the operations of the Benjamin Franklin Library, a meeting of the board of directors of the cultural institute, par ticipation in a meeting of the Creative Writing Center, visits to art exhibits, film showings, lectures, a chil drens program, and a meeting of the Mexican Association of 20 Teachers of English held at the institute. v These per sonal experiences added a perspective not easily obtained from written sources. Definition of Cultural Relations There is no exact meaning of the term, "cultural relations," that is generally understood by the uninitiated. Like democracy, it is more easily described than defined. ^These opportunities for personal observation were extended to actual participation, on one occasion through an. invitation to deliver an orientation lecture to a group of, nearly 100 Mexicans interested, in. the United, States,, in cluding many who were prospective applicants, for; scholar1 " 1 ships, to study in the United, States.., 29 Dictionaries, are of little help in explaining its meaning.. Even those, who; have engaged in Che work reveal by their use of the term, that they do not agree on its meaning* for it has been used as a. label for a variety of activities as the program; has developed over a period of more than fifteen years. Consequently, the definitions that have been ex pressed or implied by those who have worked in the program; have been both narrow and broad. In a very narrow sense* the term, ’'culture," has come to have for some persons a meaning limited to paint ing, sculpture, music, and literature, or a sort of disci plined, genteel, and perhaps artificial atmosphere one might have found in an earlier day among dilettantes in aristocratic circles at literary teas, the opera, and exhi- 21 bitions of the fine arts. In its broader meaning, the term may be used by anthropologists and sociologists to encompass everything 22 characteristic of the life of a society. "Cultural rela tions" could thus be used to refer to many types of con tacts among the nations of the world. These might be ^G. Howland Shaw, "Cultural-Cooperation Program, of the Department of State, ” Department of State Bulletin. , X (May 13, 1944), 429-35; William Benton, "A New Instrument of U. S. Foreign Policy," Department of State Bulletin,, XV (October 1.3, 1946), 672. Charles A. H. Thomson,, Overseas Information. Service of the United States Government (Washington.;, The; Brookings, Institution, 1948), n., 1„ p. 173. 30, military,, political, economic,, scientific technical,, literary and artistic, as well as others., Herschel Brickell,. who served in cultural relations with the Department of State during the Second World War* told an audience at Rollins College* Florida* in 1945 that the Division of Cultural Cooperation used to say* ""Nothing that is human is alien to culture*" And he went on to quote a definition of the terms Culture* a word of varied meanings, is here used in the more inclusive sociological sense, that is, to designate the artifacts, goods, technical processes, ideas, habits and values which are the social heritage of a people. Thus, culture includes all learned be havior, intellectual knowledge, social organization and language, all systems of values— economic, moral or spiritual. Fundamental to a peculiar culture are its law, economic structure, magic, religion, art, knowl edge and. education. 23 McMurry and Lee accept this definition in principle and add that a program of cultural relations is essentially a program of communication. "The cultural relations of a people are its efforts toward mutual acquaintance and the mutual understanding that such acquaintance brings." A nation's culture is the sum total of its achievement; its own expression of its own personality; its way of thinking and acting. Its program of cultural relations abroad is its method of making these things known to ^Herschel Brickell, "Cultural Relations in the Post-War World, " Report of Pan American Week Programs,, April 8-16, 1945 (A* J. Hanna, ed.; Winter Park,. Florida,s Rollins College, August, 1945), p« 19, quoting from Paul JU Braisted, Cultural Cooperation, Keynote of the Coming Age, (New Haveni The Hazen Foundation,* n;„ d.). foreigners*. Such a programs is in fact a self-portrait; into which go- all a people's creative ability and tech-* nical skill, and which it wishes the ££St of the world to recognise as; a speaking likeness,„24 To the extent that cultural relations are communi- cations with a purpose they constitute a form of propaganda,, But, if there is a propagandistie motive in cultural rela tions, it is not comparable to the "war of nerves" and the "subversive, insidious system" which the nazis employed "as an implement of aggression, as the psychological arm of their pattern of conquest." Cultural relations in some aspects are more nearly comparable to "propaganda" in its original sense of "an effort to urge other people to think as one thinks." Although cultural relations are distinct from propaganda in the sense that they are reciprocal in nature, it is clear that they involve an effort to estab lish favorable basic attitudes of long duration that will create a general climate of opinion conducive to cooper ation. The difference in methods but similarity in objec tives were established as early as 1942 by the chief of the Division of Cultural Relations in the Department of State: The technique of propaganda is generally similar to advertising; it seeks to impress, to press in* The technique of cultural relations is that of education in the root sense of, the word, to "lead out." Propaganda endeavors to develop a receptive or favorable, atti tude— >that state of. mind which is sometimes, called 24MCMurry and, Lee, op., cit. , „ pp., 1-3., 32, "’ good-will.,"' The; goal, of cultural, relations, is some* 9 thing, deeper and more lasting,, the creation; of a state of. mind properly- called "understanding.,"' Good-will may- be largely- emotional; it may evaporate quickly* Understanding endures* It is a thing of the mind, rooted in knowledge and; the conviction that is bora of knowledge rather than in emotion or sentimentality* When occasions of friction arise, the good-will fos tered by propaganda may soon be forgotten* But if effective understanding has developed between two peoples^, each will better comprehend the position of the other, even if they differ; irritation is lessened* and the way paved for adjustment and eventual solu tion. 25 Precise definitions of the scope of the meaning of the term were not formulated when the United States Govern ment began its program of cultural relations, and they were still vaguely conceived as the country prepared for war: The field of "cultural relations" was undefined when the Coordinator entered it, and his office made no systematic early efforts to delimit it. It was felt that "within a reasonable period of time such a pattern would develop of itself."2o ^^Charles A. Thomson, "The Role of Cultural Ex change in Wartime, ” Department of State Bulletin, VI (January 3, 1942), 30. Charles A, Thomson, Chief of the Division of Cultural Relations during the Second World War, is to be distinguished from Charles A. H. Thomson, author of Overseas Information Service of the United States Government. (Supra, p. 15.) 0 C\ Charles A. H. Thomson, op. cit., p. 137, citing Donald Rowland, History of the Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs (Washington: U. S. Government Print- ing office, 1947), p. 93. Thomson and Rowland go on to point out that suggestions for activities came from many sources, and a broad program of cultural exchange was de veloped which included such heterogeneous things as ballet, a glee club, water colors, oil paintings, archeological expeditions, ski teams, agricultural projects, literature, tennis, cultural institutes, libraries, science, public health, mechanical, training, and many others.,, • 33 Agreements on. its meaning for the purpose of; estafcr* Xishing policy apparently was reached only with difficulty In the General Advisory Committee of the Division of Gul-* tural Relations in the fall of 1941. Vice President Henry A* Wallace held a broad view of the word, ''culture*M in terms of social functions which included agriculture* road and bridge building, industrial engineering, increased production, and other technical and economic aspects of American life. Archibald MacLeish and others, on the other hand, accepted Mr. Wallace's broad definition with reluc tance because they felt "it very important that the utili tarian side not be allowed to lessen the creative side of the arts," for it was the creative artists who, working together, contributed to international understanding.^ It was the broader view that prevailed during the war, A month before Pearl Harbor, Assistant Secretary of State G. Howland Shaw included in his meaning of the term economic, technical, and medical subjects, engineering, mining, fishing, road building, social welfare movements, exchanges of persons, translations of books and other pub lications, and special university courses. Cultural rela tions meant reciprocal relations in terms of interest, ^Minutes of the Meeting of September; 17-18, 1941,, General Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural, Relations,, Department of State,, Washington* pp« 41-44 (mimeographed,)., 34 contributions: , contacts:, experiences.,, and, visits, which con-* tributedi toward a better rniders,tanding; and recognition of irr.terd; ep,ea4enc.e.» Cultural relations have to da not only with things of the mind and the spirit, the things which we have associated with the idea of culture in its narrower sense. It also involves cooperation in everything that would make life in the Americas more worth living for more Americans. It means making the experience of one country available to the people of other countries for utilization in accordance with their own judgment as to their needs«2° This broad description is clarified and narrowed at the same time by an explanation of the specific activities which by 1946 had been adopted by the government to imple ment its cultural relations program: The cultural activities carried on abroad by Governments commonly include the establishment and sup port of cultural centers or institutes and schools in foreign countries; the interchange of technical ex perts, professors, teachers, students, and leaders in various fields of intellectual and artistic expression; the exchange of books and other printed materials, lectures, concerts, and exhibitions. The newer media, motion picture and radio, are used increasingly. It is important to note that the cultural relations activi- ties carried on through official channels are planned in the main to encourage and to supplement rather than to displace the international activities of private organizations, institutions, and individuals.2* The meaning of the term had become somewhat more limited by 1948, when Thomson provided a brief definition of the government cultural relations program: 2^G. Howland Shaw, “Cultural Relations," Department of State Bulletin, V (November 8, 1941), 369-71. ^McMurry and, lee, op. cit.„ p, 5« 35 The term, became* a cliche to- denote a; specialized pro," gram-, for the reciprocal interchange of specialized personnel (students;,, teachers,, professors-,, technical' specialists.,, community leaders)-,, of specialized knowlw edge (scientific and, technical), and of materials, of the- type more-, commonly connoted by the term "culture"1 5 painting,, sculpture* .music* literature*,^ After the implementation of the "Point Four" pro- 0 gram in 1950* the term* "cultural relations*" was no- longer generally applied to technical assistance to foreign countries* and its meaning became nearly synonymous with "educational exchange," which had largely replaced it in the official vocabulary* The meaning given it in a con gressional hearing in 1953 by an official of the Inter national Information Administration in response to a Congressman’s unfamiliarity with the term coincides only in part with the definition given by Thomson* It had lost some of its earlier sharp definition and much of its scope; Those activities that we generally describe as cul tural are exchange-of-persons activities. • • « In addition, they include the library functions, and the information center functions; and we have related activities that will complement those two pro grams. We have cultural officers to keep in touch with the university people, and so forth. These are all under the heading of the cultural program.-^1 It is largely in this latter sense that the term is used in the present study. It does not include the tech nical assistance programs of the United States Government, ■^Charles A. H. Thomson, op. cit.. n. 1, p. 173. 3*U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, Supplementary Appropriation Bill. 1954. 83rd Cong., 1st Sess., 1953, Part 1, p. 63.0. . 36 but it may/ include the occasional, use of fi.be radio),, pxes:s* and motion picture programs for the dissemination of eul** turai in.fQrma.ti.on about the United States abroad* it excludes* however* the unilateral effort by the same media to affect foreign attitudes directly by the dissemination of information about current events* the foreign policy of the United States, and justifications therefor* "Cultural relations" have come to be considered those activities of a long-term educational nature in which the Latin Americans express a desire for participation* Cultural activities are fundamentally cooperative in nature. They may be de signed, nevertheless, to instill favorable basic attitudes toward the United States for the express purpose of winning political support for this country in international affairs. They are, therefore, essentially a propaganda device, but not in the customary high-pressure sense of the word usually associated with psychological warfare or the hard hitting or persuasive propaganda activities of totalitarian powers. They operate indirectly without pressure over a period of time, and they allow those affected by them con siderable freedom of choice. CHAPTER, XI THE RATIONALE OF THE CULTURAL RELATIONS PROGRAM Introduction The international political situations in which, the United States found itself from 1938 to 1953 divide the first fifteen years of the government-sponsored program of cultural relations into four general periods* During the first of these, from 1938 to 1941, the United States went through a period of changing from an international policy of neutrality in world affairs to one of preparation for national defense and war. The second period is marked off by the participation of the United States in the Second World War, against Germany, Italy, and Japan* The third period began with the expectation of peace in late 1945 and was ended by the mounting international tensions of the cold war with the Soviet Union. The final period began in 1948 and continued through the Korean War* The division into four basic periods of time pro vides a convenient frame of reference for consideration of the rationale of the cultural relations program. From one point of view, this division is somewhat arbitrary, for there is a basic continuity throughout the fifteen years* Most of, the. fundamental thinking, of one period is also found in the next, and the changes in the international 3 . a situation; were not always, reflected, immediately either in basic pri.nci.ples or operations* Nevertheless., as; the international political situation fluctuated, between peace and war, bringing changes in the world’s power structure, the organizational patterns of the program were altered; and; new leadership appeared to guide its operations. Under these circumstances, it was inevitable that adjustments be made in the rationale of the program,, The division, into four basic periods, of time also serves as a frame of refer** ence for pointing out conflicts in rationale and policies which emerged as the program developed* Initial Rationale of the Program The basic rationale of the cultural relations pro gram stemmed primarily from principles developed in the Pan American movement and the foreign policy of the United States toward Latin America. These principles were ex pressed by both Secretary of State Cordell Hull and Under secretary Sumner Welles. Each Latin American country was accepted as a juridical equal in the family of nations under international law based upon justice, fair dealing, mutual respect and cooperation. ■^Cordell Hull, "The Significance of the Pan Ameri can Movement,." Department of State. Bulletin, . I (Septem ber 23, 193.9), 2.87, 39 Sumner Welles. In. an. address before a group, of edu cators. in. 1937 stated; that the primary principle governing the- policy of the United States toward Latin America was "its utter unwillingness to interfere,, directly or in directly* in the domestic concerns of, those nations.."' Attempts to impose a. democratic form of government on Latin America or to practice imperialism were no longer accept able in a program of enlightened self-interest: I know of no act of intervention undertaken by the United States which has accrued to the benefit of the American people., We reaped only hostility, suspicion, and ill will; and, in similar degree, 1 am unable to ' find that the people of those countries where such intervention took place gained any benefit other than the temporary advantage which the road construction, or the sanitation imposed upon them brought them; for it has been demonstrated by this experience— if such ex perience were necessary— that domestic peace and the utilization of the orderly processes of democratic self-government cannot be imposed from without by an alien people; they can only arise from the individual genius, the needs and the will of peoples themselves,*^ Resting on the principle of non-intervention, the Division of Cultural Relations established in the Depart ment of State in 1938 was not to be considered a "'propa ganda,' agency, in the popular sense of the term, which carries with it implications of penetration, imposition and unilateralism.,"^ This, statement, made by the first chief ^Ben M. Cherrington, quoting Sumner Welles in "The Role of Education in. International Cultural Relations," Department of State Bulletin, I (July 8, 1939), 19* U* S., Department of State, "Outline of Tentative Program, for the Division of Cultural Relations, " Washing- ton.„ June, 1, 1939, p., 2, (mimeographed),., 40 of the new division,. Ben M.. Cherrington, on leave, of ab sence; from the University' of Denver, was endorsed, by other officers; of the. Department of State.^ The program of cultural relations was. to be truth-* full It was to be a long-term program at rather low pres-* sure in order to achieve more permanent results than; a high-pressure program, conducted over a short period, of time.,** It was to be educational in content and approach* and. its reciprocal nature was intended, to bring mutual understanding between peoples: The field; of activities thus laid out for the Division is that of genuine cultural relations* • • « If its endeavors are to be directed, toward the develop-* menfc of true and more realistic understanding between the peoples of the United States and those of other nations, it is believed that such a goal can most surely be attained by a program which is definitely educational in character, and which emphasizes the essential reciprocity in cultural relations* A primary ^Assistant Secretary of State George S. Messarsmith, "Conference of Inter-American Relations in the Field of Education: Proceedings of the Conference," Department of State Bulletin. I (November 11, 1939), 494-506; Assistant Secretary of State Adolf A. Berle, Jr., "Cooperative Peace in the Western Hemisphere,." Department of State Bulletin. I (December 9, 1939), 662; Acting Chief of the Division of American Republics Ellis 0.. Briggs, "The 1930*s— A Decade of Progress in Inter-American Relations," Department, of State Bulletin, , II (January 6, 1940), 10.. ^Minutes of. Second. Meeting of Committee on. Cultural Relations, Division of. Cultural Relations,, Department o.f. State, Washington,, November 21, 1938, p., 16 (typewritten)-;; Charles A.. Thomson, "The; Human Factor in, Inter-American Relations," Department, of State Bulletin,, TV (April. 19,, 1941)„ 482,., - - • . 43. function of the Division will be to serve as a clearing-* house and. coordinating agency for the activities, of • private agencies in the field of, cultural relations.,.® This position taken by the chief of the division was supported; by* Sumner Welles.. Rejecting the conception of an "official culture,,u he urged the educators of the United States,* assisted by the Department of State* to take the initiative in establishing a reciprocal program of international education in their respective fields in order to awaken an interest in human and spiritual values and to enable the individual citizens of the Americas to "contri bute in some practical way to this broader cultural under- 7 standing*" One of the asserted purposes of this mutual under standing was international peace. It was stated before Pearl Harbor that cultural relations were "perhaps the most fundamental of all the approaches to peace"; As long as the prevailing thought in the various nations varies in ways that touch closely and vitally the day-by-day habits and preoccupations of the people, the difficulties of international rapprochement must necessarily remain in the realms of the frequently in superable. When men lack common standards of right and wrong; when their beliefs as to the fitness of things ^Cherrington, loc. cit. ^Sumner Welles, "The Policy and Program of the United States Government in International Cultural Rela tions,," Department of, State Bulletin. I (November 11, 1939), 491-93; Sumner Welles, "The; Importance of Latin America to the United States,," ibid. , , , Ill, (November 2,, 1940), 3.72 ; -73.., 42, diverge in diametric ways; when their; tastes call, fo.r* activities that are mutually offensive:;; when their records of "fact’' ’ belie each other; when their sources of information yield, contradictory data; and even when./, through lack of interchange,, their aesthetic creations remain unappreciated by one another or, through paucity1 of travel,, there are few or none to interpret them to each other,, the likelihood of misunderstanding, in tolerance, bitterness,, intransigency, and easy victim ization by warmongers is indefinitely magnified. On the other hand, as these perils are dissipated through intelligent comprehension by one people of the manners and customs, the beliefs, the intellectual achieve ments, and the ethical aspirations of other peoples, the chances for peace may be confidently asserted to have been in basic fashion improved* If a whole people can be educated in the means of preserving peace and if such culture can be spread abroad, the duties of the Department ..of State as the guardian of peace will be lightened*” Although cultural relations were to be conducted to a large extent by private organizations, they were viewed by the Secretary of State as a cooperative device to build up mutual respect and friendship between the peoples of the United States and Latin America within the framework of the Good Neighbor Policy in a world at war: The time never was so important as now for us to have the closest possible relations of friendliness and absolute trust and confidence in each other, and every practical measure of cooperation should be undertaken for the promotion of the mutual welfare of each of the twenty-one American republics, politically, economi cally, morally, socially, and culturally.9 ^Wallace McClure, "The Department of State, Guardi an of Peace," Department of State Bulletin, XI (March 16, 1940), 10. 9U. S., Congress, House, Committee on; Appropri ations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation. Bill for 1942., 77th Cong.,,, 1st Ses.s.>, 1,941, p, 7, 43/ Bath', the; Under,'secretary' of State and; the, chief,. o.£ the Division, of Cultural Relations s.aw the program as interwoven with political and economic relations* which by themselves couid not build the essential tnutual understand;’ * Ing which was desired by both* The former saw cultural relations as an aid to foreign policy* The latter* how« ever, placed a higher value on cultural relations peg se than on political and economic policies* ^ And there was considerable doubt in his mind whether cultural relations should be used at all as an aid to specific foreign poli cies* Because the question of peace or war was decided far more by political and economic policies than by cul tural relations, he held that cultural relations should be distinct from the diplomatic activities of the Department of State, They should not be expected to serve "as an instrument of national policy designed to serve some irrelevant purpose of state," International cultural rela tions should be carried on "for their own sake" and for their "intrinsic value to man," In order to avoid even the "slightest suggestion of the imposition of one people's Sumner Welles, "The Importance of Latin America to the United, States," Department of State Bulletin* III (November 2, 1940), 372;. Ben M«, Cherrington, "The United, States and Inter-Ame.ri.can Relations," Department of State Bulletin,, II (June; 15* 1940.), 660-66., 44 culture upon another/* cultural delations activities should, h© reciprocal* and they show id involve the direct partici pation of the people and institutions of the United States with those of other countries» Consequently* much of the initiative far cultural activity was expected to come from private agencies, and the function of the Division of Cul tural Relations was primarily to serve as a clearing house in facilitating private activity* it was to implement these fundamental principles and to encourage private activity that advisory committees representing various areas of American cultural life were formed to cooperate with the Department of State in determining and executing policies at the beginning of the program* Changes During the Second World War Increased emphasis on political objectives.- - A1 - though the use of cultural relations for political purposes was somewhat suspect in the Division of Cultural Relations before December, 1941, their political value in terms of United States policy with Latin America was asserted by some of the higher officers of the Department of State shortly after the Second World War began in Europe* ■^Minutes of Second Meeting of Committee on Cul tural Relations, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, November 21, 193S, p« 16 (type written); Ben M. Cherrington, "America's Future Cultural Relations, " The Annals of the American Academy of Political, and. Social Science, CCXXXV (September, 1944), 77-82* ' ' ■ 45 Cultural relations were viewed by them as ant integral part of the Good Neighbor Policy, This policy had worked toward developing continental solidarity and cooperation for mutual defense through the strengthening of machinery for consultation* the maintenance of peace and neutrality* and 12 economic and financial assistance. The entire program of cultural relations* including technical assistance* was justified to Congress as early as December of 1939 by Assistant Secretary of State George S, Messersmith on the strength of its contribution to national defense. It was viewed as a cooperative, reciprocal pro gram of interest to both Americas because it built up hemisphere solidarity through its contribution to good will and understanding* and it was held that this preparation for national defense would make a strong contribution to 13 the peace of the Americas, A year later* the of the Division of Cultural Relations was again justified 'to*1 * Congress on the grounds that its work had been ’’ very largely devoted to efforts that are appropriate to cement the inter-American solidarity, which is of the utmost •^Adolf a , Berle, Jr., "Cooperative Peace in the Western Hemisphere," Department of State Bulletin, X (December 9* 1939), 659-63. 13 IT. S., Congress, House* Committee on Appropri ations* Hearings., Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1941* 76th Cong,* 3rd Sess»* 194Q* ppu 127* 233-34, 4G 1 * / importance at this time* ** The political, solidarity of the Americas continued to be a major objective of the Department of State during the Second World War* As stated on the level of general!- ties by Sumner Welles, the wartime objective of solidarity was not inconsistent with the basic principles and long term objectives of cultural relations, including the tech nical assistance programs; Our broad objective, briefly stated, is to develop and strengthen inter-American political solidarity, and the economic and social well-being of the Americas on a sound and permanent basis. In working toward that objective, we realize very keenly that international problems and policies arise from national ideals, cus toms* traditions, and philosophies of life, and that there can be no hope of success in that direction except through mutual respect and appreciation of these fundamentals. Thus we seek to know and understand our American neighbors and their viewpoints and to have them learn more about us--not by interference in their affairs or by telling them what we think is best for them, but rather through working jointly and cooper atively with them in the execution of undertakings in the economic, social, scientific, and intellectual fields through the personal associations connected therewith. Emergence of propagandists tendencies.--Upon the entry of the United States into the war, the Division of Cultural Relations re-examined the underlying principles of ■^U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1942. ' 77th Cong,, 1st Sess., 1941, p« 12. ' ■^U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1944. 78th Cong.,, 1st Sess., 1943, p. 201., " ’ ' Cultural relations*. $foe result was somewhat of a compro mise between normal,, peacetime objectives and; the condi tions imposed by war; Consultation in the Department led to agreement on the importance of maintaining in wartime the funda mental objective of the cultural relations program; i* e., the development of that reciprocal understanding essential to harmonious political relationships and to the most effective cooperation in defense of common interests* Any radical reorientation of the program at this time, or any slackening of its activities, would undo much of the results gained so far and later make it difficult to resume the program on lines successfully followed in peacetime* It was recognized, however, that our entry into the war calls for certain adjust ments and shifts of emphasis.1® It was recognized that the building of confidence and understanding between the two Americas would neces sarily take time* but that the United States needed immedi ately the support of Latin America in the war effort* The result was a decision to conduct both long-term and emer gency activities at the same time through the cooperative efforts of the Division of Cultural Relations, which was to emphasize the former, and the Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs, a wartime agency, which was to stress the latter.^ Concern was also expressed by 1^Report of the Division of Cultural Relations for December, 1941, Department of State, Washington, p. i; quoted in Ruth Emily McMurry and Muna Lee, The Cultural Approach (Chapel Hill; University of North Carolina Press, 1947), p. 212.- l^McMurry and Lee, loc. cit. The governmental organizations., as well as the principal private agencies, which engaged in cultural relations in Latin America are discussed in Chapter III of the present study. • - 48 In teres ted members of Congress over the need to plan a pro- 4 gram that would not only lend itself; to developing a “ war-* time solidarity of the hemisphere but one that could also be continued after the cessation of hostilities*^ Numerous statements made by officials in the Depart* ment of State and the Office of the Coordinator before and during the war attested to the conviction that cultural relations should be conducted on a genuinely reciprocal and cooperative basis.^ There is evidence to indicate, how ever, that the unilateral aspects of the program had a tendency to emerge, Officers in the Division of Cultural Relations as well as members of Congress found it necessary 1 f t U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1943, 77thCong*, 2nd Sess., 1942, jap. 467-69. ■^Cordell Hull, "Conference on Inter-American Rela tions in the Field of Education," Department of State Bulletin, I (November 11, 1939), 489-91; Laurence Duggan, "Extension of the American School of the Air to the Other American Republics," Department of State Bulletin, II (March 2, 1940), 232-53; Charles A. Thomson, "The Human Factor in Inter-American Relations," Department of State Bulletin, IV (April 19, 1941), 481; Halaore Hanson, "Inter-* national Languages for One World," Department of State Bul letin, IX (December 4, 1943), 396; Harry H. Pierson, "English Is Also a Foreign Language," Department of State Bulletin, XII (March 18, 1945), 453*54; U« S«, Congress, House, Conanittee on Appropriations, Hearings.,^: Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1941. 76th Cong,, 3rd Sess-, 1940, p. 59; U.. S,, Congress., House, Committee on Appropri- 9 ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1942, 77th Cong*, 1st Sess.,, 1941, pp., 58-61; U. S.,,/ Congress, House, Committee on- Appropriations., Hearings„ National War Agencies Appropriation. Bill, for; 1944., , 78th, Cong,,, 1st Sess,.,, 1943', p 164, 1 49 to remind; participants that they should not become so zealous in, taking American culture to Latin. America that they forgot to acquaint themselves with Latin American cul- ture in exchange,^ The Coordinator of Xnter-American Affairs likewise asserted the benefits of a reciprocal cultural program of broad scope in its relationship to hemisphere solidarity 21 and the national defense before Pearl Harbor. But uni lateral concepts could be seen in the reasoning of the reciprocal program. Latin America was viewed in strategic terms by the Coordinator. Confirmed allies among the people as well as their leaders on the vital Latin American flank of the United States were needed to protect the Panama Canal and to help produce essential raw materials of war. Successful cultural relations could assist the Co ordinator in building "a strong and positive unity between all the nations of the Western Hemisphere” for the conduct of the war, but long-term objectives were not ignored: The broad educational program whereby the people, the producers, the workers, the consumers, the states men, and the teachers of this hemisphere learn of and ^Charles A. Thomson, "The Profits of Cultural Interchange” Department of State Bulletin. I (July 8, 1939), 26; U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1943. 77th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1942, p. 522. "Cooperation of Women*s Organizations,” Depart ment of State Bulletin,, IV (April 3, 1941), 428.„ 30 believe in the need a£ immediate sacrifice for the greater goal, must be ever intensified and expanded* Throughout the urgent and immediate measures we must take to win this war, there must always be the further promise of a secure and productive world after the war.** Despite its basically educational methods and areas of operation in the cultural field, some evidence of the propagandist's unilateral point of view occasionally became evident in the work of the Coordinator* His office showed an interest in demonstrating to Latins that North Americans were cultured people and in taking to them "evidence of our appreciation" for their own achievements in order to appeal to their national pride in their own culture and to reach intellectual leaders interested in cultural affairs who 23 exercised some influence on public opinion. J The thinking of the Division of Cultural Relations, however, was somewhat less pointed although strategic con cepts were accepted in principle* Within a month after Pearl Harbor, the new chief of the Division of Cultural Relations, Charles A* Thomson, recognized political values in cultural relations by pointing out their relationship to 22 ^ U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, First Supplemental National Defense Appropriation Bill for 1943, 77th Cong*,1 2nd Sess*, 1942* Part 1, p. 559* ^^Minutes of the Meeting of February 25-26, 1942, General Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, p« 35 (mimeographed)' Report of the Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, November, 1943, p.. 3- (mimeographed,) 51 the solidarity of the Americas* ^ And he used the objac tive of political solidarity in the hemisphere to justify the program of his division before Congress: Beyond question, war casts a strong searchlight on the relations of our own land with the other American republics* In particular, the present crisis empha sizes and renders urgent the necessity of an, effective solidarity which shall be of mind and spirit, of aim and effort, as well as of material interests. The Division of Cultural Relations of the Department of State, created in peacetime to further that solidarity on a long-term basis, is an active factor now in up building democratic morale in the hemisphere* 25 But, where the propagandises point of view emerged in the Division of Cultural Relations, it was a highly moral propagandist with a conscience, who did not forget the essentially reciprocal nature of the program: The basis of our own program is a mutual inter change of people, ideas, and materials. I am proud to say that up to this time at least we have never for gotten that we have quite as heavy an obligation to understand the other fellow's culture as we have to try to explain our own to him. I do not suppose I am giving away any secret when I say that this is not only decent, but also highly expedient, one of the funda mentals of good salesmanship.26 "The Role of Cultural Exchange in Wartime," Department of State Bulletin. VI (January 3, 1942), 29. 25u. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1943, 77th Cong., 2nd Sess*,,. 1942, p. 1Q2. ^Herschel Briekell, "Cultural Relations in the; Post-War World," Report of Pan American Week. Programs.! April 8-16, 1945 (A. J., Hanna, ed.; Winter Park, Florida,:', Rollins College, August, 1945), p.- 20» sa 'While the distinction between propaganda and cul tural relations was to be maintained, it was held before Congress and the public that a favorable basic attitude toward the United States was often a by-product of inter- 27 national educational endeavors. It was recognized that the cultural relations program contributed indirectly to favorable propaganda.^ Responsible members of Congress insisted that American propaganda with latin America, for which cultural relations presumably prepared a receptive attitude, should be honest, straightforward, and truth- Something of the propagandist's unilateral point of view appeared in the concern for prestige, This was occa sionally expressed on behalf of the prestige of the United States Government, A budget officer of the department 27U# Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1940. 76th Cong., 1st Sess., 1940, p. 287; U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings« Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1941. 77th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1942, pp. 389-93; Francis J. Calligan, Exchange of Specialists and Distinguished Leaders in the Western Hemisphere. U. S. Department of State Publication No. 2414 (Washington.; U.. S., Government Fronting Office, 1945), p. 9* ^^Minutes of Meeting of February 25-26, 1942, General Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, p. 31 (mimeographed)., S.,, Congress, House., Committee; on Appropri ations, Hearings1 Department of. State Appropriation. Bill. for.1 1943.,. 77th Cong,.,, 2.n d. Sess.,,, . 1 . 9 4 2 , , p . , 525., 1 7~ S3 recommended to Congress in, 1941 that visiting American professors be given -a representation allowance on these groundsj As representatives in other countries of the culture and thought of the United States they would be required to establish and maintain prestige in keeping with the dignity of the Government by which they are sent if their visits are to be effective, Concern for the acquisition of prestige, however, was more often expressed by the officers of the Division of Cultural Relations on behalf of American scientific achieve ments, American books and journals, and the English lan guage per se. Rather than seeing this prestige as a poten tial contribution to American power, some officers of the Division of Cultural Relations were inclined to see Ameri can political power as a contributor to the prestige of American cultural life.31 30^ Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1942, 77tn Cong/, 1st Sess.* 1941, p, 253. ’ 3^-Report of Division of Cultural Relations, Depart ment of State, Washington, November, 1943, Appendix A, p. 11 (mimeographed); Haldore Hanson, The Cultural- Cooperation Program 1938-1943. U» S« Department of State Publication No., 2X37 (Washingtons U« S„ Government Printing Office, 1944), p« 16; Carl H.. Milam, "Libraries, Scholars, and the War,, f The Annals of the American Academy of Politi cal and Social Science. . CCXXXV (September,, 1944),. 102: ' Haldore Hanson, "International Languages for One World, Department of State Bulletin. IX (December 4, 1943), 403; Harry H.. Pierson, "English Is Also, a, Foreign- Language," Department of State Bulletin, XII> (March-18, 1945), 453;* Herschel. Brickeli/ Toe, cit. 54 The prestige of American culture in relation to foreign cultures in the minds of Latin Americans was of some concern from the beginning of the program. Many Latin Americans* Knowledge of American culture was imper* feet: People who regarded themselves as highly cultivated could still vociferously deny that North America had anything to give, culturally speaking, in entire ignorance of the amazing progress of theater, litera ture, art, and music in the country Rodo contrasted with the southern Ariel by calling it Caliban* The program of cultural relations was viewed partly as an antidote to native, stereotyped opinions of the United States and partly as a counter-attack on Axis propaganda, which, playing on these stereotypes, portrayed Americans as crude, uncultured materialists whose imperialistic designs and standardized commercialism showed; little respect for Latin American cultural achievements and threatened to destroy their cultural values.^ ^Minutes of Second Meeting of Committee on Cul tural Relations, November 21, 1938, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington (typewritten)* •^William Rex Crawford, "Cultural Relations in 1941," Inter-American Affairs, 1941 (Arthur P« Whitaker, ed„j New Yorks Columbia University Press., 1942), pp« 115”i6., 3‘ Slinute.s of Meeting of February 25-26,. 1942, General Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of; State, Washington, pp.. .35-3,6, Appendix 3, p.. 3 (mimeographed.);. U. S., Congress,, Rouse, Committee on. Appropriations, Hearings. Department, of - State Appropri- ation Bill, for: 1944, 78th Cong.,, 1st Sess,.,, 1943, pp.- 321.-' 2 , 2 , , 3 . 3 . 3 . . , ~ ' . . • 53 The desire to counteract native and Axis misrepre sentation of American life was accompanied by a desire to meet international competition in this field from friendly as well as unfriendly powers. The general cultural orient ation of Latin America to Europe and the activities, tech niques, and objectives of Germany, Italy, France, and Great Britain were considered in the Division of Cultural Rela tions as early as 1938.^ Research was undertaken by analysts in the Division of Cultural Relations during the war to study the policies and methods of the cultural programs of foreign countries to serve as a guide to American activity* While such programs differed greatly, it was shown that most of the countries engaging in such activities budgeted funds and exercised control through their foreign offices for the purpose of expanding abroad knowledge of their languages and cultures, for the improvement of their economic and political relations and to implement certain foreign poli cies * The fact that, the United States was a late comer in 35 Minutes of General Meeting of the Advisory Com mittee, Division of Cultural Relations,, Department of State, Washington,. November 8, 1938, pp., 12-16 (type written); Minutes of Second Meeting of Committee on Cul tural Relations,, Division of Cultural Relations,. Department of State,. November 2 . 1 . , , 1938, pp. 1-13 (typewritten)., 56 36 this field wa.s stressed* The expenditures of bath friendly and enemy powers and the need to compete with their activities in the national interest were used to justify before Congress the expansion of the American, cul- 37 tural relations program during the war. Opposition to the political use of the program.-- Although it was demonstrated by research that foreign powers used cultural relations as adjuncts to their foreign policy, this conception of cultural relations made but little progress with the representatives of the private ixi- tellectual organizations associated with the Division of Cultural Relations in the General Advisory Committee before Ruth Emily McMurry, "Foreign Government Programs of Cultural Relations," The Annals of the American Academy; of Political and Social Science. CCXXXV (September, 1944). 54-61: McMurrv and Lee, op. cit.. pp. 4-5; Hanson, The Cultural-Cooperation Program. 1938-1943* pp* 8, 18, 23, 29; Herschel Brickell, loc. cit.; Charles A* Thomson, "The Role of Cultural Exchange in Wartime," Department of State Bulletin. VI (January 3, 1942), 29; "The Non-Theatrical * Motion-Picture Program Abroad," Department of State Bul letin. IX (September 18, 1943), 198. 37u. S.,. Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill, for 1941, . 76th Cong., 3rd Sess., 1940, p.- 127; U. S.,. Congress,. House, Coiranittee on Appropriations,, Hearings Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1943, . 77th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1942, p. 143; U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill, for 1944. 78th Cong.,. 1st Sess., 1943, pp.. 321-22; U. S.., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations,, Hearings. National War Agencies Appropriation Bill for 1945,, 78th Cong.,„ 2nd Sess., 1944, Part' 1„ pp., 1000- iooT. r- . • • 57 38 and during the Second World War. This group particularly rejected the conception of using cultural relations for propagandists, imperialistic, or military purposes., Moderate proposals to do so brought reactions from the com mittee that clearly portray the rationale of the private agencies and the limitations they imposed on government policy* In 1942, Dr* Ralph E* Turner of Yale University, employed by the Department of State as a social science analyst, proposed to the committee a research program de signed to adapt cultural relations more effectively to the service of the national interest and to American foreign policy.. It was proposed to study American democracy, to 38 The members of the General Advisory Committee at first were Stephen Duggan, Institute of International Edu cation;. James T. Shotwell, National Committee of the United States of. America on International Intellectual Coopera tion; Carl H* Milam, American Library Association;. Waldo G* Leland, American Council of Learned Societies; John W* Studebaker, U. S. Commissioner of Education* It was gradu ally increased in size until by its last meeting on Febru ary 19, 1944, its membership also included Ben M« Cherrington,. University of Denver; James B., Conant, Harvard University; George N* Shuster, Hunter College;. Beardsley Ruml., former Dean of Social, Sciences, University of Chicago; Florence Sabin,. medical scientist of the Rockefeller Foundation; Archibald. MacLeish, Librarian, of Congress; Henry A., Wallace, Vice President of the United States; Charles A.. Thomson,, former Chief of the Division of Cul- . tural. Relations./ Minutes of the Meeting of. February 18-19,. 1944, General Advisory Committee on Cultural Relations,\ Department of State, Washington, 1944, p.. 1 (mimeographed); U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hear ings, National War Agencies Appropriation Bill, for 1945* 78th. Cong.,, 2nd Sess.,,, 1944, Part 1, p., 98,7« 58, determine the most appropriate materials, methods, pro™ grams, and organizational patterns, and to analyze the various foreign cultures, cultural leaders, and political, economic, social, and intellectual conditions in order to find formulas most likely to be useful in supporting the particular objectives of the foreign policy of the United States. It was declared that this support . « ■ • should take form in contributing to an inter national situation under which American democracy will be secure and can develop. Cultural relations programs can contribute to the establishing and the maintaining of such conditions if they are directed towards strengthening the democratic tendencies among other peoples.39 Although the proposal carried with it the objective of establishing peace through international understanding, its unilateral and nationalistic aspects and its use of American power and prestige brought an immediate negative reaction from leaders in the General Advisory Committee* It was held that this would be an instrument of nationalism rather than of internationalism and that the independent intellectual organizations working in the same field would not submit to the determination of their policies by the 40 gove miner* f c « . ■^Minutes; of Meeting of June. 19-20, 1942, General, Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural Relations, Depart ment of State, Washington, pp.. 29-36 (mimeographed);., 40Ibid„ 59 A negative attitude toward the use of cultural relations to implement foreign policy was again expressed at a meeting of the committee in February* 1943* It was held that if foreign policy always had peaceful objectives* the plan might be acceptable* but "once cultural relations programs became the servant of foreign policy there would be nothing to prevent their continuing in that capacity under a deteriorating policy." It was held that an un directed program permitting "free cultural growth on an international basis" would in itself "provide a suitable world climate in which international peace and security, and hence the security of the American people, might grow." It was believed that the objectives of cultural activities should remain simple* "Any implication of a tie-in between cultural interchange and foreign policy invalidates the effect of the cultural activities." Furthermore, such a relationship made mere propaganda out of cultural rela tions. If the United States used the cultural program in the national interest, other nations would assume the same privilege. Competition in this field of foreign affairs* as in other fields, could lead to war*^ There was an objection to the subordination of ^Hlinutes of Meeting of February 23-24,- 1943,, General Advisory Committee of the Division of Cultural Relations., Department of State,, Washington,, pp., 7-15 (mimeographed,). 60 cultural relations to foreign policy* rather than placing it at least as a co-equal with political and economic rela~ tions. Moreover, the concept of mutual influences between nations had not been stressed in the plan. On the grounds that it would produce a negative reaction among many for- eign peoples, an objection was expressed to the premise that the United States was the leader of world democracy and ought to propagate its way of life abroad* A simple and direct answer to the needs of other countries as the latter saw them would keep the United States from the danger of carrying out a program against the wishes of foreign people, as Germany and Italy had done.42 Expressions of opinion in favor of the proposals to integrate cultural relations with foreign policy were based on a unilateral missionary concept of sharing American knowledge "for the amelioration of the lot of humanity here and elsewhere" in the belief that other peoples have the same possibilities for progress and that the United States had something which they could use and which this country could offer to them* Xt was also held that such a program might serve to encourage Americans to become more informed on foreign affairs and foreign cultures and to "contribute to a foreign policy more closely integrated with, the think-1 ing, o,f the people, . 1 5 An officer of the Department of, State; 42lbid.,' pointed out that, slue© peoples aud cultures had always affected each other and nothing that happens outside or inside a country can be totally divorced from its foreign policy* it was inevitable for cultural relations to be used as an implement of foreign policy# The question for argu ment, therefore, seemed to be at what point in the conduct of foreign policy cultural relations should be used as an instrument. ' ■ * Although the representatives of the private organ izations believed that cultural relations and propaganda should not be confused during peacetime, they were willing to accept unilateral motives in cultural relations as a patriotic duty during wartime.44 The General Advisory Com mittee, at its meeting of February* 1942, was not unaware of the need for some change of policy during the war, but it did not lose sight of its peacetime objectives; The Committee conceives the program of cultural relations as a long-tern program of continuing activi ties, which should, however, be realistically adaptable to the changing circumstances and needs, whether in normal times or in times of emergency. 43Ibid. A A Interview with Ben M. Cherrington, Denver, Colorado, September 25, 1952. ^Minutes of Meeting of February 25-26, 1942, General Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural Relations., Department of State, Washington, p« 3& (mimeographed);, quoted in Hanson, The Cultural.-Cooperat.ion Program, 1938- 1943, p., 1« 6Z Peace through mutual understanding was a basic abjective a£ this school of thoughts The view that cul tural relations could be used as an instrument of national policy for other purposes was not entirely acceptable to the General Advisory Committee* The committee so stated in a resolution adopted in February, 1941: Cultural relations programs may serve a construc tive purpose of peculiar significance within the frame work of the foreign policy of the United States, in so far as that policy attempts to form a climate of mutual understanding and to seek as goals to be attained as rapidly as possible (a) the free exchange of ideas and information, particularly, as these relate to the health, economic and social welfare, and general cul tural advancement of the people, and (b) the establish ing and maintaining of a peaceful, secure, and cooper ative world order.46 Nor was the strictly regional use of cultural rela tions entirely acceptable to the General Advisory Committee, Inter-American relations were viewed in their broader sense as an integral part of world relations, and the unity of culture, rather than the separateness of national groups, should be stressed* Consideration was given even in 1941 to the possibility of establishing after the war a truly multilateral international cultural organization independ ent or nearly independent of "purely political entities" if Minutes of Meeting, of February 23-24, 1943, General Advisory Committee,, Division of Cultural Relations,, Department of State, Washington, p.. 17 (mimeographed)., 63: the world were not still dominated by "extreme national* isnu"47 One solution to the problem of keeping cultural relations from being used as an instrument of national policy in the post-war world was to place control in the hands of private organizations even though government funds might be accepted.4* * Another apparent solution was to dilute the power of government over cultural policies by creating a multilateral organization. It was members of this group who, believing that peace through understanding could be arrived at largely through non-political means, assisted in the formation of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization after the war. Such an organization was considered to provide a real oppor tunity for getting back to the higher ideals of the pre-war years as a truly popular movement.4^ It was not that this group believed that interna* tional cultural relations alone could prevent war, for they 47Minutes of Meeting of May 9, 1941, General Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural Relations, Depart* ment of State, Washington, (mimeographed); idem. Septem ber 17-18, 1941, pp. 58-60; idem, November 5-6, 1941, pp. 22-24. /.O Ben M. Cherrington, "Americafs Future Cultural Relations," The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, CCXXX.V (September, 1944), 80.. ^Interview with Ben M.' Cherrington, Denver, Colo rado., September 25, 1952.., were viewed as only one of many factors- influencing world affairs. It was rather that the objective of peace was seen as the primary value. William G« Carr, Associate Secretary of the National Education Association, who co operated with this group in founding UNESCO, so stated to Congress; The direct advantages to our national cultural and scientific life and the indirect advantages in serving our political and economic interest abroad, are the two values that I have already mentioned. The third, how ever, far out-reaches them in importance. Educational and cultural relations among nations can play an im portant part in the total machinery for maintaining a world order which increasingly exhibits fair play, security, and peace. The improvement of our systems of education, the enrichment of our national culture, the expansion of our national prestige are important by products but still only by-products to the greater _ achievements of the promotion of international peace. When the UNESCO Charter was finally written, the ideals of peace and security through understanding were expressed among the foremost objectives of the preamble and 51 purposes of the world cultural organization. Attempts to resolve the conflict.— Compromise views arose in the Department of State as one result of the dif ferences in opinion on the proper use of cultural, relations. To the General Advisory Committee it was suggested that -*®U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Hearings. H. R. 4368 and H. R. .4982, 79th Cong..,. 1st and 2nd Sess.-, 1946, pp., 30-31., Eugene Harley, Documentary Textbook on the United Nations (Los Angeles:. Center for International Understanding,, 1950), pp. 233.-34., 65 foreign policy in a broader sense was, the manifestation, of the "personality'1 , of a nation and should not be confused with the limited sense involving temporary and changing objectives* It was held that if a broader definition of foreign policy were accepted, then the issue of using a cultural program to implement it would be more apparent than real. The chief of the Division of Cultural Relations found it unacceptable to view cultural relations either as a mere tool of political or economic policies or as exist ing in a vacuum apart from these elements of foreign policy. He viewed the cultural relations program as an implement of the Good Neighbor Policy, which in essence was a projection of the American way of life into foreign relations. In the practical application of the cultural program under that policy, there had been no desire on the part of the govern ment to use the cultural program to achieve immediate economic or political ends with individual countries. He therefore concluded that cultural relations might be used to implement certain long-term objectives of foreign policy. Whether cultural activity was planned in support of a government policy or not, "it must inevitably be related to those long-term phases of foreign policy which grow out of the whole viewpoint of a people." Finally, when viewed in this light,, the cultural relations program, had. followed a policy of. enlightened self-interest as contrasted with 66 52, selfish nationalism* The objective of attaining peace through mutual understanding became a stated basic objective, although the manner of achieving this objective was not uniformly accepted. Archibald MacLeish, who was appointed Assistant Secretary of State and placed in charge of public and cul tural relations in December, 1944, believed, "The world1s hope for peace, which is another way of referring to the world's hope of survival, is directly dependent upon the 53 mutual understanding of peoples." Mutual understanding and peace depended to a large extent on freedom of informa tion: Belief in the freedom of exchange of information rests upon the conviction that if the peoples of the world know the facts about each other, peace will be main tained, since peace is the common hope and the common cause of people everywhere.54 One of the main tasks of the newly established information service in the Department of State under Mr., MacLeish was to emphasize cultural objectives in . . . furnishing information about the American people abroad, and, in particular, about their life and -^Minutes of Meeting of February 23-24, 1943, General Advisory Committee of the Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, pp. 7-15 (mimeographed). -^Introduction to McMurry and Lee, op. cit.. p.. v. •^"Statements Before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, " Department of State Bulletin, XI (December 10,, 1944), 693., a? civilization.— their arts, sciences, professional and educational interests, advances in health, in agricul ture, in industry— in brief, their activities and; accomplishments as a nation. 55 To achieve mutual understanding, it was held by others in the Department of State that it was necessary to establish common ideas, beliefs, values, and interests as well as an understanding of and respect for cultural dif ferences. It was believed, too, that mutual respect and appreciation could be brought about by sharing common pur poses in cooperative enterprises and that this would lead to peace.^ Sumner Welles, particularly, emphasized the cooperative aspects of the program in testifying to Con gress; The key note is ’’ cooperation, ” and in that concept I think we have the soundest possible approach to all that we seek to accomplish. . . . The fundamental prin ciple of cooperation and mutual respect and appreci ation among men and nations is the firmest foundation for international peace.57 Differing points of view both within the Department ~ ^Ibid. t p. 692. **^Charles A. Thomson, "A Free Mind for a Free World," Department of State Bulletin. VIII (March 20, 1943), 232; G. Howland Shaw, "Cultural-Cooperation Program of the Department of State," Department of State Bulletin, X (May 13, 1944), 433; Harry H. Pierson, "English Is Also a Foreign Language," Department of State Bulletin. XII (March 18, 1945), 458; Colligan, op. cit., p. 12. s** Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1944, 78th Cong., 1st Sess., 1943, p.. 203. 68 of State and among the private agencies cooperating in the program thus presented some difficulties in terms of the determination of policies. From a political point of view* the department had found it expedient to enlist the support of private agencies in conducting operations abroad because it was believed that for some activities* such as those of the cultural institutes, the direct assistance of the de partment might not be acceptable to foreign peoples and governments for political reasons. Consequently, such assistance was supplied indirectly through grants-in-aid and contracts with private, non-profit organizations* By 1944, experience had shown that it was impossible to con ceal the real source of funds and probably no longer ad visable to do so. Experience had shown also that the use of private organizations as "cultural middlemen" discouraged govern ment leadership and initiative and that private agencies were not always as concerned with the problems of the Department of State in terms of both policy and budget as they might be. Some consideration was, therefore, given to devices for making the advisory committees and the private -^U. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, H. R. 2603, 79th Cong., 1st Sess., 1945, pp. 14-15; unsigned memorandum, read to the General Advisory Committee, Division of Science, Education and Art, Depart ment of State, February 19, 1944 (MS);, interview with Carl A.. Sauer, former program officer of the. Division of Cultural, Relations, September 21, 1952.., 69 agencies moire effective from the department's; point of view. The question of eliminating them entirely, however, did not arise for larger reasons of policy.^ These reasons were based on the fact that the da- partment continued to conceive of the cultural relations program as one from "peoples to peoples," and the possi bility of expanding the program after the war to other regions of the world was being considered; World cultural cooperation is not properly cooperation between governments in the field of government, but natural cooperation between peoples, between citizens in the cultural field. In the United States, the initiative, the force and drive of private agencies such as the Carnegie Corporation, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Institute of International Education, the American Library Association, and a multitude of others is too precious to be in any way lost by being taken right into the government, The use of private agencies broadened the base of the cultural relations program, made it possible for the government to take advantage of their technical experience and personnel# and helped to prevent the growth of too large a bureaucracy.61. As the cultural relations program -^Memorandum from Bryn J* Hovde, Chief of the Divi sion of Cultural Cooperation, Department of State, to all staff members, "Changes in Organization of the Advisory Committees," December 28, 1944* 6^Minutes of the Meeting of December 14-15, 1944, Advisory Conmittee on the Adjustment of Foreign Students in the United States, Division of Cultural Cooperation, Depart ment of State, Washington, p. 2 (mimeographed). 6^Unsigned memorandum read, to the General Advisory Committee, Division of Science, Education, and Art,, Depart ment of State, February 19, 1944- (MS),, 70 expanded in the future,, it was expected that an increasing body of national groups and institutions within the various regions of the United States and abroad, all organized on a functional basis, would participate in the program* It would be ‘ highly inadvisable for the Division to carry the reciprocal manifestations of a world-wide cultural pro gram. ” The Department of State was considered merely as a focal point at which these cultural interchanges would be able to converge.^ This reasoning still prevailed as the Department of State presented its cultural relations budget to Congress in 1945, but it was now clear that the department also in tended to participate directly in the program itself. It was unable and unwilling to take complete charge of an expanded post-war program of cultural relations, and yet it felt compelled to exercise some control in the field. The result was that it compromised by deciding to supplement the work of the private agencies as one aspect of its foreign policy. The departmentFs statement of its decision took this new formula unobtrusively into accounts ^Minutes Q£ Meeting of February 23-24, 1943, General Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural Relations,, Department of State, Washington,, pp. 47-48 (mimeographed); Compilation of Policy Statements on the Cultural Relations Program Approved by the General Advisory Committee, Divi sion of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washing ton, June 15, 1944, pp.. 4-5 (mimeographed).. 0 71 The underlying policy of the Department's, efforts, in the field of cultural cooperation is to implements facilitate, and supplement the work of private, non- profit organizations in the United States, and not to replace them,63 Rationale of the Post-War Period The cultural approach to foreign policy: peace through understanding.— Within a month after the last guns were fired in the Second World War, President Truman abol ished the wartime information agencies of the Office of War Information and of the Office of the Coordinator of Inter- American Affairs, Their information functions on a world wide basis were transferred to the Department of State and placed tinder the same administration as the cultural rela tions program, which had hitherto largely been confined to Latin America, Under the terms of the executive order creating the new organization, private institutions and individuals in such fields as news, motion pictures, and communications were to be the primary means of informing foreign peoples about the United States, The United States Government was not to compete with them or "attempt to out strip the extensive and growing information programs of other nations,"' Rather, It was to "endeavor to see to it 63U, S., Congress, Senate,, Committee on Appropri ations,. Hearings, H. R. 2603, 79th Cong,, 1st Sess,, 1945, pp, 14-15, ■ . 72 that other peoples receive a full and fair picture of American life and of the aims and policies of the United States Government. There was no quibbling in principle on. whether the information and cultural programs should support United States foreign policy. President Truman recognized the program as "an integral part of the conduct of foreign affairs." Secretary of State James F. Byrnes observed that the United States was now committed to a policy of collaboration with other peaceful nations of the world and that this country was involved in "all the major inter national problems of the earth." An adequate information program was an essential adjunct to foreign policy. Mr. Byrnes stated to the House Coiranittee on Appropriations; There was a time when we could afford— or thought we could afford--to be unconcerned about what other people thought of us. If the people of other nations misunderstood us it was regrettable. The passage of time would probably correct the error. It wasnTt fatal. That time is past. We shall be making deci sions, within the United Nations Organization, and independently, that will have repercussions affecting the lives of ordinary people all over the globe. Our attitude and our actions--and rumors thereof— will be matters of concern everywhere. As never before we ^U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Hearings, H. R. 4368, . 79th Cong.,, 1st Sess.„, 1946, p. 8. "Proposals for Overseas, Information Service," •Department of State Bulletin, XIV (January 20, 1946), 57. 73 shall have to explain ours elves---and explain, ourselves thoroughly and promptly.66 William Benton, the new Assistant Secretary of State for the Office of Information and Cultural Affairs, created in January, 1946, applied this ruling to cultural relations also? All programs abroad in the field of so-called cul tural relations should be designed to support United States foreign policy in its long-range sense and to serve as an arm of that p o l i c y The major policy objectives of both the short-term information program and the long-term cultural activities were the security and peace of the United States. Combined in the same administration, henceforth they were to be sub ject to similar, although not identical, policies* Mr. Benton adopted for both programs many of the principles of the cultural relations program which had prevailed under his predecessor,, Archibald MacLeish. It was held by Mr. Benton that the benefits of incorporating both the information and cultural programs into American foreign policy could not come quickly and that, in the long run, the culturaL relations approach would do even more than information work, to build friendly 66U., S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1947, . 79th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1946, pp„ 1Q-1L., r" 67u„ S. , Congress, House> Committee’ , on Foreign. Affairs, Hearings, . H. R. 4368. 79th. Cong.,, 1st Sess.«„ 1946, p. , 5 • • . n> / ' r*. relations with other nations* ° Information and cultural programs under Hr., Benton, were both "in ayerwhelming degree to be nongovernmental in. character and function": The Government’s role here is facilitative and sup-* plemenfcary, Its first job is to be helpful to the private agencies engaged in international exchange of information, skill, and art, and to the tens of thou- sands of private individuals going abroad who act as our cultural ambassadors. The second job of govern ment, the supplementary job, is to help present a truer picture of American life and American policy in those areas important to our policy where private intercourse is inadequate, or where misunderstandings and misappre hensions exist about the United States and its poli cies .69 It was held that the benefits of the cultural pro gram were to be two-way in character.7^ Although the in formation program was essentially unilateral, most of the activities of the combined programs were concerned with background information and with long-term cultural ex changes. Furthermore, the information program was reduced 71 to 25 per cent of its wartime level. s„, Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1947i 79th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1946, p. 442; "Our Inter national Information Policy,” Department of State Bulletin. XIII (December 16, 1945), 952. ^U. Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings< Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1947, 79th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1946, pp. 5-6. 70 Ibid. , 7^William Benton, "American News Abroad,."' Depart ment of State Bulletin, XIV (April 28, 1946),, 72,6„ 75 Mr., Benton stated that there were to be no elements . of psychological warfare in the information program* There was to be no "black.1 ' ' propaganda and no secrecy* The pro* gram was to rely only an facts.^ The policy of the Department of State under Mr* Benton was to "cover the world with truth," and the truth was not to be used "along 73 the lines of psychological warfare." It was held that the United States as a democratic country was obliged by its moral position, character, and political organization to rely on "the truth, the facts, freedom of information, and programs of international information, Secretary of State James F. Byrnes stated his reasons for this policy in the post-war program in a letter to President Truman; We would defeat our objectives in this program if we were to engage in special propagandist pleading. Our purpose is, and will be, solely to supply the facts on which foreign peoples can arrive at a rational and accurate judgment.^5 72u. S., Department of State, America— "A Full and Fair Picture" (2nd ed. rev.; Washington; U« S. Government Printing Office, January, 1947), p. 8« 73u. s., Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. H. R. 3311, 80th Cong., 1st Sess., 1947, p. 985. ^Sjilliam Benton, "The American Position on Inter national. News and International Libel," Department of State Bulletin. XVI (March 30, 1947), 594., 75»pr0posals for Overseas Information Service," Department, of State Bulletin,, XXV (January 20, 1946), 57‘ „ 76 The first: concern was to have foreign people believe, "to- win confidence abroad," and "to establish a credit before the world.," It was believed that, if the facts were presented through a "candid and well balanced program," the United States would sell itself abroad, but in the process of selling, the Office of Information and Cultural Affairs was not to be a "hard-selling organisa tion."76 Although it was admitted that the establishment of a permanent peacetime information and cultural program might contain some risks which would tend to disunify the world, any intention to enter an international propaganda race was stoutly denied.77 While expansion of similar programs by foreign powers in general was used to justify appropriations before the Senate in 1946, the need to counteract the efforts of any specific power was not often 76U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1947. 79th Cong., 1st Sess., 1946, p. 444; U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Hearings, H. R. 3342. 80th Cong., 1st Sess., 1947, pp. 173, 176, 205-206; U. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. H. R. 3311. 1947, p. 892. 77William Benton, "American News Abroad," Depart ment of State Bulletin. XIV (April 28, 1946), 722; U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Hearings H. R. 4368 and H.. R. 4982. , 79th Cong., 1st and 2nd Sess.., 1945 and 1946, p.. 106; U. S.., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriatipns, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation. Bill, for 1947., 79th Cong;., 1st, Sess.., 1946, p.. 443., * asserted by name at least.^ The. policy of the Department of State was to "prevent destructive rivalry and to provide for the harmonious and efficient adjustment of these activities" between nations in the interests of cooperative action and peace.79 The major policy objectives of security and peace were to be reached through international understanding, but the relationship of national power to peace and security was not ignored. Mr, Benton held before Congress that his budget of one-fourth of one per cent of that of the armed forces "may do more to develop security for the United States" through its effort "to win willing friends rather SO than reluctant allies" for times of crises. Secretary of State James F* Byrnes supported the view that the program, like the military forces, contributed to security. "People who understand us best are likely to be our friends; at the very least they will not repeat the 7Su. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropri ations,, Hearings,-H. R.. 6056, 79th Cong., 2nd Sess,, 1946, p. 29. 79u. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1947, 79th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1946, p. 10. ^U. s., Congress, House, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Hearings, H. R., 4368 and H. R. 4982, 79th Cong., 1st and 2nd Sess., 1945 and 1946, p. 91; U. S.., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill, for. 1948, 80th Cong.., 1st Sess., 1947, pp.. 443-45.. . 78 81 error of the Axis by underrating us*" Secretary of State George G« Marshall In 194? also held that understanding of American ideas presented abroad could make an active con-" tribution to both peace and security, along with "our 82 economic and political and military strength." A Mr. Benton pointed out that the United States had become one of the strongest nations on earth in both a military and an economic sense and that because of our very power we were in danger of being mistrusted, feared and even hated. ^ He pointed to the confusion, ignorance, and prejudice against the United States and its consequent QA dangers to peace. And he recognized the existence abroad of a number of stereotyped misconceptions about the United States; The nature of the American democratic system, with its disagreements and its individual liberty, is 8^-U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1947~ 79th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1946, p. 13. 82George C. Marshall, "Letter from Secretary of State to Representative [Karl E.] Mundt," Department of State Bulletin. XVI (June 29, 1947), 1315. ^William Benton, "A New Kind of Diplomat," Los Angeles Times. March 3, 1946; U. S., Congress, House, Com mittee on Foreign Affairs, Hearings. H. R. 4368 and H. R» 4982. 79th Cong., 1st and 2nd Sess., 1945 and 1946, pp.6, 927" ^U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations,, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill, for 1947. 79th Cong.,, 2nd Sess.,, 1946, p.. 431., ' 79 bewildering to a world emerging from the throes of authoritarianism- It is easy for foreigners, without knowing the real situation, to get the impression that this is a land of strife and discord, with race set against race, class set against class, religion set against religion, the rich oppressing the poor, the poor revolting against the rich, gangsters roaming the streets of our cities, cowboys shooting up wild west saloons, and Congress weltering in a whirl of fili- busters and cocktail parties. Yes, we are some of all that, as Hitler knew, but that is not the United States, as we know* 85 Undersecretary of State Dean Acheson pointed to other stereotypes more directly concerned with foreign impressions of the international policies of the United States: A great deal of the misguided, misleading, and I think foolish talk which has gone on at some time, to the effect that the purposes of the United States are imperialistic or reactionary, or militaristic, would be utterly impossible in any part of the world which clearly understood what kind of people the American people are and what they are doing. It was regarded as essential to peace to replace the confusion, ignorance, suspicion, fear and misconcep tions that existed among the people of the world about the United States with accurate, truthful knowledge and ®-*U. S., Department of State, America— "A Full and Fair Picture,." p. 34. U. S., Congress, House, Committee, on Foreign Affairs, Hearings. H. R. 3342,. 80th Cong..t , 1st Sess.., 1947, p.. 9.. 80 S7 understanding. ' It was held by Mr. Benton that people who tinderstood the United States would trust it and would be 88 less likely to make war against it. People who under1 ’ stood each other would be willing to tolerate differences because they understood them.^ Bentonthesis was "that all human beings have the capacity to understand* and that 90 understanding among peoples makes for peace." It was considered essential by Secretary of State Byrnes to have foreign peoples understand the United States and its foreign policies because "it is the people, even in countries less democratic than our country, who ultimately 91 determine foreign policy." Mr. Benton pointed out to Congress that the United Nations was "no permanent guaran tor of peace," that it was "simply a mechanism through which controversies can be discussed," and that the mechan ism was "worthless without the will to work together." He S7u. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1947. 79thCong., 2nd Sess., 1946, p. 431; Archibald MacLeish, Introduction to McMurry and Lee, op. cit., pp. vi-vii. ^William Benton, "A New Kind of Diplomat, " Los Angeles Times, March 3, 1946. ^McMurry and Lee, op. cit.. p. 229. ^William Benton, "The American Position on. Inter national News and International Libel,," Department of State Bulletin,, XVI (March 30, 1947), 595. 91u. S., Congress, House, Committee, on Appropri ations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation. Bill, for 1947„ 79th Cong.., 2nd, Sess., 1946, p., 10.> 81 assumed that the peoples of foreign countries would exert a great deal of influence on the policies of their govern ments in the United Nations and, therefore, urged that a better understanding between peoples might enhance the likelihood of peace. He believed in "the overwhelming in-* fluence of the masses of the peoples of the world on the attitude of their leaders toward our country in periods of crisis. Mr. Benton held that understanding could be brought about "through bringing peoples of all nations together at the working level, and by letting them get to know each other by helping each other." While information alone was considered a "powerful weapon" in approaching some foreign peoples, he believed that "for true understanding actual experience is essential": Many people learn better by doing than by talking and listening. In order to build friendship for the United States, we need to supplement the word with living people who can interpret, demonstrate, and work along with people of other nations in their local towns and villages.93 Conversely, understanding was held to encourage ^u. S., Congress, House, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Hearings, H. R. 4368 and H. R. 4982, . 79th Cong., 1st and 2nd Sess., 1945 arid 1946, pp. 6, 92. ^William Benton, "A New Instrument of U. S. Foreign Policy," Department of State Bulletin, XV (Octo ber 13, 1946), 675. This same thought is expressed in McMurry and Lee, op. cit., p. 240. It was written about, the. same time, as Benton's statement above., 82 a cooperative attitude: Only with some degree of understanding and some meeting of men's minds can the peoples of the earth work to- gether for their mutual benefit. Accordingly, programs of scientific and cultural relations conducted bilater ally with other countries are playing an increasingly important role in the national affairs of the great and small countries of the world.°4 A basic assumption was that merely working and living together brought the necessary understanding and friendship: The student from Latin America who lives and works among us learns that we are human beings, and also with solid virtues. He learns that, while many of our ways take getting used to, our basic disposition is innately friendly and hospitable. Soon we are no longer stran gers to him to be mistrusted on that score alone* Having come to know us, he will not believe, when he returns to his country, that the United States is com posed of villains concocting imperialistic designs against his country. He will not believe this because he will have learned that the American people are friendly, freedom-loving, and fundamentally opposed to imperialism. He can enlighten his own countrymen on that point.95 The officers of the Department of State continued S., Department of State, Activities of the Interdepartmental Committee on Scientific and Cultural Co operation, Department of State Publication No. 2622 (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, June 30, 1946), p. 1. It is appropriate to note at this point that the personnel in the department had now begun to examine critically the relative merits of the unilateral informa tional approach, the bilateral cultural approach, and the multilateral, cultural approach exemplified by UNESCO. Infra, p. 85. ^Spruille Braden, "International Understanding Through a Cultural-Relations Program," Department of State Bulletin, , XIV (March 10, 1946), 397. 83 the reciprocal aspects of understanding in the set of prin-" ciples to which they adhered. Secretary of State George C* Marshall reminded a federation of women’s clubs in 1948: We are generous, sometimes to a fault, but it is just as important that we be understanding. By this X mean that we must try our best to realize the situ ation of other peoples and their point of view and their inevitable reactions to many things that are publicly proclaimed in this country. We often defeat our own generosity or aims by ignoring the sensitivity of people, their national pride, and the utterly dif ferent surroundings in which they live compared to ours here in America.9o But there was less pointed emphasis on reciprocity, and it was often added as a postscript to explanations of other aspects of cultural and information policy in dis cussions with both the public and Congress.^ While far from being entirely unilateral, the pro gram was willing to use the reciprocal formula openly in terms of enlightened self-interest. In the prevention of war, the defense of law and justice, and the commitment to resist aggression throughout the world,. Benton confessed a concern for the ’ ’ well-being of peoples everywhere, not. for reasons of altruism, but in our own interest and for our 9^George C. Marshall, "Firm and Determined; Course for the Democracies," Department of State Bulletin. , XVIIX (June 6, 1948), 745* ^William Benton, "A New Instrument of U. S.. For eign Policy, ’ ’ Department of State Bulletin, XV (October 13, 1946), 675; U. S., Department of State, America— "A Full and Fair Picture, ’ ’ p. 9; George C. Marshall, "Position on Educational Exchange Program," Department of State Bul letin, XVI. (June 22, 1947), 1250. 84 own protection. f , 9 8 The interest of the United States in strengthening its own position internationally also led to moral support, at least, for the growth of democracy abroad: In the case of those areas in which the people have little or no apparent voice, the world's best hope for peace lies in their rising to power. That is why it is vital to our interest that the peoples of other nations— and not merely their rulers— acquire an under standing of the United States. With understanding of us, we can hope that almost all peoples will join with us as willing friends and allies.99 Cultural relations were held to facilitate and strengthen commercial, as well as political, relations with the United States through friendly understanding,Cer tain aspects of the technical and exchange-of-persons programs were justified after the war for their commercial value. It was held that trade with the United States would be stimulated abroad by an acquaintance with American tech nology, products, and methods. Scientific information in the fields of public health, education, and agricultural products contributed to raising the standards of living in other countries, which enabled them to trade with the ^"National Defense and National Reputation," Department of State Bulletin,, XVI (February 2, 1947), 203- 204. ^William Benton, "Understanding Among Peoples," Department of State Bulletin, XIV (March 17, 1946), 409*. -* - 0 0Ibid.,McMurry and Lee, op. cit. , , pp. 3, 242.-43.., 85 101 United States. Here, too, certain aspects of the tech nical program, while basically cooperative in nature, scarcely appeared to be reciprocal in the disinterested equal sense in which the term was used by the Division of Cultural Relations before the war. In referring to certain liberated countries, Mr. Benton stated: A small number of American technical personnel can now contribute American ideas or American methods, which may well influence the basic planning of those coun tries for the next fifty years.102 Problems arising from a political orientation.--The problems affecting the cultural program during this period reveal to some extent the rationale of the bilateral cul tural relations activities. A fundamental problem was the question of the use of the program for strategic purposes. Those engaged in bilateral cultural activities now found themselves flanked on the one hand by those who insisted on a multilateral approach in order to avoid the use of cul tural relations for political purposes and on the other by those who would give the program a strategic orientation in the national interest. A strategic use of the program raised questions about the place of UNESCO in cultural relations and the use of private organizations to carry out 101-U. S., Department of State, America--MA Full and Fair Picture." pp. 32-33. 102rtrrhe Role of International Information Service in Conduct of Foreign Relations," Department of State Bul letin, , XIII. (October 21, 1945), 593., government functions* During the immediate post-war period, the stated objectives of peace through understanding and emphasis on the facilitation of the work of private agencies by the Department of State coincided with similar objectives and methods expressed by UNESCO. The similarity of objectives and methods apparently prevented any conflict regarding their value in the mind of Assistant Secretary of State Benton, for he spent a considerable portion of his time during his tenure of office helping to organize and estab lish UNESCO. These policies were agreeable to many of the cultural specialists in the department, who had helped to a large extent to shape up the principles under which UNESCO was to operate in the expectation of an early return to international peace. The National Commission for UNESCO, representing some one hundred private and non- federal government organizations, was particularly designed to encourage the active participation of private organiza tions and individual citizens.'*'®4 The main criticism of active government participa tion in UNESCO came from those in both the cultural and information programs who questioned the value of UNESCO Charles A. H. Thomson, Overseas Information Service of the U. S. Government (Washington: The Brookings: Institution, 1943), p. 297. lo4Ibid„, p.. 298.. 87 from a strategic point of view* Thomson* a proponent of the informational approach, observed; UNESCO in the international field has repeated many of the half-truths of the "peace through understanding" approach. Whatever the long future holds as a reward for diligent pursuit of this ideal, it is certain that short-run concrete results will be s m a l l . 5 Although UNESCO offered the opportunity, from the propagandist's point of view, for the United States to identify itself as a supporter of peace and the development of culture, its service otherwise to those interested in actively promoting the national interest through strategi cally planned information programs appeared limited. The active promotion of the national interest was the point at which bilateral cultural specialists tended to agree with information personnel in the Department of State. The cultural specialists understood the desire felt by supporters of the United Nations to broaden their efforts from a national to an international outlook through a multilateral organization, and they wished them well in their quest for peace. The disagreement between the bilateral and multi lateral points of view was based on whether cultural rela tions should be used in the national interest for strategic 105Ibid. . lo6Ibid..„ pp., 299,, 389-90. ■^McMurry'and Lee,, op*, cit.., pp., 231, 247.. 88 purposes. Whereas the multilateral group proposed to use their program only for peaceful purposes, the bilateral cultural specialists insisted that their program could be used in peace or war, as other nations had done: Taken together, it all amounts to irrefutable proof of how valuable, how necessary, the cultural approach of understanding between peoples has proved, even under the hard test of war. In wartime, as in time of peace, no other investment seems to give so largely a propor tional return as the investment in international soli darity through a cultural relationship.10° The bilateral cultural group observed that "a program of national interpretation may be largely non- political in character in its international aspects, or may be directed toward ends demonstrably political." By com parison with the activities of the totalitarian states, the inference could be drawn that the American program was largely non-political, at least until 1946. on the other hand, without being so stated directly for American policy, the question of the propagandist's point of view in the cultural program was answered in the affirmative by •kQ^Ibid., p. 7. The entire book, written by two cultural specialists in the Department of State who had access to government information and facilities to conduct their research, is, in a sense, a justification to the American public for the bilateral approach to cultural relations, as opposed to the multilateral approach and the unilateral informational approach. The book is not argu mentative, however, and, consequently,, their reasoning is reflected indirectly in the comparative approach to their study of the bilateral programs, of other countries« ^•Q^Ibid.,, p. 8., 89 comparison with the practices of both friendly and un friendly powers: A certain portion of the work of all the successful programs of cultural relations with foreign countries is undoubtedly propaganda, but, the writers wish to repeat, propaganda in its original sense of "propaga- tion of the faith." The love which . . . all the other peoples have for their homeland, their faith in their own institutions and in their own life and thought, find expression in their cultural activities abroad.'*”1 * 0 This was expressed in terms of concern for the im provement of the international standing and prestige of the 11] United States through cultural relations* Mr. Benton recognized that with loyal Americans operating the informa tion and cultural programs, there would be a natural tend- 112 ency to reflect a "native pride of country." He himself ^■*-°Ibid., pp. 244-45* -^Archibald MacLeish, Introduction to McMurry and Lee, op* cit., p. ix; The Record. IV (January, 1948), 34; Cooperation in the Americas, U. S. Department of State Pub lication No. 2971 (Washington: U« S. Government Printing Office, 1948), p. 88; Aid to American Sponsored Schools Program: Narrative Report Covering Operations from July 1 to December 5l, 1948, U. S. Department of State, Division of Libraries and Institutes, Washington, April 7, 1949, p. 8 (processed); The Interest of the Department of StateTs Cultural Program in Education Abroad, statement prepared for the Conference on International-Educational Reconstruc tion November 22-23, 1946, U. S. Department of State, Division of Libraries and Institutes, Washington, 1947, p. 1 (mimeographed). s., Congress, House, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Hearings, H. R. 3342, . 80th Cong., 1st Sess., p., 141; U. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. H. R. 3311. . 80.t.h. Cpng.., 1st Sess.., 1947, p.. 985., 90 was concerned with the task of disseminating abroad knowl edge among foreign peoples of American “social, moral, and intellectual qualities. A moderate amount of nationalism, then, was accept able even in peacetime in the rationale of the bilateral cultural relations group which had emerged in the Depart ment of State at the end of the war. The multilateral organization proved inadequate in their minds for this pur pose, but the two types of programs were not deemed incon sistent with each other in other respects. On the con trary, they were expected to reinforce each other: It must be borne clearly in mind, however, that the Governments of the United Nations, while increasingly supporting UNESCO, are not therefore slackening but, on the contrary, are intensifying their bilateral pro grams. In other words, these governments seem to feel that the success of the general multilateral program of educational, scientific, and cultural relationships will be furthered by the confluent tributary streams of the several programs of national interpretation, and that these in turn will be deepened and enriched by the comprehensive program of the United Nations as such.H^ It was held that there was room for both types of programs in the cultural field because not all interna tional differences can be entirely reconciled and because “the fullest possible understanding of the problems involved is of vital importance to the growth of peaceful relation ships": 113wxlliam Benton, "International Understanding: An, Undeveloped Human Resource," Department, of State Bulletin, . XVI. (March 16, 1947), 501. H^cMurry and Lee* op. cit.., p., 2 . 3 5 . . , 91 If these bilateral programs of "national inter pretation" abroad are based on the truth and on the presentation of facts, and if they are directed by the best minds of the several countries, they give promise of making a valuable contribution to lasting peace.H5 Although the bilateral cultural group agreed with the unilateral information personnel on the question of using the program in the national interest, they disagreed with them on the question of the amount of political orien tation to be given to the program. Assistant Secretary of State Benton confidently expected at the beginning of his tenure that the informational and cultural activities of the Department of State could be coordinated with the activities of UNESCO.116 The majority of the participants in UNESCO, however, preferred the cultural approach and were suspicious of the amount of government propaganda that might be injected into information programs using mass media of communications. They so discouraged the sup porters of the information programs that they found it ex- 117 pedient to withdraw their interest. A somewhat similar mistrustful view of the informa tion programs characterized the thinking of the bilateral cultural group in the Department of State. Although they 115Ibid., p.. 247. ^•^America--"A Full and Fair Picture," p.. 10; Charles A,. H. Thomson, op. cit., p.. 211* ^■^Charles A.. H.. Thomson, op* cit., pp.. 298, 300. 92 were willing to use cultural relations in the national in* terest, there was some fear that they might be made to serve the ends of outright political propaganda or to rein force exaggerated nationalism* According to the proponents of a strategic use of both informational and cultural media, the cultural specialists believed that coordination and control of cultural relations for strategic purposes would prejudice their operations in the eyes of other IIO governments and peoples. Observation of the moderate programs of the British and the French and the national istic activities of the Axis powers during the war had taught the cultural officers the danger of activities that might be contraproducente. It was held that "their politi cal usefulness would be greater the farther they stayed away from the reality or even appearance of being politi cally interested. Even those favoring a strategic use of cultural 118Ibid.. pp. 229, 300, 337. ■^Letter from Carl A. Sauer, Phoenix, Arizona, to the writer, October 15, 1952. The Spanish word contra producente ("self-defeating, producing the opposite of the desired effect") was common in the vocabulary of other cultural personnel interviewed during the investigation. Dr. Robert G. Caldwell, Chief of the Coordinator's Division of Cultural Relations and Cultural, Attach^ in Mexico City in 1953, used it, for example, in the meetings of the General Advisory Committee of the department's Division of Cultural Relations to oppose the strategic use. of cultural relations to any great extent in 1943. Minutes of Meeting, of February 23-24,, 1943, p. 13 (mimeographed)., 93 relations admitted that from a strategic point of view such activities as libraries, institutes, and the exchange of persons probably had a greater impact abroad if they did not appear to be strategically oriented at all. Yet, they wished to avoid only the appearance of strategy, not the substance. They were concerned about the refusal of the cultural specialists to consider the probable political impact of their activities and the possibility of exer- cising political influence directly on various types of individuals abroad. It was obliquely suggested that Ameri can professors sent abroad might be selected ’ ’for their competence as pro-American propagandists" and ability to expound pro-American themes and that technical personnel could be skillfully oriented before their departure to go abroad.1 ' 20 It was on these grounds that those in favor of a highly strategic use of the program questioned the use of private agencies. It was pointed out that under the pro gram of free exchange of persons and cultural information whatever political questions were involved in the selection processes were dealt with for the most part by the private agencies, even those serving the department's programs under contract. These agencies were strongly inclined to ■^^Charles A. H. Thomson, op. cit.. pp.. 301, 357-59. 94 use professional rather than political standards in making such selections* On the other hand, it was to stimulate the "peoples to peoples" relationship that the Department of State con tinued the policy of encouraging private agencies and institutions to conduct cultural exchanges and of holding that the function of the department was to facilitate and supplement their work. It was the view of Secretary Marshall that "private institutions and organizations must continue, as they have in the past, to bear the principal responsibility for the exchange of students and profes sors. , '^22 Although cultural relations were not expected to duplicate or replace diplomatic relations, Assistant Secre tary of State Braden referred to the exchange of persons as a program to "popularize diplomacy." The conception that foreign offices alone were adequate to conduct interna tional relations was held as "a dangerous anachronism in a democratic world. *'123 jn some cultural circles, this 121Ibid., pp. 308-309* 357-59. ■ * - 22J. Manuel Espinosa, "Exchange of Professors Between the U. S. and the Other American Republics." Depart ment of State Bulletin, XV (July 21, 1946), 90; George C. Marshall, "Position on Educational Exchange Program," Department of State Bulletin. XVI (June 22, 1947), 1250. 123spruille Braden, "International Understanding Through a Cultural-Relations Program," Department of State Bulletin.. , XI.V (March 10, 1946),, 396., 95 thought was carried, a step further in the observation Chat* "Foreign Offices are no longer offices to speak for one people to another; the people can speak now for them* selves. Believing that its function was to facilitate, sup* plemenfc, and encourage the work of the private agencies in the field of cultural relations, and advocating a free exchange of cultural information, the Department of State was unwilling to give financial assistance to private cul tural agencies for the purpose of "generating dependence in 125 matters of policy." It is highly doubtful that it would have been possible in any event because of resistance among the agencies themselves. The initial contacts with such agencies had been made before the war, when the Division of Cultural Relations was operated on a regional basis under multilateral concepts. Operated for the most part by per sons identified with educational objectives and endowed with a sense of academic freedom, they had already indi cated their suspicion of government controls and their interest in free exchanges, at least during times of peace. ^.6 ^-^Archibald MacLeish, Introduction to McMurry and Lee, op. cit., p. x. •Jap* S.,, Congress, House,, Committee on Foreign. Affairs, Hearings. H. R. 4368 and H. R. 4982, ; 79th Cong.,, 1st and 2nd Sess., 1945 and 1946, pp.. 89“92.> Supra,, pp., 56.-64* . 9 6 . Freedom from concern with all, hut the broadest and most general political objectives permitted the cultural officers of the department greater flexibility in dealing with the private agencies*. But, however advantageous this might prove in encouraging private individuals and organ* izations to participate in the program, it made the program itself somewhat less flexible from the strategic point of View* Rationale During the Cold War The threat of communism.— The question of strategy in what was expected to be essentially a peaceful operation was not a difficult one* By the summer of 1947, however, it was becoming increasingly clear that a return to com pletely peaceful conditions was impossible* The advent of the cold war, finally culminating in the fighting in Korea, brought about a situation in which the United States was neither completely at peace nor engaged in total war. This situation gave the information and cultural programs an importance and orientation that were lacking in the imme diate post-war period, and it provided reasons for sharpen ing the objectives and increasing the intensity of opera tions as the period progressed. Rejecting the conception that American democracy could survive in a state of isolation, the Department of State pointed to the fact that the. Soviet. Union was using 97 a "combination of political* psychological, economic* and military tactics’ ' ' in an effort to "weaken the United States by isolating it from the rest of the world. If the Soviet empire succeeded in capturing control of a major part of the free world, it was plain that the United States would be no match for Soviet power in terms of its industrial establishment, raw materials, and population. It, there** fore, became essential to the security of the United States to have strong and reliable friends and allies: The countries and the regions of the free world are interdependent, and if there can be created unity of purpose, resolution to meet the present danger, and the great strength that can come from mutual security efforts . . . , then the threat that faces us can be reduced to manageable proportions. Our United States policies are aimed at helping to bring about these con ditions. i27 Toward Latin America, the basic principles of the 128 Good Neighbor Eolicy continued to be followed. Although the danger of military invasion of Latin America seemed remote, any attempt to extend the communist system to any portion of the Western Hemisphere through diplomatic pres sures or political and economic penetration was viewed as •^^Dean Acneson, "Defenses Against Menace of Ex ternal and Internal Attack: A Program for Mutual Security," Department of State Bulletin. XXV (July 9, 1951), 46-52. 1 ?8 U. S., Department of State, Strengthening the Forces of Freedom. U. S. Department of State Publication No. 3852 (Washington: LL S. Government Printing Office, 1950), p. 179. ' 9$' a violation of the Monroe Doctrine and dangerous to the peace and security of the United States. The solidarity of the hemisphere was considered essential to the economic and political welfare of the United States in terms of raw materials, productive enterprises, transportation routes, support in the United Nations, and in terms of manpower and military assistance for the defense of the continent. In short, Latin America was considered a "vital base area for the free world's effort to achieve collective security," and it was considered "sound strategy to ensure the defense 129 of this base and to develop its potential." 7 The foreign policy of the United States, then, was to increase the military, economic, political, and moral strength and unity of the free world in the interests of p e a c e .13Q This policy was designed to discourage aggres sion: It is that we maintain and, where necessary, in crease the free world's strength— political, economic, 129£dward G. Miller, Jr., "Nonintervention and Col lective Responsibility in the Americas, " Department of State Bulletin, XXII (May 15, 1950), 768; Edward G. Miller, "The American Way and Standards of Democracy," ibid., XXII (May 22, 1950), 797-98; John C. Dreier, "Taking Stock of Inter-American Relations," Department of State Bulletin, XXIV (April 30, 1951), 688-90; Dean Acheson, "Defenses Against Menace of External and Internal Attack: A Program for Mutual Security," Department of State Bulletin. XXV (July 9, 1951), 49-50. ■^^Dean Acheson, "Peace Through Strength: A Foreign Policy Objective," Department of State Bulletin, XXII (June 26, 1950), 1039. 39' military* and moral-*-’ on the assumption that* confronted with this strength* finding it impossible to carry off any more aggressions, or succeed with its subversions* shown up for what it is* oppressive and ruthless, the police state will suffer from its inherent and in escapable weaknesses* the master plan of the Kremlin will perforce and in time fall apart, and will be re placed by something more amenable to the decencies of international life. This policy seeks to avoid the tragedy of war* to correct the circumstances affording special advantage to the Kremlin, and to guide inter- . . national life toward cooperative patterns of conduct. In the conduct of that policy, the information and cultural programs were intended to play a significant part in creating unity and support for the United States in 1 S9 Latin America and the free world as a whole. The expansion of the program.--Although peace was still an objective* it was clear that the policy of avoid ing international competition and rivalry in the informa tion and cultural programs was no longer tenable. The uncertainty that existed in the Senate of whether a world wide information program and a cultural relations program •^lprancis H. Russell, "The Problem Ahead," Depart ment of State Bulletin, XXVI (May 12, 1952), 731. 132 J ’ “^Dean Acheson, "The Strategy of Freedom," Depart ment of State Bulletin. XXIII (December 18, 1950), 965-67; Dean Acheson, "Threat to Democracy and Its Way of Life," ibid.. XXII (May 1, 1950), 674-75; Tom Connally, "Reviewing American Foreign Policy since 1945," Department of State Bulletin, XXIII (October 9, 1950), 566-67; Edward G. Miller* Jr., f l The Conduct of Hemispheric Relations, " Department of State Bulletin, XXVI (February 11, 1952), 209; U. S., Department of State, Our Foreign Policy 1952. Department of State Publication No. 4466 (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, March, 1952), pp. 71-74. . 1 0 0 expanded; beyond Latin America were needed in peacetime was ended in the fall of 1947*, when a joint committee of five Senators and seven Representatives visited, twenty-two countries of Europe# Their report showed that, while the United States was planning to spend billions on European recovery, the Soviet Union was spending "hundreds of mil lions" on psychological warfare in an attempt to drive the United States out of Europe by asserting that the true pur pose of this country was to enslave Europe economically* The legislative result of this international rivalry was the passage of the Smith-Mundt Act as Public Law 402 as 133 soon as Congress reconvened in January, 1948. The legislation provided both an information serv ice and an educational exchange program on a permanent basis with the dual purposes of promoting "a better under standing of the United States in other countries" and in creasing the "mutual understanding between the people of the United States and the people of other countries. ■^Howland H. Sargeant, "The Overt International Information and Educational Exchange Programs of the United States," Department of State Bulletin. XXVI (March 31, 1952), 484; Charles A. H. Thomson, op. cit*. pp. 204-207; U. S., Department of State, Report to the Congress: First Semi-Annual Report . . . under Authority of Public Law 402, January 1-June 30. 1948, Department of State, Washington* pp. 1-2 (processed); U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1949, 80th Cong*, 2nd Sess,, 1948, p. 508. 134U. S., 62 Stat. 7. mi Its intention was to disseminate the truth about the United States on a global basis* It relied heavily on private agencies and on the "full and fair picture" formula enunci ated by President Truman in 1945* At the time of its passage* the information and educational exchange programs were viewed as "public rela tions" activities abroad for the United States Government 1 Or in connection with its foreign policy. JD As Congressman John Davis Lodge of Connecticut observed in 1947, the pro gram was not like a psychological warfare program because the United States was not engaged in a shooting war, and, in the words of Congressman Mundt, one of the sponsors of the law, this was "a mirror, not a showcase," Nevertheless the elements for a highly geared pro gram are here. Therefore, as this peacetime conflict rises in crescendo, and as we strive to bring more and more elements of our national power to bear on the problem in order to promote peace, it will be possible for this program to be stepped up, to become more militant. The elements are there. This program can become a psychological warfare agency in terms of peacetime conflicts, rather than just for war or for normal peacetime ends.137 135sargeant, loc. cit.; Charles A. H. Thomson, op. cit., p. 297; U. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Report to Accompany H. R. 3342. 80th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1948, pp. 1, 14. 136u. s., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Report to Accompany H. R. 3342, 80th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1948, pp. 3-5. U7U. s*» Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign . Relations, Hearings,. H.. R. 3342,, 80th Cong.., 1st Sess., 1947, p.. 44. XQ2 The passage of the Smith-Mundt Act in 1948 did not bring about immediately outstanding changes either in terms lOO of approach or in expansion of the American program, J By 1950, it was held that the international position of the United States was still being damaged by the world's mis- conceptions of the meaning of the democratic way of life and that this was working to the advantage of the commu nists: Ignorance about the United States is a fertile soil for the accumulation of grotesque stereotypes and extravagant distortions of American life and casually developed misconceptions and doubt of United States motives which would be damaging even in a world in which no Communist aggressor existed.139 By 1951, it was estimated that the Soviet Union was spending some one and a half billion dollars annually on propaganda as its principal means of non-military aggres sion. This propaganda was adroitly maneuvering the mis conceptions of American life and foreign policy to its own advantage: Nearly all Soviet propaganda is directed specifi cally against the United States— distorting and ridi culing American life and institutions, playing up dissensions, depicting this country's leaders as de bauched "warmongers" or "imperialists" carrying on their "nefarious" activities against the true wishes of the American people. By contrast, the Soviets brazenly -*-3^Sargeant, loc. cit. l^Ralph Block, "Propaganda as an Instrument of Foreign Policy," Department of State Bulletin, XXII. . (June 19, 1950), 969« * ‘ " ' l '■ ' 103 portray themselves as the true exponents of "peace'1 and "democracy," the only protectors of the "oppressed masses."140 As explained to the Senate by Secretary of State Dean Acheson, communist propaganda was part of a strategic plan in furtherance of communist world objectives which threatened the security of the United States and the free world. The communist campaign attempted to divide the free world in order to weaken it, to confuse the world about the nature of democracy and to weaken its moral force, to spread deception about the free world's strength and re sources, and to sow doubts regarding the free world's firm- _ 141 ness of purpose. ^ In the spring of 1950, proposals to expand the American program and change its nature came as the result of increased sensitivity to Russian propaganda. In March, Senator William Benton, former Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs, sponsored a resolution in the Senate proposing a "Marshall plan in the field of ideas" to open a "world-wide offensive in behalf of the ideas which ex press our democratic principles and aspirations" in order to close "the mental gulf that separates the United States 140jy[chard L. Brecker, "Truth as a Weapon of the Free World," The Annals of the American Academy of Politi cal and SociaT Science, CCLXXVIII (November, 1951)i . 1« ^^U. S., Congress,. Senate, Committee on Foreign. Relations, Hearings, S. Res. 2 4 3 81st Cong., 2nd Sess.., 1.950, pp. 39-40.. 104 from other peoples and that, now blockades the universal I/O hope for freedom and peace." This was followed by instructions from President Truman to the Secretary of State and an appeal for public support in the United States to begin a counterpropaganda campaign on a world-wide scope* In addressing the American Society of Newspaper Editors on April 20, 1950, the Presi dent declared: The cause of freedom is being challenged throughout the world today by the forces of imperialistic commun ism. This is a struggle, above all else, for the minds of men. Propaganda is one of the most powerful weapons the Communists have in this struggle. Deceit, dis tortion and lies are systematically used by them as a matter of deliberate policy. Our task is to present the truth to the millions of people who are uninformed or misinformed or uncon vinced. Our task is to reach them in their daily lives, as they work and learn. We must be alert, in genious, and diligent in reaching peoples of other countries, whatever their educational and cultural backgrounds may be. Our task is to show them that freedom is the way to economic and social advancement, the way to political independence, the way to strength, happiness, and peace. This task is not separate and distinct from other elements of our foreign policy. It is a necessary part of all we are. doing to build a peaceful world. It is as important as armed strength or economic aid. The Marshall Plan, military aid, Point Four--these and other programs depend for their success on the under standing and support of our own citizens, and those of other countries.. We must make, ourselves known as we really are— not as Communist propaganda pictures us. We must pool our efforts with, those of the other free peoples in a- •^^Ibid.,pp. 1-2,.. 105 sustained, intensified program to promote the cause of freedom against the propaganda, of slavery., We must make ourselves heard, round the world in a great cam paign of truth. J-4-3 Two weeks after the outbreak of the Korean War, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held hearings on Senate Resolution 243, which favored an expansion of the pro- T / / gram. Thereafter, Congress passed supplemental appro priation bills for the "campaign of truth" which provided a total of $121,301,789 to the Department of State to expand its program. This was nearly four times the regular appro- priation for that year and the year before. More than $50,000,000 of the amount was intended for the expansion of radio facilities. The greatest increase in the budget was made in the media for mass communications, radio* press, and motion pictures* Expansion in such cultural fields as the exchange of persons, overseas libraries, translation and distribution of books, and cultural centers was less dramatic. -^Harry s. Truman, "Fight False Propaganda with Truth," Vital Speeches, XVI (May 1, 1950), 442-44. 5., Congress, Senate, Committee pn Foreign Relations, Hearings, S. Res. 243, 81st Cong.,. 2nd Sess., 1950. 145 5., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Report No. 406, 83rd Cong., 1st Sess., 1953, p.. 78. ■^^U. S., Department of State, Launching the Cam paign of Truth: First Phase. Department of State Publics- tion No. 4375 (Washington:. U.. S., Government Printing, Office,, December,, 1951.),, p. 1 . , 106 The orientation of the "campaign of truth .."--The size of the budget for information purposes was only one indication of a changing rationale in the Department of State and in Congress favoring the unilateral approach to foreign peoples. Despite basic distinctions in approach provided by the Smith-Mundt Act and earlier congressional recommendations for a balanced program,, organizational pat terns were now altered to eliminate the clear distinction between informational and educational activities and to permit the control of both types of programs by a single administrator. More significant was the fact that the budgetary and organizational changes were accompanied by the predominance of the thinking of the information spe cialists,, who were trained largely in the techniques of advertising and journalism. Taken as a step to counter act Soviet propaganda* the "campaign of truth" accelerated changes in the conceptions of the functions of the informa tion and, cultural programs that had been developing since 1947. One of the first indications of a change of rationale came early in 1949, when the Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs* George V. Allen,, openly re ferred. to both the educational exchange and information i ■■■■■■■■ ■!' . ■ .ntf. ..p ■^^Dan Lacy* "Aid, to- National Policy,,"' Library. Trends:,, July,, 1953.,, pp., 153-55 (reprint)., 107 programs in terms of "propaganda as a conscious weapon of diplomacy*" Both programs were intended to be truthful, however, on the grounds of credibility. People abroad would "believe what we say for the very reason that we 1 Aft admit our imperfections." After the "campaign of truth" began officially in 1950, the conception of truthful propa ganda was retained, according to the program* s adminis trator: Propaganda--and let us face it, we are in the business of international propaganda--propaganda is a powerful political weapon. We are using that weapon in the interest of truth and truth o n l y . ^ The program was now conceived by its administrator as a "vigorous offensive in the field of ideas" and as a "propa- 150 ganda war." It was regarded as "one of the few hard- 151 hitting weapons we have in the intensifying cold war." As the "campaign of truth" developed, it put less ^^George V. Allen, "Telling Our Side of the Story," Department of State Bulletin. XX (January 30, 1949), 142-43; George V. Allen, "Our World Information Program," ibid., XX (March 13, 1949), 323; George V. Allen, "Propa ganda: A Conscious Weapon of Diplomacy," ibid., XXI (December 19, 1949), 942. ■^%ilson Compton, "An Organization for Interna tional Information," Department of State Bulletin, XXVI (March 24, 1952), 444. • ' ■ • ’ ^Wilson Compton, "Mutual Security Requires Mutual Understanding," ibid., XXVI (April 28, 1952), 670. l^Edward w. Barrett, "U. S. Informational Aims in the Cold War," Department of State Bulletin, XXII (June 19, 1950), 995. 108 emphasis on Ma simple building up of good will toward the United States" and mutual understanding between the peoples of this and other countries. Greater emphasis was now placed on a psychological approach to foreign peoples in an effort to influence them toward the national objectives of the United States. Adopting concepts appropriate to psychological warfare, the program became more militant. More emphasis was now placed on building up an affirmative desire to cooperate with the United States as a morally honest and strong world power, on developing a spirit of unity, confidence, and determination to resist communism, and on counterpropaganda behind the Iron Curtain to deter further communist aggression. Although these concepts had appeared in the program earlier, much more stress was now placed on them. The Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs reported to Congress early in 1951: It is perfectly evident . . . that in the past year we have shifted very considerably from the presentation of what was called a full and fair picture of America, to a much more vigorous, hard-hitting campaign, which is designed to achieve psychological objectives which will unify the free nations of the world, weld them together in a common unity against the threat of Soviet aggression,2 Greater attention was now given to planning opera tions. Before the "campaign of truth" began, a system of ^^U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriations for 1952. . 82nd, Cong.., 1st Sess.,, 1951,.pp., 353, 711,, 980., ” 109 priorities was developed to select, the countries o£ criti cal concern, the media to be used within each country', the 153 target areas, and the population, groups to be reached. J Operational plans,, called "country plans, " were developed for each country* These provided an analysis of the aspirations of the country, its basic attitudes toward the United States, the Soviet Union, and other countries, governmental and private activities of these countries within the target country, favorable and unfavorable fac tors affecting operations, channels for mass communication, and the nature of the leaders of public opinion. Priori ties were assigned to leaders in government, education, press, farm and labor organizations, intellectuals and pro fessionals, and among the youth of the nation. An opera tional plan was then developed that provided for basic themes, methods of approach to each target group, as well as. evaluation of the program. On the recommendation of the Educational Exchange Advisory Commission established by the Smith-Mundt Act, the Department of State had begun in the fall of 1948 to evalu ate those activities which had paid dividends in terms of 153u. S., Department of State, Launching the Cam paign of Truth: First Phase, p., 1. 154u. s., Congress,, Senate, Committee on. Foreign Relations, Report No. 406, 83rd Cong.., 1st Sess..,, 1953,, pp., 75-77. 110 the experience of the program. By 1949, four such "country studies" had been completed and plans had been made to make similar studies of sixteen more countries*As the "cam paign of truth" began, it was agreed that the program must have an approved system of evaluation, supported by propa ganda analysis, as a "periscope to see into the minds and behavior patterns of the target.t»156 steps were taken to evaluate the program in terms of its objectives. These included market research techniques and field evaluation reports.Trial public opinion polls were conducted in foreign countries in 1952 and 1953. The propagandistic approach to cultural relations.— Faced with communist opposition during the cold war and the disproportionate expansion of the information media, the cultural relations program was under pressure to make some shifts of emphasis in its rationale. Traditionally oriented to more peaceful circumstances and approaches, it clung to most of its basic principles wherever it could, giving ground more slowly than the information media to the pressures to engage in a national propaganda campaign. The ^ U . s., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1950. 81st Cong., 1st Sess., 1949, p. HOP. —— •^f>Block, loc. cit.. p. 991* -l-'^Henry James, "The Role of the Information Library in the United States International Information Program,," The Library Quarterly., XXI.II (April, 1953), 104.; Ill conflict between earlier thinking in this area and the openly propagandists intentions of the "campaign of truth" resulted in some compromises which were not always accom plished -without some difficulty- ^8 One of the observable changes in rationale appeared in the relationship of the Department of State to private agencies. Government policy at the beginning of the pro gram in 1938 was to stimulate* facilitate, and coordinate the work of private agencies in the cultural field in order to encourage direct contact between the peoples of the United States and the peoples of foreign countries- In order to encourage the participation of private agencies in the program, the department had established advisory com mittees. The principal committee of this type was the General Advisory Committee of the Division of Cultural Relations, which was composed of the operating heads of many of the private agencies participating in the program. Until it was discontinued in 1944, this group shared with the division the tasks of planning and establishing poli cies. By that year, the practice of awarding contracts to ^■^^Some insight into the problems involved in ad justing the different viewpoints are indicated for the overseas libraries in Henry James, "The Role of the In formation Library in the United States International Information Program," The Library Quarterly. April, 1953, and in Dan Lacy, "Aid to National Policy," Library Trends. July, 1953. No general analysis of the differing points of view covering the whole range of cultural relations, and information was discovered during the research., private agencies to facilitate their work had become estate* lished practice. By the end of the Second World War, the Division of Cultural Cooperation was actively participating in opera tions. Thus there was added to the original policy the concept of supplementing the work of the private agencies. This formula was written into the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 by Congress for both the information and cultural relations programs, so that government was to use its own as well as private facilities* But, under the terms of the law, the Secretary of State was Mto utilize, to the maximum extent practicable, the services and facilities of private agencies”: It is the intent of Congress that the Secretary shall encourage participation in carrying out the pur poses of this Act by the maximum number of different private agencies in each field consistent with the present or potential market for their services in each country.i59 Representative Mundt amplified the reasons for this intent of Congress in urging its passage: If this act is to achieve its objective of serving the cause of peace by creating and widening areas of under* standing and mutual respect among the people of the World it is imperative that the people themselves, both at home and abroad, be given full opportunity to uti lize their ingenuity, their energy, and their resources in establishing the maximum number of peace-preserving contacts among nations both through individual and 159U. S., 62 Stat. 7, Sec. 1005. organizational interchanges of ideas, of ideals, and of inspirational and educational experiences* The use of private agencies and advisory eommis- sions in the facilitative and supplementary formula estab lished by the close of the Second World War, however, begged the question of the control of policy. This problem was partly solved from the government's point of view by limiting the functions of the advisory commissions estab lished by the Smith-Mundt Act to a purely advisory nature and by relieving them of responsibility for the determina tion and execution of policy. It was held by the Secretary of State that he would welcome the best advice he could get, but the final determination of foreign policies must be left with him and the President, not an advisory body composed of private citizens. Private agencies, individuals, and advisory com mittees now occupied a somewhat different position. The use of the information and cultural programs for strategic purposes limited the extent to which they were to be per mitted to participate in the determination of policy* Strategic concepts indicated a need for security of in formation regarding advance plans, in which private *-60jfay Stewart French, "Internationalism from the Grass Roots," The Record, V (February-March, 1949), 17* l ^ G e o r g e c * Marshall, "Action Urged on Information and Educational Exchange Act," Department of State Bulle tin. XVII (July LS„ 1947), 105-106,* ! * " ” agencies might not always be willing or qualified to par ticipate. 162 The new administrators of the programs were consequently somewhat reluctant to take their own advisory commissions completely into their confidence when it came 161 to preparing policy plans. Furthermore, the advisory bodies had to rely largely on the administration of the program itself for basic information and guidance in their work, 164 Private agencies were not to be excluded entirely from the official programs, however. They were deemed use ful in recruiting personnel and in supplying some materials, 16S as well as in an advisory capacity* They were also use ful in executing policies and in supplementing the official program after policies had been determined. Government assistance could be given to those private agencies which carried on activities in harmony with official policies. ^■^Charles A. H. Thomson, op. cit., pp. 327-29. 163y. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Hearings. Overseas Information Programs of the United States, 83rd Cong., 1st Sess., 1953, pp. 506, 1090, 1092; U. S., Advisory Commission on Educational Exchange, Seventh Semiannual Report on Educational Exchange Activi ties, 82nd Cong., 2nd Sess., House Document ! ' c , . 412, pp. i-ii. 16^0* S«, Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Senate; Report No. 406* 83rd Cong., 1st Sess., 1953, p. 13; U. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Hearings, Overseas Information Programs of the United States, 83rd Gang., 1st, Sess., 1953, p« 1092. Charles A« B« Thomson, loc. cit. . 115 In the ex.change-of~pers.ons field, contracts were granted to forty-three private organizations, and the work of nearly 300 private organizations and institutions which contrib uted voluntarily to the official objectives was facili tated- *66 At the same time* the “supplementary" portion of the formula permitted expansion of the government’s share of the program. In 1949, it was explained to the public that private exchange programs could not always fill national requirements, because private grants were inade quate or too restrictive* Consequently, in the national Interest the government financed and directed a portion of the program and handled specific exchange activities itself in certain a r e a s .*67 xn testifying before Congress in the same year, the Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs reaffirmed his faith in the private activities, but he pointed out that it was the role of government to act in those fields "where private activity either cannot or will lfi ( 3 not,, for one reason or another, do the job.''^00 166u. s., Congress, Senate, Conmittee on Foreign Relations, Hearings, Overseas Infomation Programs of the United States, 83rd Cong., 1st Sess*, 1953, pp. 1090-91# *67y. s., Department of State, Trading Ideas with the World: Report of the United States Advisory Commission on Educational Exchange„ Department of State Publication No. 3551 (Washington: U. S* Government Printing Office, October, 1949), p. 3. *68y% Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1950, . 81st Cong.., 1st Sess.,. 1949, p. 72Q„ Under the pressure to make the program serve more specifically the objectives of foreign policy,, the earlier conception that the cultural relations program was an uncontrolled ' ’peoples to peoples'1 operation began to be supplemented with the conception that it should be a more direct activity of the government: In our information and educational exchange activi ties, we are openly and frankly trying to reach foreign people direct. We are going over the heads of foreign governments, or through them, around them, or bypassing them, trying to reach peoples of foreign countries,-**69 The direct approach to foreign peoples was justi fied on the grounds that, the nazis had started the practice and other European powers had adopted the method in self- defense. This was explained to Congress as follows: We had no real choice in this matter. We had to make the decision to use this tool of foreign policy because other governments have adopted the direct appeal to foreign peoples in carrying out their foreign policies, and certain governments have expanded their programs to tremendous proportions for the principal purpose of undermining the policies of the United States and of democratic governments friendly to us.1-'-1 * As observed by a subcommittee of the Senate Commit tee on Foreign Relations in 1953, the emphasis had been •^9Ibid,, pp„ 714, 718. •^^George V. Allen, "Telling Our Side of the Story," Department of State Bulletin, XX (January 30, 1949), 142. 171u. S., Congress., Senate; Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, H.,R.,4016, 81st Cong., 1st Sess., 1949, p h 17 9 V 117 placed on centralised central of the program in Washington: The assumption upon which the organization, and role of the overseas information and education activities has been based in the past has been that there should be an official program, centrally designed and adminis* tered, and contributing to foreign peoplesr under* standing of America*s objectives for world peace and progress. ^-72 The shift of emphasis in cultural relations is illustrated in the reports of the Advisory Commission on Educational Exchange* In the fall of 1948, the chairman of the commission indicated that he was aware of the bipolar world that had developed but expressed a preference for freedom from control in cultural exchanges: The educational exchange program is based upon the conviction long held and amply demonstrated by civi- lized nations that free interchange of persons and ideas between nations is a source of understanding, enrichment, and progress. Since the effectiveness of such a program will depend not only upon its range or extent but also upon the voluntary and unprejudiced spirit in which it is conducted, it is obvious that its greatest usefulness will be in relation to the free and democratic countries of the world which are glad to avail themselves of its reciprocal a d v a n t a g e s . - * ^ One of the major difficulties facing the cultural relations program at the beginning of the "campaign of truth,“ according to the Advisory Commission on Educational Exchange, was found in the lack of complete agreement on ■*•^11. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Senate Report No. 406, 83rd Cong., 1st Sess., 1953, p. 38. 173u. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropri ations., Hearings, H. R. 4016. 81st Cong., 1st Sess.., 1949, p. 210. 118 what It should be. There was a divergence of interest and emphasis on the part of those responsible for administering the program both in the field and in Washington; According to one view the purpose of this program is to transplant American methods and techniques to other countries, to "Americanize" them, in fact, as one representative stated it. A second view is that its purpose is to acquaint other nations with the accom- plishments of the United States in the fields of scholarship and the fine arts in order to impress them with our cultural achievements. A third view is formu- lated in altruistic terms: This program is to help other countries meet their problems of education and should be guided, therefore, by local needs. A fourth view sees the educational exchange program as a special form of the information program of the State Depart ment. It would weigh each undertaking only in terms of its immediate impact, as well as our foreign policy objectives in a particular country at the time. In response to this problem, the commission ob served that the methods of educational exchange were dif ferent from those of the information media in that they avoided propaganda for specific objectives, declarations of purity of purpose, and quick results. Unlike the informa tion service, educational exchange was basically reciprocal in character and, although like other parts of American foreign policy, it wanted to make friends for the United States, the commission believed that genuine friendship could only come as a by-product of a genuine desire on the part of Americans to know and work with foreigners in 174y, s., Advisory Commission on Educational Ex change, Third Semiannual Report on Educational Exchange Activities (Washington: U. S. Government, Printing Office, 1950), p., 6.. activities of mutual interest and needs ♦ It held that con fidence in the United States roust come from personal con- tacts and knowledge. The commission observed that educational exchange was expected to support American foreign policy "by bring ing about growing understanding of American life, con fidence in this country's broad objectives, and a desire to be associated with her in working toward these ends." Edu cational exchange was to enable "other peoples to know our country and our people, our democratic processes, our political principles, our problems, and our ideals, and letting them judge for themselves. The report endorsed the broad objectives of the Smith-Mundt Act "to increase mutual understanding" but took a more unilateral approach than in 1948 by suggesting at the same time that the educational exchange program could more specifically serve the United States. "It must be concerned with whatever are the significant forces and movements which can interpret the United States to other peoples*" Although their methods were different, the commission recommended that there be more extensive co operation and coordination between the information and 175"Fostering International Understanding; Fourth Semiannual Report on Educational Exchange January to June 1950," Department of State Bulletin. XXIII (September 11, 1950)-, 417-23. ' -k-^xbid. . 120 X77 educational exchange services* In its fifth semiannual report to Congress covering the last six months of 1950, the Advisory Commission on Educational Exchange increased its support for the propa- ganda objectives of the "campaign of truth," It recom mended that the educational exchange program be shaped to fit each country on the basis of prevailing national atti tudes and conditions. It also recommended that the educa tional exchange program be examined and restated with three specific objectives in collaboration with the information program: To keep alive the spirit of cooperation among the free nations of the world for the purpose of self protection and progress for all. To strengthen resistance to communism in countries immediately threatened with infiltration or aggression. To weaken the forces of communism and diminish its power^ig areas now under the domination of the U. S. S • R« These new aims were held not to be in contradiction to "the earlier, general aim of interpreting the United States to other countries* They do represent, however, a 179 great gain in flexibility and in definiteness*" Among the top administrators, there was no question l77IMd. "Educational Exchange Among Free Nations: Fifth Semiannual Report to Congress., July to December, 1950," Department of. Stater Bulletin* XXIV (May .14,, 1951), 7 89 « 179ibid.. about using cultural relations for political objectives. The chief aim of the foreign policy of the United States was the preservation of the democratic way of life,*^ Both the information program and the cultural relations program were intended to be used to support that foreign policy. William C. Johnstone, Director of the Office of Educational Exchange from 1948 to 1952 and subsequently Deputy Administrator for Field Programs, told a congress sional committee: It is basically a political job, for this program is an effective arm or instrument of American foreign policy. In its simplest form, the job of this program is to implant a set of ideas or facts in the mind of a per^ son. When this is done effectively, it results in action favorable to the achievement of American foreign policy. It can help unite the free nations on the road to peace. Although the following statement of the propagan-' distic motives of cultural activities must be viewed in the light of the need for congressional appropriations and the estimate that undoubtedly some gap existed between theory and practice, it illustrates the nature of the political ^^George V. Allen, r'The Voice of America," Depart- * ment of State Bulletin. XIX (November 7, 1948), 567. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Hearings. Overseas Information Programs of the United States, 83rd Cong*, 1st Sess«, 1953, Part 2, pp. 1027, l450-51. The statements of top administrators in the exchange of persons, program and the library programs leave no question about the, political intent. Ibid. , „ pp. 881,-930* 122 orientation of the educational exchange program during the "campaign of truth": No cultural activity is presently being continued which does not, through its own methods, encourage the unity and strengthening of the free world, increase trust in the United States as a leader in the free world, or expose the evils of communism. Proportionate emphasis on different approaches properly varies country by country. However . . . cul- ture for culture's sake has no place in the United States Information and Educational Exchange program. The value of international cultural exchange is to win respect for the cultural achievement of our free society, where that respect is necessary to inspire cooperation with us in world affairs. In such a situ* ation, cultural activities are an indispensable tool of propaganda. Since the ultimate objectives of the entire program were the same, there was some tendency on the part of top administrators to view all elements of the program as "tools'1 with which to reach that objective. Radio, press, and motion pictures were regarded as "fast media" or "mass media" for communicating the program's messages to foreign peoples; cultural relations, consisting chiefly of the in* formation centers and exchange programs, were regarded as "slow media.” One top administrator regarded them as "deep penetration media." Another, as early as 1949, in making another point in a congressional hearing, included libra ries and the exchange of persons in the "mass media" cate** gory* Although this application of the term was not general, the tendency for the mass media information 1 -^^Jamasj, log.. cit,»pp* 105^106., 123 1 O ' ! programs to dominate "became noticeable* The Assistant Secretary of State explained to Congress in 1949, "The whole purpose of the program is to reach the great mass of the people" in order "to bring the impact of our foreign relations closer, not to a few se lected officials, but to the masses* The media of both the information and educational exchange programs were incorporated in the country plans, and "targets" were assigned for both types of activities. Cultural attaches, as well as public affairs officers in the information media, were included in the list of American officers abroad who were propagandizing foreign peoples. The earlier conviction that educational exchange ^Sargeant, loc. cit., p. 485; U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings,, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1950, 81st Cong., 1st Sess., 1949, p. 846; U. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Hearings, Overseas Information Programs of the United States, 63rd Cong., 1st Sess., 1953, Part 2, pp. 387, 418, 421, 506, 895-96. 5., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1950, 81st Cong*, 1st Sess,, 1949, p. 846. 5., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Report No. 406, 83rd Cong., 1st Sess., 1953, pp. 75-77. 186u. s., Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, Appropriation Bill for the Departments of State, Justice, Commerce, and the Judiciary, 82nd Cong.,, 1st Sess,,, 1951,. Part 1, p., 112Q., 124 and other cultural relations could accomplish only long- range results was abandoned. It was now held that their 187 effect was both immediate and long range* It was ex plained to Congress that . * « the great majority of exchanges involve adults in positions of active leadership--professors, special ists, technicians engaged in research, mature leaders in important fields such as journalism and the profes sions, leaders of labor organizations, and others whose impact upon the attitude of their respective countries will be immediate as well as long continued , 188 Other parts of the cultural relations program were also viewed from the point of view that their activities had both an immediate as well as a lasting impact: The United States libraries are a particularly clear illustration of this. Thirty percent of the users are educators or journalists who come to our li braries seeking specific information about this country. Within a matter of hours this information is imparted to others through classrooms, lecture halls, and news papers. Other users are doctors, lawyers, scientists, industrial workers, and farmers who obtain from the libraries facts and figures about American know-how for immediate use in their offices, factories, and farming projects. This did not mean, that the long-range point of view was abandoned, for it was held that the r , 'imminent present'3 . ■ ^ 8^U. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Hearings. Overseas Information Programs of the United States, 83rd Cong., 1st Sess., 1953, Part 2, pp. 42l„ 860, 882, 1053. ■ * -88U.. S ., Congress, Senate, Committee, on A p p ro p ri ations., H earings, H.. R.. 4016, 8.1st Cong.,, 1st Sess., 1949, p., 204., • 18 9 Ibid., 125' flows into the "foreseeable future" even though the two might have their own forces and causal relations* Ful filling the purposes of the one should carry with it the implied capacity to fulfill the other, which was that the United States Government and associated governments would "rebuild a peaceful and productive world in which the hindrances to free intercourse between peoples will have been eliminated* other forms of cultural relations could be useful from a propagandist's point of view in the "campaign of truth": In the interchange of persons and cultural elements, we must understand how to use the spiritual and physi cal strength— our great accumulation of technical knowledge and experience and the moral credit of the United States--to penetrate through barriers of race, custom, and language to the hopes and fears of peoples whose thoughts and behavior we wish to influence; and equally to maintain an accurate picture before the potential resource and power of our will which the program operated, but it now became understanding with a more militant purpose: International education is one of the most effec tive instruments of the Nationfs foreign policy* It is perhaps the best device we know for developing a sense of unity based on improved understanding among free peoples*, International communism, seeks to divide and But it did mean that the exchange of persons and Understanding remained one of the principles on ^9®Block, loc*. cit. , , ; pp., 991-92.1 191 Ibid.,,, p., 991., 126 Co conquer. International education, through, the international interchange o£ peoples, reduces geo* graphic and cultural barriers and brings people to gether to begin to know and to understand one another. The problem of creating quickly a strong, free world community in the face of constant Communist pressure demands a new kind of diplomacy. The international educational and cultural exchange programs of this Government are building the foundation of this new diplomacy. 19 2 Mutual understanding was still a watch word in public releases. Its purpose was to build mutual trust, mutual respect, friendship, moral strength, and a capacity to work together in order to establish mutual security. But there was increasing emphasis on having the rest of the 103 world understand the American point of view. ^ To enhance understanding of the United States abroad and to reach foreign public opinion more adequately, officers of the Department of State recognized the need to study foreign ethnic, social, and political characteristics, the cultural values of other peoples, and to acquire an in tensive knowledge and understanding of the history, people, s., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Hearings. Overseas Information Programs of the United States. 83rd Gong„, 1st Sess„, 1953, Part 2, p.. 587. ■^•^Edward W. Barrett, "The American People rs . Part in U« S-« Foreign Policy," Department of State Bulletin» , XXII (April 24, 1950), 647;. Edward W.. Barrett, "The Kremlin's Intensified Campaign in. the Field of Cultural Relations," ibid.. XXV (December 31, 1951), 905; Wilson Compton, "Mutual Security Requires Mutual Understanding," Department, of State Bulletin.. XXVI (April. 28, 1952),. 672. 127 and institutions of the United States* This was done not purely for the sake of mutual understanding but for the purpose of eliciting understanding abroad for the American message through psychologically sound methods that would motivate “other people and their governments to act in 194 consonance with United States purposes,” This brought the strategy of the propagandist into play* While his approach had to be truthful, he was con* cemed with selecting the facts he wished to impart, the media of communication, and the psychological means of achieving understanding. He was concerned with basic symbols of thought and expression of foreign peoples, the different levels of literacy abroad, and a common ground between American and foreign culture, "The transmission of understanding from one people to another can be carried out only across the bridge of whatever understanding already exists between them," wrote one propagandist in the depart" ment, With these objectives and methods, the term, "mutual understanding," took on the meaning of a "one-way street” in the thinking of some administrators and was to be achieved: by selecting; the ^target” and using methods of persuasion: 194glock, Ioc*. cit.,, pp., 98&*91.*> ^hb±d., ■ u& We mast work together to Increase mutual under standing with the "marginal1 1 countries--those not yet convinced of their own stake in the world contest between oppression and freedom— and convince them that their own good lies on the side of freedom* 1°o The Smith-Mundt Act was interpreted unilaterally to embrace the "proposition that the peaceful attainment of our foreign policy objectives rests ultimately upon the attitudes which the peoples, as well as the governments, of other nations hold toward us*"^7 The program was ex plained in Congress as an effort to build a favorable world climate of opinion which would strengthen the military morale of the rest of the world and one in which American 198 military expenditures could come down* It was held that one of the ways of contributing to a favorable climate of world opinion that would assist in supporting American foreign policy was the support of democracies and democratic principles abroad and the intro duction to foreigners of American ideas, methods, and *•9^Edward W. Barrett, "The American Peoplefs Part in U. S. Foreign Policy," Department of State Bulletin. XXXI (April 24, 1950), 647. ^ 7U« s., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriations for 1951. , 81st Cong*,, 2nd Sess., 1950, Part 2, p. 1043. 198 U1 . S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations., Hearings* S.. Res., 243., 81st Cong., 2nd Sess., 1950, pp« 45.-47., 'T " 129 institutions through educational methods. This was justified on the grounds of contributing to international understanding: Behind the somewhat general terras of the enabling act was the intention to extend the ideas and concepts inherent in the United States constitutional and tradi tional democracy among other peoples as a general pro cess. Thus, a correct understanding and the true facts would supplant vague or incorrect understanding and intentional distortions^ and other people and govern ments would be influenced by true understanding to think and act in ways conducive to acceptance of United States standards and interaction with t h e m . 2 0 0 Edward W. Barrett, Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs, explained to a UNESCO audience in 1950; We are doing what we are doing in order to preserve a climate of freedom and opportunity in the world for others and for ourselves* We are convinced that the only way to keep that climate is by building a new kind of world society, democratic in spirit and practice*201 It was held that international understanding acquired through education encouraged the adoption of democracy abroad and made for peace: If we can succeed in preventing a resort to arms, we are confident that the peoples of the world will ulti mately choose democracy as the system that assures 1QQ U. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, H. R. 4016, 81st Cong., 1st Sess*, 1949, pp. 225, 280 2Q0Biock, loc. cit,, p. 987* 20-^Edward W* Barrett, "The American People*s Part in U« S., Foreign Policy," Department of State Bulletin, , XXII (April 24, 1950), 647. 130 them more freedom and greater material benefits than any other.202 Despite the general objective to support democratic principles abroad in the interests of the United States* it was generally held in policy statements that the effort to extend democracy must be done by democratic means. This was not an effort to impose democratic ideas on others by force* to ’ ’ Americanize the world, ” or to make other peoples over into a ’ 'glorified United States.” If both educational and persuasive methods were to be used in propagating the democratic creed abroad, other peoples were to be allowed* insofar as the United States was concerned* freedom of choice in how heavily they themselves were to invest in democracy* ^03 Basic to the idea of freedom of choice was the con ception expressed by John Foster Dulles, Special Assistant to the Secretary of State* that the free world they were seeking was one that comprehended and tolerated differ ences.^1 ^ Mr* Dulles stated: ^^Howland H. Sargeant* "Helping the World to Know Us Better*" Department of State Bulletin. XIX (November 28, 1948)* 672. 203ibid. j , p. 676; Block, loc. cit.; U. S.* Congress, Senate* Committee on Foreign Relations* Hearings. S. Res. 243. 81st Cong., 2nd Sess.* 1950* pp. 48, 84; U. S., Department of State, Our Foreign Policy 1952. p. 71. 2^U. S., Congress* Senate* Committee on Foreign Relations* Hearings, S. Re.s, 243. 81st Cong., 2nd Sess.* 1950* p., 48.* We, for our part, invite unity, but the unity we invite is the unity needed for a common defense of the right to be different* Also, we recognize that cooperation may find expression in many ways.2^ A corollary of the democratic ideas advocated by the "campaign of truth" was the renewed insistence on free dom of information in the conviction that other peoples, "if informed of the truth, will make sound judgements,"206 This position contained now the additional advantage of bolstering the propaganda strategy of separating other peoples of the world from communism: Truth is on the side of the free nations and the lead ers of communism everywhere fear the truth. Knowledge of the truth, however, is dependent upon the free flow of information and exchange of ideas* This is the role of the international information and educational ex change program. 207 Freedom in cultural exchange was held to be as important as freedom of information. It, too, became pro ductive of propaganda values in that it provided an oppor tunity to point out the freedom from political controls in American cultural life in contrast with the political 205 John Foster Dulles, "New Aspects of American Foreign Policy," Department of State Bulletin, XXIX (May 8, 1950), 720. 206oean Acheson, "The Strategy of Freedom," Depart ment of State Bulletin, XXIII (December 18, 1950), 967. 207U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriations for 1952, 82nd Cong., 1st Sess., 1951, p. 11. purposes which had penetrated Russian science, literature, art, and music.^08 According to the Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs, freedom in cultural expression and in cul* tural exchange permitted individual creative artists to express the common heritage of cultural symbols and values that gave universal meaning to their work. It was held that a conviction of fundamental human unity underlying national differences could arise "only in the free sharing of the individual and national expressions of a universal cultural heritage." This in turn would have political values: Only through freely creative and freely shared cultural expression, we believe, can every people see its own values, its own fundamental humanity, mirrored in its neighbor. Only through such cultural expression can they arrive at that sense of identity and common pur pose that must underlie all efforts at common political and economic action.209 It was to demonstrate that the United States shared this common heritage and common human experience with other free nations that examples of American cultural life were sent abroad. This meant that greater attention had to be given to the problems of selecting the best not only for the purpose of demonstrating greater unity with the culture Sargeant, "How Can We Defend Free Culture?" Department of State Bulletin. XXVI (April 7, 1952), 539. 2<»Ibid. 133 of other free peoples but also to belie the charges ad vanced by the Soviet Union that we had no real culture of our own.^10 If the American defense against Soviet aggressive behavior and the effort to show common values and interests meant some deviation from the earlier "full and fair pic ture" formula as a result of the selection process, it was justified by those in charge of the program on the grounds of political need.^*' The policy of the Department of State was explained as follows: To present simply an accurate picture of the United States is now only a part, although still an important part, of our total effort. The emphasis is stronger on pointing up the values we share with other free peoples. We point out the ways in which freedom is threatened by aggressive Soviet communism. We show the other free peoples that their stake in the future is closely tied with our own. Only by developing an awareness of these ties can we effectively reach other peoples and their governments and gain their support.212 The exchange-of-persons program.— This type of reasoning occurred to some extent in the exchange of per sons program, lecturers sent from the United States went 210ibid.; Edward W. Barrett, "The Kremlin’s Inten sified Campaign in the Field of Cultural Relations," Department of State Bulletin. XXV (December 31, 1951), 905. 211u. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Hearings. Overseas Information Programs of the United States, 83rd Cong., 1st Sess., 1953, Part 2, p. 1078. ^l^U. S., Department of State, Our Foreign Policy 1952. p. 71. 134 uninstructed with the same professional freedom they en joyed in the United States, but they were counted on to establish abroad concepts of American freedom and the desire to be truthful, objective, and sincere. Similar freedom was demonstrated to foreign visi tors to the United States. Both the good and the bad in American culture were shown them to impress them with American frankness, strength, and fundamental decency. Efforts were made to show that where the United States re cognized its faults it was striving toward their solution. The visitors were relied upon to return to their homes with a greater appreciation and understanding of the American way of life and in some cases to become supporters and ad vocates of the United States and of democracy in their home countries. They were also expected to use their first-hand experience in the United States to counteract in their home countries misconceptions of the United States based on ignorance and the deliberate falsehoods and distortions created by communist propaganda* Substantively, many of ^•^Francis M« Rogers, "For All Americans," The Record, VII (May-June, 1951), 13-14. ^^Edward W* Barrett, "U. S. Informational Aims in the Cold War," Department of State Bulletin, XXII (June 19, 1950), 994; Edward W. Barrett, "The Kremlin's Intensified Campaign in the Field of Cultural Affairs," ibid., XXV (December 31, 1951), 906. 135 the exchangees were expected to participate in basic constructive work that would ’ ’ eliminate the social and 27 5 economic conditions in which communism breeds#" The exchange program approached the objective of building up a climate of opinion in other countries favor able to cooperation with the United States by working closely with foreign peoples# It took into account the interests and needs of other countries and of the visitors themselves# It engaged the cooperation of educational institutions and other private organizations in the United States, and it counted on the support of binational bodies abroad in helping to select the individuals to travel to the United States# The assistance of the binational selec tion committees abroad not only was essential to the department's operations, but it also brought prominent American citizens resident in foreign countries and foreign nationals together in a cooperative, friendly endeavor, which in turn was believed to be of value to the program. Giving these groups freedom of decision encouraged them to take a greater i n t e r e s t . ^ ts primary values was that it was able to attract the voluntary participation of 2 U. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Hearings. Overseas Information Programs of the United States# 83rd Cong., 1st Sess., 1953, Part 2, p. 570. 216Ibid., pp. 639, 882, 888, 890-91, 899, 901, 907.. 136 leading citizens because of its high prestige and non- 717 political and non-propagandistic methods. Despite Its free, cooperative, and reciprocal aspects, in the pursuit of American objectives, the ex change program was subject to some of the same strategic thinking and manipulation as the information program, al- 718 though not to the same extent. It was held that the educational exchange program could be conducted for bona fide and worthwhile educational purposes in the broadest sense and at the same time serve the basic general objec- 91 q tives of United States foreign policy. The program as a whole was concerned with winning over to the side of democracy neutral peoples and countries that might be persuaded by opposition efforts to join the 220 communists. The heads of the exchange-of-persons 217 U* S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Report No. 406, 83rd Cong., 1st Sess., 1953, p. 15. 2^U. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Hearings. Overseas Information Programs of the United Stated 83rd Cong., 1st Sess., 1953, Part 2, pp. 638-39. 219Ibid., p. 905. 22C)lbid. f pp. 1040, 1083; U. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings. H. R. 4016. 81st Cong., 1st Sess., 1949, p. 220; U. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings, Appropriations for the Departments of State, Justice, Commerce,and' the " Judiciary for the fiscal year . . . 1952, 82nd Cong., 1st Sess., 1951. Part 1, p. 824; Block, loc. cit., p. 990. 137 programs were Inclined to see some of their efforts in the light of the same strategy. Insofar as the laws and pro cedures permitted they brought to the United States as visitors the "neutralists," the people who might take either side.^*^ Although those who were already most friendly to the United States were most interested in visiting this country, the program was more interested in bringing those who were more "open-minded" and whose 222 opinion might be changed. Some emphasis was also placed on selecting present leaders of thought and opinion and promising young profes sional people, teachers, and junior government officials who had demonstrated a capacity for leadership and might be expected to be forming public opinion in their home eoun- tries in the future. For the same reason, some atten tion was given to offering travel grants to foreign nationals engaged in information activities in their home countries, such as journalists, film producers, and broad casting officials. To counteract the impression abroad 221u. s., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, Appropriations for International Informa tion and Educational Activities for 1953, 82nd Cong., 2nd Sess., 1952, Part 2, p. 202. o ?? U. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Hearings, Overseas Information Programs of the United States, 83rd Cong., 1st Sess., 1953, Part 2, pp. 882, 903-904. ^ ^ Ibid., pp. 882, 900. that the United States was "mechanical-minded, material® istic, and essentially uncultured, ' * a number of travel grants were provided to "key individuals" in the arts in countries where these Impressions were most prevalent* 22^ In addition to selecting persons whose positions might influence public opinion favorably, the program took appropriate steps to see that their needs and interests in the United States were adequately met in order to provide a satisfying experience. Orientation was given them before their departure from home and during their stay in the United States so that their adjustment problems were mini mized and so they would be provided with a setting in which to view the United States from a balanced point of view. After the visitors * return to their home country, public affairs officers abroad were encouraged to maintain contact with them through the formation of alumni associations and other means,2^5 The overseas libraries,--The overseas libraries were also viewed in strategic terms* The placing of the "output of the free and uncensored publishing industry of 224 "Fostering International Understanding: Fourth Semiannual Report on Educational Exchange January to June 1950," Department of State Bulletin. XXIII (September 11, 1950), 417-23, 2 ^ s., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Hearings, Overseas Information Programs of the United States, 83rd, Cong,, 1st Sess., 1953, Part 2, p p 882.,, 908« ■ 139 the United States1 ' " on the shelves of the overseas libraries was regarded as an effective means of establishing the credibility of the program with the foreign public. The presence of books and magazines reflecting the various shades of American opinion, some openly critical of the administration in power, certain aspects of American life, American public figures, and of American foreign policy, which obviously pointed to the fact that the United States was not a perfect society, were held as valuable in helping to prove to the foreign public that the libraries were not propaganda agencies. In November, 1950, the overseas libraries became "information centers" and their administrators in Washing ton intensified their efforts to disseminate information 227 with a purpose under the "campaign of truth.1 1 That pur pose was . . . to promote the national security of the United States by providing published materials which will assist in creating within other nations an understand ing and respect for the United States, its democratic ideals and institutions, and in developing greater trust and cooperation for the attainment of freedom and peace throughout the world.228 226Ibid*, pp. 909, 925, 928, 930. 222Jamas, loc. cit«, pp. 103-109. 7 7 8 U. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Hearings. Overseas Information Programs of the United States. 83rd Cong., 1st Sess., 1953, Part 2, p., 912.. • 140 TO’ the earlier library program built around the concept of the "full and fair picture*4 of the United States was now added the "task of entering a powerful and compel* ling set of American ideas in the current struggle for men's minds.1' The specific objectives thus became to re flect a "true picture of American political, economic, Social, and cultural ideas and achievements, portraying our values, objectives, and powers as a nation" and advocating "the concepts of free democracy in a world shadowed by Soviet imperialism."229 xhe key to wielding influence in foreign countries through this portion of the program was found in the processes of selecting books, librarians, and, to some extent, the readers. To accomplish the basic objectives of the "full and fair picture" formula, books had been selected "to promote a balanced understanding of the United States and the American people" and to ’'make available American contribu tions to the humanities and to the social and physical sciences." To achieve the purposes of the "campaign of truth,f f publications were also selected "to interpret American foreign policy, with particular reference to Soviet aggression," to "reveal the fallacy of the communist doctrine," and to "correct misconceptions and combat anti- American propaganda." Books selected for translation into 229Ibid., pp. 908, 910. foreign languages and publication abroad by foreign pub* lishers through regular retail channels were selected largely by the same methods and for the same purposes,230 Librarians were chosen not so much for their pro* fessional training alone as for their “strong sense of community participation," It was held that their useful” ness in stimulating the circulation of American books would be greater if they learned to work closely with the foreign library systems, book publishers, and influential community leaders. Their work included inter-library loans, exten sion loans by mail, and presentation of books of special significance to American foreign policy. Their objective was to influence the thought of the community toward the United States by building on local knowledge and preju dices.^* Special book exhibits served to stimulate interest in American books and in learning English. They also served as a device for achieving cooperation abroad; One of the main reasons for providing special book exhibits is that they offer especially effective means for establishing or strengthening relationships with foreign government departments (such as ministries of education) or with private professional organizations 23Qlbid,, pp* 909-14, 929-30. 23IIbid., pp. 909, 915-17, 924., and groups* through cosponsorship or close liaison in presenting the exhibits to foreign audiences.232 Incapable of reaching the population at large* the information centers concentrated on reaching the people*s leaders, raolders of opinion, and makers of political deci sions, who would in turn influence the native population. These included professors, authors, journalists, commen tators, political leaders, industrialists, labor union officials, leaders of youth groups and other intellectuals who communicated with others and whose knowledge of English would make their use of the library and comprehension of Q'lO higher levels of thought possible. It was also thought during the "campaign of truth" that more attention should be devoted in the same media to winning over urban labor, farmers, farm workers, and the lower economic levels of the white-collar class by such extension services as films, exhibits, group discussions and lectures. Those who were not in the "target" group were to be permitted to continue to use the library, but no effort was to be made to promote its use by others than 232U# Department of State, Trading Ideas with the Worldt Report of the United States Advisory Commission on Educational Exchange, p. 20. 2-^James, loc. cit«, p. 1Q6; Lawrence S* Morris, "U* S. Information, PleaseThe Record. VII (May-June, 1951), 4; Dan Lacy, "Aid to National Policy," Library Trends, July, 1953., p., 161 (reprint). 143 234 those the program wished particularly to reach. The cultural institutes."'•Except for the exchange* of-persons program, little faith was expressed in the reciprocal and cooperative aspects of cultural relations after the passage of the Smith-Mundt Act in 1948. The administrators of the information program did not believe that the basic law permitted them to "encourage the flow of information into the United States from other countries." And they did not see "any conflict between the purpose of increasing understanding between the people of the United States and the peoples of other nations,1 1 as expressed in the basic law, and the greatly increased emphasis on the ' ‘ more directly political activity of increasing understand ing and cooperation abroad with United States national policies."235 The emphasis in the information services on the unilateral propaganda approach to foreign peoples repeated ly raised questions at home and abroad concerning its rela tive effectiveness compared to the bilateral cultural approach, and there was reflected some lack of confidence ^^Lacy, loc. cit., pp. 161-63. 235 U. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Hearings, Overseas Information Programs of the United States, 83rd Cong*, 1st Sess., 1953, Fart 2, pp. 3l4, 1077, 1083. -V 144 in it.^ In early 19S3, the United States Advisory' Com*" mission on Information acknowledged that the information activities were largely "one-way streets.” It pointed out that while there were many governmental and private chan* nels of communication for the promotion of mutual under standing, both Americans and peoples of other countries often felt that they were misrepresented and misunderstood abroad. As a corrective to this situation, the commission recommended that more attention be paid to the reciprocal and cooperative aspects of the program: let us not lose sight of the fact that our goal of a world family of peaceful nations is attainable only by way of mutual undertakings. Our task should not be limited to giving the world a "full and fair picture" of the United States but should include seeking full and fair pictures of other nations for dissemination within the United States. Our purpose in learning about the cultures of other peoples should not be merely that of seeking to make our propaganda among them more effective, but should be based on a genuine desire to understand their problems and purposes so that we can cooperate with them more effectively. A greater effort on our part to learn about other peoples for this purpose would do much to dispel any belief that we are trying to Americanize the world by imposing our culture on other peoples.237 23%arold E* Snyder, When Peonies Speak to Peoples (Washington; American Council on Education, 1953), pp* 28* 31; U. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Report No. 406, 83rd Cong., 1st Sess., 1953, pp. 153-88; U. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Hearings, Overseas Information Programs of the United States, 83rd Cong., 1st Sess,, 1953, Part 2, pp, 506, 681; The New York Times, November 24, 1952; ibid,, June 14* 1953, 9 ^ 7 U, S., Advisory Commission on Information, Seventh Semiannual, Report,, 83rd, C.ong„„ Xs.t Sess,*,, House Document No. 94, 1,953* p. 9- The commission painted out that the "best under standings and most kindly feelings between peoples of dif ferent countries are engendered when occupational groups communicate with each other." To convince other peoples that the United States was sincerely trying to understand their ways of life, their problems and their purposes, the commission recommended that more attention be given to the flow of foreign information to the United States and that more cultural institutes, or "binational centers," as they were now called, be established abroad. The commission believed that Our work in the field should become less and less that of Americans conducting propaganda on foreign soil and more and more a partnership arrangement between Ameri cans and others for the mutual welfare of both.238 The significance of the recommendation rests partly on the fact that the cultural institutes had only recently come within the purview of the Advisory Commission on Information. Established by the Smith-Mundt Act# the com mission had previously been concerned only with the uni lateral information media of the radio* press, and motion pictures and in that capacity had earlier supported the unilateral psychological approach in the "campaign of truth." Coming from the Advisory Commission on Information rather than from; the Advisory Commission on Educational. 2.3-8ibid.» pp* 9:”10.) 146 Exchange, the recommendation served to emphasize the fact that the unilateral aspects of the program had largely obscured the basic concepts of reciprocal and cooperative action as a device for winning friends abroad. This change in perspective is perhaps reflected more distinctly in the changes in values placed on cultural institutes between 1947 and 1953 than in any other phase of the cultural program* In 1947, the Department of State especially empha sized the cooperative aspects of the cultural institutes with the American public. It took pride in the fact that Americans, both public employees and private citizens, In cooperating with Latin Americans demonstrated ''the in dubitable sincerity of the United States, and they have dispelled whatever fears may have existed that United States assistance would mean infringement on local autono my. " The conclusion that the program of assistance to cultural centers is a cooperative enterprise will be self-evident. It is cooperative in the sense of Americans and foreign nationals working together har moniously toward mutual ideals of peace and under standing. It is cooperative in the sense that its benefits accrue to both parties to a bilateral program. In a financial sense, it is cooperative in that support is derived from public and private sources in both the United States and the countries of Latin America. 239ECj raund: R. Murphy, "Cooperation with Cultural Centers in the Other American Republics," The Program, of the Interdepartmental. Committee on Scientific and Cultural Cooperation, . U« S« Department of State Publication N o . . - , 2994 (Washington; U., S, Government printing Qf.fi.ee,, 1947), p., 32., 147 By 1949, Soviet propaganda against the United States caused a greater dedication to the attainment of immediate foreign policy objectives* To meet this chal lenge, a unilateral orientation was given to the values of the cultural institutes, although the cooperative aspects were not yet lost: Through their varied educational and cultural pro grams, the cultural centers are developing groups of people friendly to the United States. Thus they are indoctrinating foreign nationals with the ideals and methods of American democracy, reducing anti-United States feeling in important social and geographical areas, and encouraging inter-American economic and racial harmony and cooperation, as well as counteract ing the effects of anti-United States propaganda. By 1951, the unilateral emphasis in both approach and values in a strategically oriented program had so in creased the need for administrative control by the United States that the value of the cooperative approach disap peared from administrative statements. To the suggestion that the number of information centers be decreased and the number of binational centers be increased both as a means of reducing costs and as a means of working more closely with foreigners, the information service replied in terras of strategy and control; U*i S«, Department of State, Division of Libra ries and Institutes, Institute Branch, "Assistance to the Cultural Centers Program; Narrative Report Covering Oper ations from July- 1 to December 31, 1948,"' Washington, April 14, 1949, p„ 5 (processed,),, 148 It may be true that unobtrusive, or unattributable, operation is desirable in local areas. Certainly# the binational centers are less obviously United States installations than are the information centers. How ever# the fact that United States support is given to binational centers is generally known in local areas; and the principal disadvantage of the binational center technique is precisely that it is more difficult to guide and control for United States purposes than the frankly United States information centers. It is not believed, therefore, that the gains implicit in this suggestion always outweigh the disadvantages to be expected,241 This obvious change In the value placed on the cul tural institutes in a six-year period of time raises the interesting question of the true nature and extent of the political value of the institutes to the United States. It also raises the question of whether the United States attempted to manipulate the cultural institutes for politi cal purposes. If efforts were made to exercise control, this raises questions of relative success and failure of such attempts and the ease with which the cultural insti tutes responded to guidance from Washington, On the other hand, the earlier emphasis on cooperation and reciprocity raises questions concerning the responses to this approach in terms of political values# The search for answers to 24%. S. * Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Hearings. Overseas Information Programs of the United States. 83rd Cong.# 1st Sess*, 1953.* Part 2, p. 930* This is the only direct reference to cultural institutes found in some 1500 pages of the congressional hearings on the total program, conducted in 1953 by a subcommittee of the Committee on. Foreign Relations headed, by Senator Bourke B„ Hickeniooper of, Iowa., 149 these and related questions is reported in succeeding chapters. Summary The cultural relations program stemmed from the Good Neighbor Policy and the democratic principles of equality, justice, and mutual respect. Its purpose was to build up in the minds of people of both continents a deeper appreciation of these basic principles and a feeling of friendship and understanding through a long-range program. It was designed to be truthful, reciprocal, and educational, and it was to involve many private citizens and institu tions as direct participants in cooperative endeavors with Latin Americans. Government was to facilitate and coordi nate the program, but cultural relations were not intended to serve as an ordinary instrument of unilateral propaganda, and their use for any political purposes other than peace ful was questioned by many of those engaged in the pro- 242 gram* As the United States became involved first in the problems of national defense and then as an active partici pant in the Second World War, cultural relations were seen ^^A general summary of many of the basic prin ciples of the cultural relations program as viewed by its first director is found in Ben M« Cherrington, "America*^ Future Cultural Relations," The Annals of the American Academy of Political, and. Social Science„. CCXXJCV (September, 1944)/ 77-82.., . ^ " " as a device for building up hemispheric solidarity for the political and military purposes of the United States. The basic principles of using truthful, reciprocal, cooperative and educational methods in a long-term program were re tained, but short-term needs brought a focusing of atten tion on objectives and devices that would benefit the United States without doing excessive violence to basic principles. Cultural relations were held to prepare the way for overt propaganda by laying down favorable basic attitudes toward the United States. Under the pressure of war, concern developed for the prestige of American culture, the need to counteract traditional native misconceptions and Axis distortions of American life and motives, and the competition of foreign powers generally in cultural rela tions. As a result of the war, a desire to further the national interest by increasing the political orientation of the program developed, although it was far from being militant propaganda. Although the cultural relations program was under taken by the government to implement certain aspects of the Good Neighbor Policy, it relied heavily on private intel lectual and cultural organisations for both policy and operations* The leaders of these groups hoped to develop eventually a non-political., non-propagand.istic multilateral, organization which would, be independent of any national 151 government end dedicated to using cultural relations to promote international peace* The advent of the war before this was accomplished molded cultural relations into a regional program conducted on a bilateral basis in the national interest* Divisive factors in the rationale of the program developed when it became apparent that cultural relations could be used for both war and peace. When officers of the Department of State proposed a more effective political orientation of the program for the benefit of the United States after the war, they dis covered that the private agencies cooperating with the government strenuously objected to making of cultural rela tions a unilateral political vehicle. They held that cul tural relations should be non-political in purpose and multilateral in scope. They should be genuinely reciprocal, mutually beneficial, strictly educational in nature, and conducted on a cooperative basis by private groups and individuals. Government support was acceptable if it came without controls. Their objective was peace through inter national understanding, Although the Department of State was unable to abandon the political purposes of cultural relations* it was equally unwilling to alienate the support of private groups and the public in general in conducting the program* Retaining otherwise the: principles: o.£ the multilateral, group, it developed a rationale for a bilateral* coopera tive, reciprocal program of cultural relations operated without close controls to implement long-range objectives of the broader aspects of foreign policy. Cultural rela tions were held to be an inappropriate vehicle for tempo- rary and changing objectives in political and economic affairs. Wishing to retain the support of private groups, yet being active in the field of cultural relations itself, the department developed the formula that it would facili tate and supplement the work of private agencies in cul tural activities for peaceful purposes after the close of the war. At the conclusion of the Second World War, the cul tural relations program was combined with a small informa tion service. Both activities were now dedicated by an executive order of the President to the support of foreign policy. Peace and security were the major objectives of this foreign policy. The major principles of cultural relations were adopted for both types of activities insofar as this proved feasible. They were dedicated to building friendly relations with other nations over a long period of time* Private agencies were to conduct bath programs wherever possible, and the government's role was to be fac’ ilitative and: supplementary» The program was to be truthful,, dedicated to freedom, of information, and cultural 153 exchange, non-propagandistic in character, and moderate in approach* Destructive rivalry with foreign powers was to be prevented in the interests of cooperation and peace through understanding. Major officers of the department, however, did not forget the possible need of using under standing of the United States abroad for the purpose of winning friends for either peace or war. Political objec tives in the support of foreign policy were clearly re flected in the desire to substitute stereotyped miscon ceptions and fear of the power of the United States abroad with accurate knowledge and a will to peace through under standing. It was held that true understanding and friendship between Americans and foreign peoples could best be brought about through cooperative activity and through study and travel in each others’ countries. Although It was held that understanding must be reciprocal, there was an in creasing emphasis on the interests of the United States in building up advantageous political and economic relations through the understanding brought about through cultural activities. Those favoring a bilateral cultural approach to foreign peoples found themselves flanked on the one hand by those favoring a multilateral approach and on the other by the unilateral information specialists with whom they had 154 to work* They agreed with the stated objectives of UNESCO to seek; peace through understanding, but unlike the UNESCO group they would also use cultural relations to seek allies for war if necessary. They agreed with the information specialists in the Department of State on the use of cul- tural relations for the benefit of the United States, but they were more reluctant to attempt to coordinate or con trol cultural relations to any extent for fear of producing in the minds of foreigners an unfavorable attitude. In formation officers were more inclined than the bilateral cultural officers to think it passible to disguise the substance of control for strategic purposes. Accordingly, they questioned the uncontrolled use of private agencies and individuals because of the difficulty of exercising governmental control for strategic purposes. The bilateral cultural group, on the other hand, held to the formula that the function of the department was to facilitate and supplement their work, and they were reluctant to accompany financial assistance to private groups with controls in matters of policy. By the close of 1947, it was becoming increasingly apparent that the objective of attaining world peace through mutual understanding was unlikely to be achieved* The Soviet Union not only refused to cooperate in planning for peace, but it also was attempting to isolate the United State's: from: Europe and the rest of the free world, through; propaganda attacks discrediting its motives and way of life* To counter these attacks. Congress passed the Smith- Mundt Act in January, 194S, establishing an information, service and an educational exchange program on a permanent basis and giving them a world-wide scope for their opera tions. The act contained the dual purposes of increasing the understanding of the United States abroad and mutual understanding between the United States and other countries* It was both to facilitate and supplement the work of private agencies, on which it was expected to rely as fully as possible, in presenting the "full and fair picture" of the United States enunciated by President Truman in 1945. It contained, however, In this dual formula the basis for psychological warfare In case of need. As communist propa ganda persisted, the objectives of the Information and cultural relations programs sharpened until in 1950 Presi dent Truman asked the public for support and the Congress for financial means to conduct a "great campaign of truth*" The ensuing expansion of the program placed far greater emphasis on the unilateral approach made by the Information media than on the educational services, and the effort to • increase the effectiveness of both programs in terms of countering the Soviet offensive and winning support for the United States brought about increased use of psychological techniques and strategic controls, which, altered to some 15b extent the rationale of the educational exchange program. The Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 provided for a maximum use of private agencies in order to encourage free contacts between private citizens, but under the pressure to make the program serve more specifically the objectives of foreign policy, the program found it expedient to limit the participation of private agencies in the determination of official policies and to take a more direct approach through government channels in reaching foreign peoples. The shift from a free exchange to a program with greater controls was accompanied by increased emphasis on adapting cultural relations to the benefit of the United States. Cultural relations were expected to increase the spirit of cooperation abroad, strengthen the determination to resist communism, and weaken the forces of communism. The government consequently became less interested in supporting cultural relations for their own sake and increasingly viewed them as tools of propaganda in the cold war and, therefore, subject to some manipulation* The view that cultural relations served only the long-range purposes of foreign policy was now altered to provide for immediate needs as well as the needs of the future* and the two were seen as interrelated. International, understanding was now conceived as invaluable in providing unity in a free world against ■communist pressure. Mutual understanding remained a con venient cliche of the program, but the emphasis was clearly on having other peoples understand the United States in order to secure their support for the objectives of Ameri can foreign policy. It was held that the attainment of the objectives of American foreign policy depended on the attitudes of foreign peoples and a favorable world climate of opinion. The introduction of American ideas, methods and institu tions, support of the democracies and democratic prin ciples, and the encouragement of the growth of democracy abroad without attempting to "Americanize" the world were expected to encourage a favorable climate of opinion. Insistence on freedom of information and on free cultural exchange were advocated as corollaries of the "campaign of truth" not for the sake of freedom alone but also for their propaganda value against communist fear of the truth. Freedom of cultural expression in the democ racies was expected to demonstrate the fundamental human unity underlying national differences and consequently increase a sense of political and economic unity against communist power* It became important to demonstrate abroad that the. United States shared this common heritage of cul^ fcure« To do; this and to. belie the Soviet, charges that, the; United States was uncultured made it essential to select the best q£ our culture to send abroad. If this meant a deviation from the Tr£ull and fair picture" formula, it was justifiable for political reasons* Freedom from apparent control in the exohange~a£“ persons program was counted on to demonstrate abroad and to foreign visitors in the United States the freedom, sincerity, frankness, and honesty of the United States* Visitors were expected on their return home to be motivated to disseminate abroad greater understanding and appreci* ation of the American way of life, to advocate support for democracy and the United States, to counteract misconcep- tions about the United States created through ignorance or Soviet propaganda, and to participate substantively in helping to eliminate the social and economic conditions in which communism breeds* By taking into account the needs and interests of other countries and of the visitors them* selves and by cooperative endeavors of Americans and foreign nationals in selecting individuals to travel to the United States, the exchange-of-persons program was counted on to build political support for this country through non- political activity. It was held that political objectives could be met at the same time that educational purposes were served, .Special efforts were made to bring to the United States visitors whose neutral attitude might be changed to support for the United States* The exchange program concentrated some of its efforts on bringing to the United States cur rent leaders of thought and opinion in influential occupa- tional groups, particularly those that made political decisions or communicated with others. Friendly and help ful contacts with visitors before, during, and after their trips to the United States were designed to assure a satis fying experience in this country. The overseas libraries, or information centers, were also held as a device for demonstrating the freedom of the democratic way of life and as a means for establishing belief in the truthful methods of American efforts to ex plain itself abroad. The ’’ campaign of truth” brought increased efforts by the overseas libraries to promote the security of the United States, understanding and respect for its democratic ideals and institutions, and greater trust and cooperation for freedom and peace. In addition to its original objectives of supplying unbiased informa tion about the United States and useful information to foreign peoples, it added the objectives of interpreting the American point of view and counter-attacking communist propaganda efforts. To do this, it attempted to choose librarians who could increase the circulation and presenta tion of American; books in. foreign communities, American, 160 librarians abroad concentrated on reaching foreign com munity leaders who in turn would take political action or help mold public opinion favorably toward the objectives of United States foreign policy. Except for the exchange-of-persons program, the reciprocal and cooperative aspects of cultural relations were, in general, lost from view after 1948 as the emphasis was shifted to the unilateral approach. It was held by some that an increase in the reciprocal aspects of the in formation program and an increase in the number of cooper ative activities such as the cultural institutes, or binational centers, would establish a deeper sense of understanding than a unilateral flow of information from the United States, The basic law was interpreted, however, not to provide for reciprocal flow of information about foreign countries to the United States, and the cooperative action of the cultural institutes was held so to inhibit their control for United States purposes that the value of increasing their number was seriously questioned by the administrators of the programs. CHAPTER, III THE ORGANIZATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT IN CULTURAL RELATIONS Introduceion Before the establishment of organized activities in the field of cultural relations by the United States Government in 1938, the foundation for such relations was well laid by private activities: There were promising movements within the Pan American Union for such official ministrations, and the United States cooperated with them in a dutiful way. But initiative for real activity was left to the privately endowed foundations for the advancement of science and learning and the promotion of peace, insti tutions of international scope and purview which formed such a distinctive feature of North American culture in the twentieth century. Even these foundations did not devote their resources very much to the work of cultural exchange with Latin America until after the First World War.I Although there was some activity by government agencies in cultural relations before 1936, the United States Government made no direct efforts to encourage or promote cultural relations with Latin America until that year. Besides its membership in the Pan American Union, the United States made limited contributions to cultural relations on a multilateral basis through specialized ^Samuel Flagg Bemis, The Latin American Policy of the United States (New York: Hareourt, Brace and Co., 1943), p., 314., 162 conferences and organizations and through the Inter- American Conferences* In 1936# it proposed and secured the adoption multi" laterally of a convention providing for the exchange of students and professors# but when the Second World War appeared to threaten the safety of the United States# this country began the development of a bilateral cultural rela tions program with the Latin American countries individu ally. To implement this new approach to international relations, it utilized existing agencies and established new ones. Among these were the Interdepartmental Committee on Scientific and Cultural Cooperation, the Office of the Coordinator of Xnter-American Affairs, and the Division of Cultural Relations in the Department of State. Of primary interest in the present study is the growth and development of the cultural relations program within the Department of State, since it administered the cultural institutes in Latin America. Furthermore, al though the work of the department itself began on a modest scale and was overshadowed at first by the achievements of other agencies, it was in the department that major policy was formed in the cultural relations field* It was the Department of State, too, that provided the nucleus of activity on which the program was to depend for its con tinuity and ultimate development into the present United States Information Agency., Private Cultural Relations Before 1938 Early cultural exchanges.*-During the nineteenth century# the orientation of students, tourists, and descend* ants of. immigrants in both the United States and Latin America was to Europe* Except for businessmen, government officials, and missionaries, Americans maintained little regular contact with Latin America. From time to time, the southern republics were visited by engineers, explorers, geographers, scientists, and soldiers of fortune, but in general the difficulties of transportation, combined with a general lack of interest in the United States served to isolate Latin America from this country.^ Without regular contact on any extensive scale, the people of the two areas were not only generally uninformed about each other*s ways of life, but there also developed a considerable amount of prejudice and misconception, often exaggerated, which stood as a barrier to any mutual under standing; Americans tended to picture all Latin America as a land of chronic revolutions and of romantic, dilatory, and generally unreliable habits; Latin Americans looked on this country as a materialistic collossus, whose people were given to disorderly living. In the United States, the serious studies of the 2Ibid., p. 315. ^William Lytle Schurz, Latin America (New York: E. P. Dutton and Co., Inc., 1942), p. 290. . 164 few scholars and: writers interested in Latin America were not yet well known to most Americans: Newspapers contributed little to the mutual en lightenment of the two peoples* • * . At five-year intervals, as time for another Fan American Conference came around, the press built up a rather sensational and superficial interest in Latin America, after which the public attention promptly relapsed into customary indifference.4 In Latin America, students by the end of the nine teenth century were beginning to be interested in technical instruction in this country in such fields as medicine, dentistry, and engineering, but they seldom were interested 5 in American humanities, arts, politics, or law. Ever mindful of the numerous American military and diplomatic interventions in Latin American affairs, especially in Mexico and the Caribbean area, Latin Americans were in clined to fear both the imperialism and the materialism of the ’’ Colossus of the North. It was in the field of education that the United States made its greatest cultural contribution to Latin America in the nineteenth century* As a result of the efforts of the Argentine statesman, Domingo Faustino Sarmiento, the influence of the New England schools was spread to the southern part of Latin America. The ^ibid. ^Bemis, op. cit.» p. 316. 6Ibid«, p. 318. excellent Instruction, of; the Protestant missionary schools established by Americans attracted not only the under privileged students but also those of the middle classes. Some of their graduates continued their work in the United States, although the number was small in comparison to those who went to Europe before the First World War.7 During the period between the two World Wars, a growing interest in Latin America was expressed in the United States in many ways. Several of the larger univer sities developed outstanding centers of research in Latin American affairs. This was supplemented by the work of a few non-academic research centers. In the academic year 1938-1939, more than 300 colleges and universities in the United States offered courses in Latin American history to some 10,000 students. Courses in literature and geography of Latin America were also offered. The study of the Spanish language and Spanish and Spanish American litera ture became widespread and increased in volume between 191? and 1938, although little attention was paid to Portuguese. American students also began to take an interest in summer sessions in Mexico and Peru. Some of the outstanding Spanish American novels were translated and published in this country, but otherwise books published in Latin America were virtually unobtainable* By 1938, major 7Ibid., p, 316, 166 newspapers and news magazines were maintaining correspond*" ents in Latin America* and Latin American music was be** coming known by means of radio, moving pictures, and a few personal appearances. The art of Latin America, however# was generally little known in the United States during the 1930*s except for that of Mexico, especially the work of its mural painters*^ During the inter bellum period* too, Latin Ameri cans became somewhat more acquainted with the United States. Regular news services were supplemented by short wave radio broadcasts of both news and music. American motion pic tures became increasingly more common, if not always more popular when dealing with Latin American themes. The tourist trade between the two Americas remained small in volume except for Mexico and the Caribbean area, although students of technical subjects came to the United States to study if they were financially able. The demand for Ameri can technical, scientific, and professional books and periodicals increased both in English and in Spanish* On the other hand, the general book and periodical trade remained undeveloped, and American art and literature re mained virtually unknown in Latin America, although some q standard nineteenth century authors had been translated, ®Schurz, op. cit.r pp. 294-305, Slbid. The private foundations,~-The educational efforts of the early religious missionary groups to Latin America were supplemented in the twentieth century by the philan thropic work of private foundations. Several of these included Latin American countries in their field of opera tions. Among the more prominent was the Rockefeller foun dation, established in 1913, Although interested chiefly in the fields of public health, medicine, and agriculture, its work from the beginning included a program in inter- cultural understanding, It was particularly concerned with "the interpretation of contemporary cultures to one another1 * in Latin America as well as elsewhere. The foundation reported in 1951 that . . . scholars and educational programs which were assisted during that period have played important roles in government relations with these countries and were of direct practical use to the Allied cause during World War 11.1° The foundation's work in this field was carried on through its Division of Humanities, Its projects varied annually but were designed to raise the general cultural level and to promote cultural interchange between coun tries, From 1929 to the end of 1953, the Division of ^The Rockefeller Foundation, Annual Report, 1951 (New York; The. Rockefeller Foundation, 1952), pp. 79-80. t 7 Ralph Rogers David, "The Development of Activi ties and Policies of the United States Government in Inter- American Cultural Relations" (unpublished Master's thesis,.. University of Denver, 1951), p, 28., 168 Humanities appropriated a total of $902,92-9*00 in grants to further Latin American studies in its program of inter- 12 cultural understanding# * A second major source of funds and activities for the private support of cultural exchange with Latin America was the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, which was founded in 1910. Its Division of Intercourse and Education and Division of International Law carried on pro grams designed to improve inter-American intellectual understanding. It not only provided funds for scholar ships, books, exhibits, cultural institutes, studies and publications, but it also provided support for programs of other private groups, such as the Council on Foreign Rela- 1 ^ tions and the Foreign Policy Association. The Carnegie Endowment arranged its first exchange of visiting professors between the United States and Latin America during the First World War. Between the two wars, it arranged and subsidized the exchange of professors, scientists, scholars, distinguished citizens, cultural leaders, teachers and students. It helped to establish ^ The Rockefeller Foundation, Statement of the Rockefeller Foundation and the General Education Board Be fore the Special Committee to Investigate Tax Exempt Foun dations. House of Representatives— 83rd Congress (New York: The Rockefeller Foundation, 1954), Appendix B. 1 " 3 JDavid, op. cit., p. 27. 169 international relations clubs in both North and South America, and it supplied them with collections of books on the history, literature, and politics of the other region, as well as books on other subjects,^ The work of international cultural exchange was also undertaken by the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foun dation and by the Julius Rosenwald Fund. These and other foundations financed the study of several thousand foreign students in the United States and sent hundreds of American scholars to foreign countries for research work during the 1 s period between the two wars. The Guggenheim Foundation began its fellowship program in 1925, and in 1930 its first fellowships were granted in Mexico, one in mathematics and one in medicine* By 1948, the Guggenheim Foundation had granted some thirty fellowships to Americans to study in Mexico and about forty to Mexicans to study in the United i / * States. The Guggenheim fellowship program was expanded to include other Latin American countries in the 1930*s so ^Bemis, op. cit., pp. 321-22. ■^Haldore Hanson, The Cultural-Cooperation Program 1938-1943* Department of State Publication No. 2137 (Washington; U. S. Government Printing Office, 1944), pp. 8-9. ■^Donald d. , Brand, "United States-Mexican Scienti fic and Cultural. Relations," The Annals of the American Academy of. Political, and Social Science,, CCL.V (January, 1948), 75., ' " ~ * 170 that scholars might pursue higher studies in the United States* With the outbreak. o£ war in Europe irt 1939* the great foundations began expanding their programs of grants* in-aid* fellowships, and scholarships in the direction of 17 Latin America. ^ The learned societies*— The interest in cultural exchange expressed by the great foundations was paralleled by that of the learned societies that developed after the First World War. Their work was financed in part by funds from the foundations. In 1921, the League of Nations Assembly created the International Committee of Intellectual Cooperation to encourage and facilitate international intellectual cooper ation. This committee, recognized by the League Assembly in 1926 as the Organization of Intellectual Cooperation, stimulated the formation of the International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation in Paris in the same year to serve 1 8 as its secretariat. The institute was supported largely by the French Government, but it also received support from the Rockefeller Foundation and the Carnegie Endowment and eventually from most of the forty-two member governments. The Organization of Intellectual Cooperation directly and. ■^Berais, op* cit.,. n. 17, p« 443, pp. 328-29« "Proposed Educational and Cultural Organization of the: United Nations.," International Conciliation, . CCCCXV' (November, 1945), 731-32.. 171 through cooperating learned, societies and academies con ducted international conferences and research studies, worked on many technical questions, and exchanged informa tion in a variety of intellectual, cultural and scientific fields* To carry on the work in each country, national committees of intellectual cooperation were formed in some * 1 Q forty-two countries. * The work of the committee in the United States was described as follows; In the United States, the National Committee pro moted a study of the relations of education and inter national tinderstanding. It played an important role in stimulating the use of the radio and moving pictures as media for international communication. It sponsored a study of copyright and the rights of intellectual workers in general. And finally, it encouraged the establishment by specialist organizations of technical committees to study the part they can play in the field of international relations.20 Founded in 1926 and receiving its chief financial support from the Carnegie Endowment, the National Committee of the United States of America on International Intel lectual Cooperation organized and collaborated with tech nical committees of other American organizations which served it in an advisory capacity. At the suggestion of ^Gilbert Murray, "Intellectual Cooperation," The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. CCXXXV (September, 1944}, 1-9* ^1. L. Kandel, Intellectual Cooperation: National and International (New York: Bureau of Public ations," Teach ers College, Columbia University, 1944), pp. 44-45, quoted by Howard. E. Wilson, "International Cultural Cooperation," International. Conciliation, CCCCXV (November, 1945), 709.. the Rockefeller Foundation, it studied the question of international copyright and prepared numerous reports on the subject. It presented its recommendations to the Eighth International Conference of the American States at Lima in 1938 and at the First American Conference of National Committees on Intellectual Cooperation at Santiago, Chile, in 1939. It also sponsored conferences on inter- American relations, encouraged the establishment of the International Document Service to serve as a clearing house for important literature on international relations, and published reports of surveys on the study of international relations and international understanding through education in the United States.^ Another scholarly organization with international connections and an interest in international relations was the American Council of Learned Societies. This is a federation of American academies, societies, and associ ations devoted to the advancement of the humanistic studies. By 1944, there were twenty-three member associations. It was organized in 1919 and 1920 in order to cooperate with the newly created Union Academique Internationale. This latter organization was created in Paris in 1919 as a ^National Committee of the United States of America on International Intellectual Cooperation, "Pre liminary Survey of Inter-American. Cultural Activities in the United States," September 25,. 1939, pp.. 87-88 (mimeo graphed),, 173 federation of the principal academies and learned societies of the Allied countries of the First World War* It was among the first of the many international organisations that came into existence in the decade following the First .World. War and that were indicative of the trend among scholars of the different countries toward closer inter national intellectual cooperation. Financed by the founda tions, the American Council cooperated in research projects and publications, in archeological and historical activi ties, in supplying bibliographies and microfilm copies, and in encouraging foreign language study for first hand re search, particularly in areas outside Western Europe*^ The American Council had as one of its component organiza tions a Committee on Latin American Studies which had been formed to promote study and research in neglected fields of Latin American culture,^ The Institute of International Education was another private organization interested in cultural ex change* Founded in 1919 with funds from the Carnegie Endowment, with a former university professor, Dr, Stephen Duggan, at its head, the institute was founded to develop ^•^Waldo G* Leland, "International Intellectual Relations, " The Annals of the American Academy of. Political: and Social Science, CCXXXV (September, 1944), 83-91, ^ N a t i o n a l Committee of the United States: of America, on International, Intellectual, Cooperation,, op.. cit. , „ p« .90 * 174 international understanding and good will by means of edu cational and cultural activities* It became a center of information and advice in its field, published booklets and pamphlets on study abroad, held conferences on problems of international education, and cooperated with agencies in other countries* Convinced that the best way of developing knowledge of the civilization and culture of another people was by personal contact for a sufficiently long period of time, it concentrated on facilitating the exchange of stu dents and teachers between the United States and foreign countries. The president of the Institute developed ex change scholarships with the colleges and universities of the United States, Europe, eastern Asia, and Latin America. By 193$, more than one hundred American colleges and uni versities were allotting one or more partial or full scholarships to the Institute of International Education for exchange purposes. Industrial, commercial, financial and learned organizations, as well as interested indi viduals, also donated scholarships to the institute. From its founding to 1939, the institute facilitated the grant ing of scholarships to more than 2,500 foreign students for study in the United States, and it sent some 2,400 American students to study in European countries. From 1929 to ■1939, the institute brought almost three hundred Latin American students to the United States, for study in higher 175 institutions of learning, and between 1929 and 1935, it arranged for special contingents of teachers and students to come to the United States from Argentina, Brazil, mid Chile* By reducing travel to Europe, the First World War created an interest among Latin Americans in studying in the United States which previously had not existed. When the Second World War started, there were almost 10,000 foreign students in American colleges and universities, 2& twice as many as the number of Americans studying abroad* One of the active but little publicized organize* tions interested in Latin American cultural relations before 1938 was the American Library Association* During the First World War, it developed a library war service and from 1924 to 1929 it operated a library school in Paris.^ In 1920, it established a standing subcommittee on Latin America which by the 1930's was known as the Committee on 26 Library Cooperation with Latin America. Organized inde pendently of the association's International Relations Committee, its purposes in 1931 were ^Stephen Duggan, "International Interchange of Students," The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. CCXXXV (September, 1944), 92-99. 2S Carl H. Milam, "Libraries, Scholars, and the War," The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social~~Science, CCXXXV (September, 1944), 1QQ-1Q6. ^Arthur E. Gropp, "Library Cooperation with Latin America," Bulletin of the American Library Association. XXIX (September, 1935), 638. 176 , * * to serve as a medium for the exchange of informa tion , advice and assistance between libraries and library organizations of the United States and Canada, on the one hand, and Latin-American countries on the other; to promote the exchange of books and magazines by gift, sale and subscription; and to cooperate with the Committee on International Relations*27 The report of the Committee on Library Cooperation with Latin America in 1935 outlined some of its principal activities and something of its philosophy of international relations; The committee has initiated such projects as a survey of libraries in Porto [sic] Rico; compilation of Spanish reading lists; compilation of publications in Spanish on the subject of library practice; collection of clipping materials for a cumulative notebook on the history of Latin American libraries; provision for centralized cooperation through correspondence; the preparation of a guide to library practice in English and Spanish; the preparation of a union catalog of Latin American books. The fulfilment of these projects and others to be undertaken by this committee will con tribute much to the scientific and intellectual world of historical and cultural information of the Latin Americas as well as lay a firmer foundation for friend ly relationships and sympathetic understanding. ° In 1938, the committee reported a field survey of Central American libraries, the stimulation of book ex hibits in Latin America, and several types of technical assistance to Latin American librarians. This latter cate gory included plans for a series of fellowships, a handbook in Spanish on library procedure, and assistance to Latin 2?Henry 0« Severance, "Report of the Committee on Committees," Bulletin of the American Library Association. XXV (May, 1931), 270-73. 2®Gropp, loc. cit. . 177 American librarians both by mail and irt person* In several projects it received support from the Rockefeller Founda tion and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace*^9 In the fall of 1939, the American Library Associ ation placed a full-time executive assistant in an office in the annex of the Library of Congress. Partly financed by the Rockefeller Foundation, it set about immediately to survey the work of other private and government agencies in Latin America and to increase its own contacts with libraries and librarians in the other American republics# For this purpose, it made use of qualified inter-American travelers whenever possible.^ During the period between the two World Wars, the number of non-governmental groups which pioneered in the field of international cultural relations developed rapidly* A survey conducted shortly before the outbreak of the Second World War showed that there were more than a thousand scientific, educational, and cultural organisations ^Arthur e* Gropp, "Library Cooperation with Latin America,1 1 Bulletin of the American Library Association, XXXII (September, 1938), 643* ^Carl h. . Milam,. William. Haygood, and Marion A. Milczewski, "Latin American Activities, of the American, Library Association, " Appendix No* 5 to Minutes, of Meeting of February 25-26, 1942, General Advisory Committee,, Divi sion. of Cultural Relations,, Department of State, Washing ton, D„ G . , - (mimeographed,).., 178 with relations with similar groups abroad*^ Despite apparent gaps in the potential network of cultural relations with Latin America, private means of communication were beginning to develop through which a future official program could be channeled and guided by experience: It must be recognized that before the outset of direct governmental activity in inter-American cultural relations, private groups had laid a broad basis on which the Government could build* No program could have been easily developed without the recognition, use, and cooperation of these private groups.32 Official recognition of the work of private organ izations in the field of cultural relations was given at the Eighth International Conference of American States in Lima in 1938. Specific mention was made of the Carnegie Endowment, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Guggenheim Foundation, and the Institute of International Education, among others "whose complete enumeration would be too ex-* tensive* Of Ben M. Cherrington, "Americavs Future Cultural Relations," The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, CCXXXV (September, 1944),, 8Q* •^David, op» cit», p, 3CU S., Department of State, Report of the Delega-*. tion of the United States of America to the Eighth Inter national Conference of American States (Hashington:, I I . . S . , Government. Printing Office, 1941), p.. 181.., 179 The Development of the Government Program Early activities of the government,--Before 1936. the United States Government expressed only a limited in* terest irt the exchange of cultural information with foreign, countries, Such activity as existed, however, can hardly be considered as a conscious part of a planned foreign policy. One of the first agencies to engage in cultural exchange was the Library of Congress. A joint resolution of Congress on July 20, 1840, authorized the Library of Congress to exchange books and documents for similar pub lications from foreign countries. In 1898, it published a List of Books Relating to Cuba, the first bibliographical work on Latin America, After that date, the Library of Congress accumulated materials covering many phases of Latin American life. In 1939, the Hispanic Foundation was established as a unit of the Library of Congress as a spe cialized agency to build up as complete a collection as possible on Hispanic culture and to send out exchange material in return.^4 As early as 1850, the Smithsonian Institution car ried on an informal, exchange of publications. In 1867, it "^U, S*, Department of State, Cooperation in the Americas, Department of State Publication No., 2971. (Washington: U.. S., Government Printing Office, January, 1948), pp., 41.-44. 180 sent out an offer to foreign governments to make formal agreements for exchanges, and this was accepted by some of them* In 1886, the United States signed conventions at Brussels with seven other countries to exchange official journals, parliamentary annals, and other documents, as well as scientific and literary publications.^ The Smithsonian Institution distributed publications to learned institutions, libraries, and specialists in Latin America, and served as the agency for transmitting scientific and literary exchanges between the United States Government, institutions, and individuals in this country and corre sponding units in Latin America. It also sent experts to travel and study in the Latin American republics*^6 Created in 1867, the United States Office of Edu cation early began to study educational systems in foreign countries. Before the Second World War, it had accumulated files on educational exchange between the United States and Latin America, and in 1937-1938 it released a radio program entitled "Brave New World, " which outlined the history of Latin America. Other government agencies also produced motion pictures, booklets, or other information of interest o c "International ExchanH Department of State Bulletin, IV (May 10, 1941.)., 56 3^National Committee of the United States of America on International. Intellectual Cooperation,., op., cit. , „ pp., 12,-13., 181 to cur pertaining to Latin America. ^ Multilateral cultural cooperation**-Before 1938, the principal focal point of cultural relations between the United States and Latin America was the Pan American Union. The Pan American movement after 1890 in general encouraged the exchange of culture and humanity between the United States and the other American republics: Such indeed was its most useful purpose before 1928. . . . In this direction the Pan American Union soon came to have its most far-reaching influence. Without a doubt the Union has been the greatest single factor for international education in the Western Hemisphere. Its effect has been more potent in the United States, the seat of the Pan American Union, than in any other republic, The first effort in the direction of Pan American cultural activities was the creation of the Columbus Memorial Library as the result of a resolution of the First International Conference of American States in 1890 in Washington, D. C. It collected "historical, geographical and literary works, maps, manuscripts, and official docu ments relating to the history and civilization of America." It was housed in the building of the Pan American Union constructed with funds contributed by the Carnegie Endow ment.^^ 3^Ibid. 33Bemis, op. cit. „ p. 319. 3%bid. 182 By 1938, the Pan American Union had developed front a commercial bureau into an international secretariat of experts 'who gathered data, disseminated information, answered inquiries, undertook special studies, and arranged for the preliminary details of inter-American conferences, exchanges, publications, and other activities,4® Schurz states that . « * through the medium of its publications, its large library, its widespread extension work, its promotion of Latin-American music, and in many other ways, the Pan American Union is a major force in the spread of a better understanding among all the peoples of the Americas.^1 Much of the work in inter“American cultural rela tions by the Pan American Union was conducted by the Divi sion of Education, which was established in 1917. Its name was changed to the Division of Intellectual Cooperation in 1929 to cover a broader scope of activities. Besides dis seminating information on art, literature, and science, it also promoted the exchange of teachers and students. In 1935, a Travel Division began to promote inter-American travel. The Bulletin of the Pan American Union, published for fifty years, was a vehicle for disseminating informa tion on the activities of the Union and of member states. Visual aids in slides and motion picture films were loaned 4®ibid., , pp. 319-20, 41 Setters op. c it, „ p., 2 , 8 . 6 « 183 to educational institutions and clubs, and the Union became the scene of concerts, art exhibits and other aspects of the culture of Latin America.^ One of the major activities of the Pan American Union was to help organize special conferences of a tech nical and non-political nature which arose as the result of major diplomatic conferences or which it organized itself* Between 1890 and 1940, there were 159 special Pan American congresses or conferences, and most of them took place after the First World War* These meetings resulted in some seventy*three inter*American organizations. Many of them were of special interest to professional, scientific, humanitarian, and cultural groups in the two Americas, Attending such meetings were scholars, teachers, physicians, scientists, journalists, bankers, engineers, artists, and others.^ Among the subjects covered by these specialized conferences were agriculture, architecture, child welfare, finance, travel, communications, transportation, engineer ing, housing, Indian life, history, geography, labor rela tions, medicine, sanitation, and many others.^ By 1938, the United States was officially a member of six important ^David, op. cit., pp. 22*23. / ^ Bemis, op. cit., pp. 262, 320. ^Edward 0* Guerrant, Roosevelts Good Neighbor Policy (Albuquerque.;. University of New Mexico Press,, 1950), pp., 12.9 *3 Q . , 184 inter-American specialized organizations of an official character and three of a semi-official nature. Among the former were the Pan American Sanitary Bureau., with head quarters in Washington, D. C., and the Pan American Insti tute of Geography and History, with headquarters in Mexico City.45 Until the rise of nazi power in Germany., the United States Government took little interest in developing a program of cultural relations with Latin America.4^ In some areas of activity it made definite contributions, but in others it merely acquiesced to Latin wishes or declined to participate. After 1902, it had participated actively in matters of public health and sanitation.4^ There was some evidence of willingness to cooperate in the fields of science, agriculture, and education, particularly In send ing delegates to conferences. It had ratified conventions of 1902 and 1910 on the protection of literary and artistic copyrights but had failed to ratify the 1928 revision. It had ratified a convention of 1902 to exchange publications, and it had shown a modicum of interest through the Library 45David, op. cit., pp. 20-21. 4^Guerrant, op. cit., pp. 115-16. 4^U. S., Department of State, Report of the Dele gates of the United States of America to the Seventh Inter*- national Conference of American States (Washington: U* S* Government Printing Office, 1934),, pp« 298„ 304-305,* .309-11, 316, 319, 321, 185 of Congress in cooperating in bibliographical and library 48 matters, Xn 1933 at the Seventh Inter-American Conference in Montevideo, the United States delegation introduced a resolution that was adopted, with additional provisions Submitted by other countries, to stimulate the interchange of bibliographical material. The United States abstained from voting, however, on two resolutions providing exemp tions from customs duties on books and periodicals and on paintings and sculpture by artists of the Americas intended for exhibits. Of seventeen projects reported out from the committee on intellectual cooperation at Montevideo, the United States voted favorably on ten and abstained on four.^ Despite a record of something less than whole hearted support for it, a United States delegate at Monte video stated that the United States was in sympathy with the work of cultural relations. He stated that this country was interested in placing "great emphasis" on in tellectual cooperation with the other American republics; That the people of the United States are eager to gain a greater knowledge and appreciation, of the intel lectual achievements of Latin America is evidenced, by the. increasing numbers of scholars and. institutions of ^Ibid,, pp., 29 7 **3 2 - 6 . > Ibid. , s < pp., 40-43.* 186 learning in my country which are turning their atten^ tion more and more to the countries to the south of us* We are anxious that your great scholars and institu tions of learning should get better acquainted with us, 50 In general, however, the delegates of the United States declined to sign agreements involving the exercise of control over educational and cultural matters, including the press, radio, and moving pictures, The reasons given were that the United States Government had no legislative or constitutional authority to interfere with the states and private endeavor in these fields- This was the reason advanced at Montevideo in 1933 for refusing to sign the convention on the revision of textbooks and for not taking a more active part in encouraging the exchange of students 51 and professors. This was also the reason given for not signing the Convention Concerning the Peaceful Orientation of Public Instruction and the Convention Concerning Facili ties for Educational and Publicity Films at Buenos Aires in 1936*52 Ibid,, pp. 43-44* C 1 - ' • ‘ ■Bemis, op. cit*. p. 324; U* S., Department of State, Report of the Delegates of the United States of America to the Seventh International Conference of American States,, pp* . 150, 305. 325-26. ’ 5^u. S., Department of State, Report of the Dele gation of the United States of America to the Inter- American Conference for the Maintenance of Peace (Washing’ * torn U„ S.* Government Printing Office, 1937), pp., 35-36., 18? In 1933, the United States delegation disclaimed any responsibility of its government for the exchange of students and professors, but it reported that the Office of Education had circulated information on this subject* The Pan American Union and a number of universities, moreover, 53 facilitated this type of exchange. Because its govern" ment had a constitutional inability to provide funds for educational matters, the United States delegation insisted that funds for this purpose should be provided only "by voluntary annual contributions from the interested coun- 54 tries, private institutions, or philanthropists." In 1936, however, the United States was ready to take its first positive steps toward a government*supported cultural relations program. It was the United States dele gation that proposed the Convention for the Promotion of Inter-American Cultural Relations which was adopted by the conference* The constitutional problem of the United States was met by inserting an article disclaiming any obligation on the part of the signatory powers to "inter fere with the independence of its institutions of learning or with the freedom of academic teaching and administration -^U* S., Department of State, Report of the Dele gates of the United States of America to the Seventh Inter-. national. Conference of American States, p« 44. 54ibid. , , p., 41* 188 therein. The more active interest in cultural relations demonstrated hy the United States was justified by a state** ment that cultural relations helped to maintain the peace, the main purpose of the conference: The United States was convinced that the maintenance of peace requires not only the existence of machinery for the settlement of international disputes but also the existence of a will to use that machinery. It was be lieved that the promotion of cultural relationships was one of the most practical means of developing in the American republics a public opinion which would favor and support a rule of peace throughout the Western Hemisphere. The Convention for the Promotion of Inter-American Cultural Relations provided for the exchange between each ratifying country of two graduate students or teachers every year and the exchange of one professor in alternate years to teach or conduct special research, preferably the former. In the case of the students, the government award ing the fellowship provided tuition and a maintenance allowance, but the sending country or the student was to provide travel and incidental expenses* In the case of the 57 professor, the sending government was to pay all expenses. 55u. s., Department of State, Report of the Delega tion of the United States of America to the Inter-American Conference for the Maintenance of Peace, pp. 34, 171. . ^Ibid. , > 34 „ ^^Ibid. . , pp.. 167-75. 189 Four other cultural conventions of the same confer" ence provided for the exchange of private and official publications* the granting of facilities for art exhibits* the peaceful orientation of instruction in public school systems and through public channels of communication* and the extension of facilities for educational* professional* scientific, technical and travel films. All of these were intended to increase the circulation of information and encourage attitudes of international understanding and cooperation that would support the pacific settlement of disputes and the renunciation of war.^ When the Eighth International Conference of Ameri- can States met in Lima in 1938, the Americas were deeply concerned about disturbed conditions in Europe. They gave expression to their political unity with the Declaration of the Principles of the Solidarity of America and they placed increased emphasis on the importance of cultural relations to peace. The Declaration of American Principles stated: CO Ibid., pp. 176-207. Of sixty-four resolutions, recommendations, and declarations adopted by the Buenos Aires conference, thirty-one were concerned with some aspect of cultural relations. These provided for the dis semination of cultural information and knowledge of the Americas through the exchange of visits by private groups, through radio broadcasts, the press, exhibits, libraries, bibliographies, and education. They ranged in caliber from expressions of gratitude to recommendations for intellectu al, artistic, and literary cooperation* The avowed, objec tive of most of them was. mutual understanding, and. peace* Ibid. . , , pp., 209, 21.3, 2.16-2,7 , 246-56* 190 peaceful collaboration between representatives of the various States and the development of intellectual interchange among their peoples are conducive to an understanding by each of the problems of the other as well as of problems common to all, and makes more readily possible the peaceful adjustment of inter national controversies.59 There were no conventions drawn up at the Lima con ference, but there were 112 resolutions, declarations, recommendations, and agreements, of which more than one- third were concerned with inter-American cultural rela tions. ^ The United States delegation participated actively at the Lima conference in encouraging cultural relations. In his opening address, the Secretary of State acknowledged the need for continuing the work in cultural relations, along with strengthening the foundations of international J:7U. S., Department of State, Report of the Delega tion of the United States of America to the Eighth Inter national Conference of American States (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1941), p. 191. ^Many of them dealt with exchanges of music, art, books, exhibits, students, teachers, technical experts, and scientific knowledge. Others recommended greater use of radio, moving pictures, tourist travel, and cultural cere monies in promoting inter-American understanding. In creased emphasis was placed on the field of education through recommendations for vacation courses in the other Americas, the study of the American languages, the recogni-j tion of academic work, done in other countries, and the teaching of democratic principles and peaceful means, of solving international disagreements* The conference; com* mended previous governmental and private: efforts in cul tural relations, and, encouraged future cooperative endeavors* Ibid. , , , pp., 16Q-8.3.* 191 law and removing economic barriers, in order to maintain peace; Our Conference must carry forward the work of providing wider and stronger foundations for international cul tural relations and better understanding among nations-' again* among ourselves* as well as between each of us and the rest of the world. This work of moral disarma ment* already far advanced on the American Continent, is indispensable for the creation and maintenance of a civilised world-order under law,61 Of twelve projects the United States delegation presented to the conference* eight were concerned with cul tural affairs. It particularly urged the other nations to expedite their ratification of the Buenos Aires Convention for the Promotion of Inter-American Cultural R e l a t i o n s . ^2 The principal government agencies.--The avowed pur pose of the United States in negotiating the cultural con ventions at Buenos Aires was the maintenance of peace. The pressure from the Axis powers in the field of cultural relations and propaganda was being felt, however, in the United States with increasing intensity in the period be tween 1936 and the entry of this country into the war in December of 1941.^3 61Ibid», pp. 99-101. 62£bid*j= PP* 193-210. ^Bemis, op., cit* „ p* 326; Guerrant, op. cit. . f l pp. 116-17; Charles A. H. Thomson, Overseas Information Service of the United States Government (Washington; The Brookings Institution, 1948), 160; Ruth Emily McMurry and Muna; Lee, The Cultural Approach (Chapel. Hill; Univer sity' of North Carolina. Press., 1947)-* p* 2.36;, Minutes of, It was dating this period that three agencies were established which were concerned with cultural relations with Latin America. These were the Interdepartmental Com* mittee on Scientific and Cultural Cooperation, the Division of Cultural Relations in the Department of State, and the Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs. The work of these three organizations in Latin America was closely related and conducted under the general direction of the Department of State.^ The Interdepartmental Committee, established in 1938, was principally concerned with increasing the serv ices of established government agencies to the Latin Ameri can countries on a cooperative basis. The Division of Cultural Relations, founded shortly afterwards in the same year, was designed at first chiefly to stimulate scientific General Meeting of the Advisory Committee, Division of Cul tural Relations, Department of State, Washington, Novem ber 8, 1938 (typewritten); Minutes of Second Meeting of Committee on Cultural Relations, Division of Cultural Rela tions, Department of State, Washington, November 21, 1938 (typewritten). The pressure for the entry of the United States into the field of cultural relations was not con fined to pressure from the Axis powers alone. The activi ties of France and Great Britain, as well as other European countries, also served to stimulate United States activity. See the last two references cited above and Hanson, op. , cit«« pp. 18-23. ^Charles A. H*. Thomson, op. cit. „ p. 16Q; Donald W« Rowland, History of the Office of the Coordinator of Inter- American Affairs (Washington; U-« S.. Government, Printing Office, 1947),, p* 91- and cultural contacts with Latin America by private agenr cies* Both were limited in the scope of their operations. When the international crisis caused by the war in Europe increased, the Office of the Coordinator was established in 1940 to supplement the work of building a program of hemi sphere solidarity through additional government and private activities,^ The Interdepartmental Committee Basic authority and objectives.— At the suggestion of President Roosevelt, the Undersecretary of State, Sumner Welles, called into being the Interdepartmental Committee for Cooperation with the American Republics, known later as the Interdepartmental Committee on Scientific and Cultural Cooperation, The committee was organized under the legal authorization of a statute of May 26, 1938, and the Conven tion for the Promotion of Inter-American Cultural Relations of Buenos Aires, After a preliminary study and report to the President, which he transmitted to the Bureau of the Budget and the Congress, two additional laws were passed in 1939 authorizing the status and work of the committee and the cultural relations program in Latin America* These were Public Law 63 and Public Law 355 of the 76th Congress,, first session,^6 These laws authorized the temporary fi S Charles A. H., Thomson,, op.. cit,„ pp« 3“5« 66Ibid. , , p*. 161., 194 detail of government employees to the American Republics, Liberia, and the Philippines, and they authorized the President to use the services of the various agencies of the executive branch of the government in carrying out through cooperative endeavors the conventions, resolutions, declarations, and recommendations of the Buenos Aires and Lima conferences,^ The Interdepartmental Committee on Scientific and Cultural Cooperation was created "to undertake a permanent, cooperative program for the development of economic, cul tural, and scientific relations.'1 Under the leadership of the Department of State, it was to coordinate the activi ties of departments and agencies of the government in these fields,^ The purpose of the program was stated as follows: The objective of the program has been to assist those countries in their social and economic develop ment through projects of mutual advantage to them and to the United States. As byproducts of this assist ance, the United States has sought to strengthen political solidarity with those friendly countries and to increase understanding of United States aims,, life, and institutions among their peoples. 67U. S., Department of State, Cooperation in the Americas, pp, 103-105. ^Henry H„ McGeorge., "Detail of U, S„ Personnel to Other Governments," Department of State Bulletin, XXV (January 20, 1946), 72. S., Advisory Commission on Educational Ex change, Trading. Ideas with the World. Department, of. State Publication; No« 3551 (Washington:; U., S ' . , Government; Printing Office,, October,' 1.949),. p.. 3 . 6 . . 195 Although the immediate contribution of the program to the defense of the United States was recognized* it was conceived of as a long-term program even during the war to develop a “closer and more sympathetic understanding" be tween the United States and Latin America*^ It was stated after the war that , , * the program of the Committee is long-range, not something formulated as an instrument of national defense to be pursued with great intensity in time of war and discontinued with cessation of hostilities. Its objective is to strengthen inter-American political solidarity and to develop the economic and social well-being of the Americas on a sound and permanent basis.71 From the beginning of its operations, the control of the committee’s program in terms of foreign policy was vested in the Department of State through control of the budget and the committee’s secretariat* The proposals of the various cooperating agencies were channeled through the secretariat to the committee and then presented to the Bureau of the Budget and the Congress by the department* After funds were appropriated, they were turned over to the department for allocation to the operating agencies after Raymund L*. Zwemer, "The Interdepartmental. Com mittee on Cooperation with the American Republics," Depart ment of State Bulletin, . JCI (September_ 24, 1944),. 320.* S*, Department of State,, Activities of the. Interdepartmental Committee on Scientific and Cultural Cooperation, , Department, of State. Publication No., 2622. (Washington?, U-. S., Government, Printing Off ice.,. June 30, 1946.),. p* 4 5 . . - , 196 72 consultation with them through the committee. The general policy of the committee was to see that "each project should be a cooperative undertaking on the 73 part of the nations concerned-" The projects had to be of mutual interest and benefit to the United States and the other countries. The need for them was jointly assessed, agreements were worked out jointly, and both the United States and the foreign government contributed to the cost. United States experts worked with officials and profession al groups in studying scientific and technical problems. The United States Government established and directed ex perimental stations, trained native personnel, and provided technical equipment- The other governments contributed land, buildings, construction, personnel, transportation and other services,^ Furthermore, it was the general policy of the committee that . . . the over-all program should consist of a suffi cient number of projects in the economic, scientific, and intellectual fields to result in a well-rounded 72 Charles A. H. Thomson, op. cit., pp* 161-62; U. S.., Department of State, The Program of the Interdepart mental Committee on Scientific and.Cultural Cooperation,,^ Department of State Publication No- 2994 (Washingtons U- S. Government Printing Office, 1947)# pp« 2~3« U* Si.y Department of State, Activities of the Interdepartmental Committee on Scientific.and Cultural Cooperation, , p.. 44. 7^U.. S ., Department, o f S ta te , The Record, IV (M arch-A pril., 1 9 4 8 ), 8. plan of cooperative action that will reach people of all walks of life in the cooperating c o u n t r i e s *75 The major activities of the committee*."•‘The three main divisions of the program of the Interdepartmental Com* mittee were the exchange of persons, cooperative scientific and technical projects, and the exchange of special in formation. These functions tended to overlap, and all three might be integrated closely in the program of a. single agency.^ The committee administered the technical training fellowships program, in which twenty agencies of ten govern ment departments or independent agencies offered special ized training in their technical and professional operations in the United States to employees of the Latin American governments. From 1938 to 1945, twelve agencies of the United States Government loaned sixty-three experts to Latin American countries *^7 Seven major departments or 75u. S., Department of State, Activities of the Interdepartmental Committee on Scientific and Cultural Cooperation, p. 44. " " " 7^ibid. „ p. 3. ^Charles A« H. Thomson, op. cit.« p. 163. The fields of the experts included agriculture, veterinary medicine, tropical agriculture, soil-conservation, cotton- ginning, meteorology, laboratory construction, vital statistics, statistics, rubber production, chemistry, rail ways, tariff and commercial policy, highway engineering, livestock,, meat-refrigeration, fisheries, rural education, geology, coal, immigration, police instruction, prisons, librarians, cost, guard patrol, boat operations, taxation and finance. Ibid. , „ n« 8, pp., 1.73-74. agencies of government, including eleven subordinate units, were active in the program of cooperative scientific and technical projects,^ The exchange of information program received support from such agencies as the Office of Educa- tion, the Women's Bureau, the Division of Labor Standards, the Library of Congress, and the Department of State* Xhe latter supported a program of translating certain govern ment publications for distribution to Latin America*^ After the war, the program of the committee con tinued much as it had previously* By 1949, about 1,700 United States Government technicians had been sent to Latin America and some 2., 000 younger scientists and technicians had been brought to the United States for training* Major scientific and technical projects had been conducted in thirty different fields of activity in collaboration with other countries* In 194S, the Department of State trans ferred funds to ten agencies, including twenty-nine tech nical bureaus, to conduct such projects. In 1949, nine agencies, including twenty-eight technical bureaus, par ticipated in the program* There were twenty-five federal ^Ibid., p* 163* These included the Department of Agriculture, Census Bureau, Civil Aeronautics Administrac tion, Coast and Geodetic Survey,. Weather Bureau,. Office of Education, Public Health Service, Department of the In terior, Children's Bureau, Women's Bureau, Library of Congress, and the Smithsonian. Institution., Ibid. , „ n.. 9, p., 174.. I b i d .,t l pp.,, 1,63-64., 199 agencies on which the Department of State could call for OQ assistance. After 1949, the Interdepartmental Committee ceased to exist, but its program was taken over as part of the world-wide program of technical assistance, better known as the "Point Four" program, under a separate administration. The Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs Objectives and scope of operations,--With the German successes in Europe after 1939, it became more ap parent that the United States must look to its own defense, both militarily and economically. With strategic materials unavailable in Europe for the military machine of the United States and with Latin American trade with Europe cut off by the war, the need for mutual economic assistance came into sharper focus. The strengthening of the econo mies of Latin America would not only increase their power to resist nazi aggression if need be, but it would protect the flank of the United States at the same time that it provided a source of raw materials and a market for the United States% Lt would also serve the double purpose of denying such trade to the Axis and provide sufficient era1 * ployment to reduce economic discontent and possible ^®U. S., Advisory Commission on Educational, E x . - : • change,, op. cit., pp., .3, 10,. 2Q0 disorder* This, in turn, would contribute to blunting the edge of the organized propaganda campaign against the United States which had accompanied the German economic 81 penetration of Latin America. In view of the interlocking relationships involving national defense, commerce, and propaganda, the Council of National Defense, with the approval of the President, established by executive order on August 16, 1940, the Office for Coordination of Commercial and Cultural Rela tions between the American Republics,82 On July 30, 1941, the agency was placed under the Office for Emergency Manage ment, its name was changed to the Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs, and certain of its duties and relationships were clarified. Its name was again changed on March 23, 1945, to the Office of Inter-American Affairs. Under its third name, it was to last until May 20, 1946, when some of its operations were terminated and others were 83 transferred to the Department of State.The essential features of its basic instructions, however, were not materially altered by the changes in name, although the agency showed great freedom and maneuverability in its 0*1 OARowland, op., cit., pp.. 3-7. 8 2 Ibid.. 88 Ibid. . „ pp:„ 280.-‘ 84 , ,. O A operations as conditions changed* The executive order of August 16, 1940, ■which appointed Nelson A* Rockefeller as Coordinator,, provided that the new office was . . . to insure proper coordination of, and economy and efficiency in, the activities of the Government with respect to Hemisphere defense, with particular refer ence to the commercial and cultural aspects of the problem. For these purposes, the Coordinator was to establish liaison with both government and private agencies, to "con sider and correlate proposals of the Government with respect to Hemisphere defense, commercial and cultural relations,n to make recommendations to the various govem- ment agencies, and to recommend such new legislation as might be deemed essential. The Coordinator was specifi cally charged in the cultural field with . . . the formulation and the execution of a program in cooperation with the State Department which, by effec tive use of Governmental and private facilities in such fields as the arts and sciences, education and travel, the radio, the press, and the cinema, will further national defense and strengthen the bonds between the nations of the Western Hemisphere* ^ Since it was created to meet the international emergency, the general policy of the Office of the 84Ibid. , „ pp* 8, 175* 8^Ibid.B p* 180; "Office for Coordination of Com mercial and, Cultural Relations between, the American Repub lics, " Department of State Bulletin,, III, (August 14,, 1940),, 1 ,5 1.. 202 Coordinator in all programs was to promote activities that would encourage hemisphere solidarity for the immediate purpose of national defense* However, it was the "constant aim of the Office to integrate short-term emergency meas- ures with plans for long-range development." In carrying out its programs, it first took steps to stimulate and coordinate the activities of both public and private agen cies. If this proved impossible, it engaged directly in oc operations itself. The scope of operations of the Office of the Co ordinator was reviewed toward the close of the war by Nelson Rockefeller in a radio address on March 31, 1945: It is the policy of the United States to encourage and assist in the development of those forces which make for economic development, a rising standard of living, and the growth of democracy. This means cooperation in the fields of education, health and sanitation, de velopment of food supplies for internal consumption, transportation, industrialization, together with a free flow of information. All of these factors lead to the betterment of the conditions of life of the people, and encourage the growth of knowledge and understanding. For the past four and a half years the Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs, with which I was formerly connected, has been working in all these fields throughout the Americas,8' The commercial aspects of the Coordinator's assign ment were approached immediately and were given greater 88Rowland, op. cit., pp« 165-75J, tl* S., Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs, "Programs in the Fields of Cultural Relations, Health and Security,, r Novem ber 1, 1941, p., 1 (mimeographed) “ ^ 1 ’ America‘ ‘ s ; Good. Neighbors, ' ■ Department of State Bulletin, XIX (April 1, 1,945), 547-'54,« . 203 emphasis in the first two years -of the agency*s existence* War shortages and conflicting jurisdiction with other agencies of the government limited the scope of the Co ordinator'* $ activities in the economic fields* however, as the war progressed.^ The Coordinator found that the major responsibility for economic, commercial, financial and strategic action was clearly vested elsewhere in estab lished government agencies. Consequently, he turned his attention to cultural relations and an information program: The cultural and informational program, neglected at the outset, became the largest and most important element of his remaining functions, for which he was better equipped than his competitors. These functions, combined with certain specialized work in the economic and cultural fields, comprised the main tasks of his office until its dissolution. The information program.--In the information field, the agency was guided by both the Department of State and the Office of War Information in broad policy matters. Until 1943, greater emphasis was placed on counteracting the Axis propaganda campaign. After that date, more em phasis was placed on providing a flow of information that would stimulate continued effort in the economic field and discourage political instability in order to provide greater unity for the prosecution of the war.Greater ^Rowland, op. cit., pp. 9-10.. ^Charles A., H* Thomson, op>. cit.p. 119. Rowland,,-, op.'. cit> pp.i 41-42* 204 emphasis was placed, too, on. the reasons for dislocations arising from the war effort, the successful war activities of the United States, and "demonstrating American character, purpose, and interest."^ The office made no deliberate misrepresentation of the facts, but it did select items and emphasized ideas which would place the United States in the most favorable and convincing light* Information adverse to the interests of the United States was admitted but not stressed.^ Convinced of the need for an atmosphere of mutual understanding that would let Latin Americans know that the campaign for hemisphere solidarity was a two-way program, the office also supplied information about Latin America to the United States.^ The activities utilizing mass media of communica tion to disseminate information were placed in the three major divisions of press and publications, radio, and motion pictures.^ It was estimated that these three media reached about 25 per cent of the people in Latin America.^ 9^Charles A. H* Thomson, op* cit.. p, 123. 9^Rowland, op. cit.. p. 42. ^Ibid., pp. 10, 105* ^Ibid., p. 156. 95U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. National War Agencies Appropriation Bill for 1944, 78th Cong.,i 1st Sess... 19&3.7 Part 1, P., 140. 205 In furnishing news to Latin America* the Coordi nator supplemented hut did not compete with the commercial press associations* A daily news report and commentary was distributed by short wave radio and this was supplemented by feature articles, news letters, photographs, newsmaps, and cartoons. More than a thousand Latin American news papers were serviced this way* In addition, press and publications specialists distributed posters, placards, pamphlets, cartoon booklets, and a monthly illustrated smooth paper magazine, En Guardia. The office also en couraged American firms to increase their advertising in Latin America and American news and book publishers to pro- 96 vide special editions for Latin America. In 1941, the Coordinator began a policy of provid ing financial assistance and guidance to private and com mercial short wave radio broadcasting to Latin America. In order to provide adequate coverage, competitive practices were converted into a concerted effort in the national in terest. Six private companies established a central office, pooled their efforts, and increased their broad casting power. By April, 1944, eighteen stations were broadcasting to Latin America. Two companies established affiliated radio chains in Latin America, and other Latin American stations were given direct assistance. Programs ^^Rowland, op. cit. „ pp., 41-56., 206 were broadcast directly from the United States by short wave and indirectly in Latin America by rebroadcasting* transcriptions* and local production. The Coordinator maintained control over programs and production originating in the United States through general content directives. Programs included news, news features* entertainment, interviews with prominent Latin American visitors* dramatic shows, sports events, and musical programs. "Great em phasis was laid on programs which would stress the friend ship of the countries of the hemisphere and the values of democracy. *'97 In the motion picture field, the Coordinator adopted tactics similar to those used in the field of radio. In order to eliminate Axis films in Latin American commer cial theaters* the motion picture industries were encour aged to pool their efforts and to cooperate with Latin American movie industries in increasing the production and distribution of feature pictures, short subjects* cartoons, and newsreels of interest to Latin American audiences. Through the granting of subsidies and guarantees against financial loss, the Coordinator secured cooperation in terms of content. This included efforts to reduce the cir culation of films with an unfavorable impression of the 97ibid.> pp. 57-65. 20 7 United States and of Latin Americans* as well as to in crease the number of those with positive themes designed to build hemisphere solidarity. The Coordinator either pro duced or secured from government agencies* business firms* professional associations, and the motion picture industry itself about seven hundred 16 mm. documentary newsreels and educational films* Many of these proved useful in supple menting work in the fields of health and sanitation, food supply, and education* They were shown to non-commercial audiences in schools, universities, cultural institutions, and other organizations* The distribution of some 300 projectors and nearly seventy sound trucks facilitated this work* By the end of the war, the audience for commercial films was approximately 20,000,000 weekly and for the non-commercial films it was approximately 3,000,000 per month. ^ To represent the Coordinator in Latin America, the office organized what became known as "coordination com mittees." These were formed from among resident Americans in Latin American cities who volunteered their services without pay for the purpose of assisting the Coordinator's programs. Before 1942, their existence was intended to be kept secret, for they were established to "nullify the sub versive efforts" of Axis groups by carrying on work "which 9^Ibid.,, pp., 67-82.. the United states Government officially could not do**" They were technically independent of both the Coordinator and the United States embassy or legation, but they re ceived funds and instructions from the former and consulted closely with and could be controlled considerably by the latter. Paid executive secretaries were employed by the committees. Eventually about six hundred persons were em ployed to carry out the work. Regional committees were established in most of the republics. Mexico had as many as twenty. At first, they were expected to support all the programs of the Coordinator--economic, informational and cultural— but by the end of the war, some 95 per cent of their efforts was concerned with the press, radio, and motion picture programs. They cooperated, however, in the work of cultural relations. The ’'coordination committees" proved particularly valuable in reporting local attitudes, in serving as an outlet for channeling information programs to meet local conditions, and in evaluating results. At the end of the war, they were disbanded.^ The cultural relations program.--At first, the Coordinator's office shared with the Department of State the responsibility for cultural and educational projects in Latin America. The Coordinator established a Division of Cultural Relations for this purpose in the fall of 1940. 9 9 Ibid., p p 245- 60» 209 In the spring o£ 1942* this was: changed to the Science and Education Division and placed under the direction of the Information Department* To provide guidance and direct operations* the division established art, music* literary, publications, education, and fellowship interchange com mittees* Although these committees indicate to some extent the scope of operations, the division at first engaged in a variety of cultural projects that included these and other topics without regard for a fixed pattern.*^0 To demonstrate that the United States was not devoid of purely cultural endeavors, the Coordinator sent on tours of South America a ballet group, a sculptor to make busts of ten Latin American presidents, exhibits of contemporary American paintings on loan from four major museums, and the Yale Glee Club. It also sent tennis players, motion picture actors, and ten archeological ex peditions. Reciprocally, It invited from Latin America art exhibits, a Chilean ski. team, swimming champions, and other groups. To care for Latin American visitors, it estab lished reception facilities in the United States. With the active participation of the United States in the war, the scope of the activities of the Coordinator in cultural relations was somewhat narrowed, and more 1Q0Ibid. i. pp. 91-93.. 1Q1Ibid., pp., 93-97., emphasis was placed on educational matters, which had Been carried on from the beginning* The office supported the intef-Americ an travel and residence of lecturers, profess sors, graduate students, and scholars* It stimulated special conferences, courses, lecture series, essay con tests, and Inter-American Centers in the United States to encourage and demonstrate interest in Latin America among the various educational and community groups in this coun try. It assisted in the translation, publication, and distribution of books on United States history, music, art, education and other topics. This was done by aiding pub lishers in both Latin America and the United States. It also fostered the publication of guidebooks on Latin America, anthologies of Latin American literature, teaching aids, and other materials for use in the United S t a t e s , Possibly more than any other division in the Coordinator’s office, the cultural relations group stressed a two-way interchange of both persons and materials, In order to aid in eliminating the influence of German and Italian schools, the Coordinator cooperated with the Office of Education and the Department of State in allotting funds to strengthen United States schools in 1Q2Ibid., pp. 93-100* ■^Charles a . h . Thomson, op. cit*. n. 41, p. 155* Latin. America.. Xt also distributed books, films, record” ings, and educational exhibits to Latin American schools and took steps to encourage the teaching of English as a foreign language. Working through the American Council of Learned Societies, it provided financial aid to United States cultural institutes in several countries, including Mexico. Through the American Council of Learned Societies and the American Library Association, it provided funds to help build up the libraries of the cultural institutes and to establish American libraries in Mexico City, Managua, and Montevideo. In July, 1943, after agreements made in 1942, the Department of State assumed responsibility for long-range activities in the fields of assistance to cultural insti tutes, libraries, and American schools, the exchange of students, leaders, and in-service trainees, the translation and exchange of books and other publications, and exchanges 105 in art and music. After 1943, the Coordinator’s work in education was largely limited to working with Latin American school •^O^Rowland, op. cit., pp. 92-95. l05U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, National War Agencies Appropriation Bill for 1944, 76th Cong., 1st Sess., 1943, Part 1, p. 215; " letter from Sumner Welles, Undersecretary of State, to Nelson Rockefeller, Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs, Washington, August 12, 1942. systems in vocational,, health* and ratal education.,, trains ing programs for elementary and secondary teachers, and administrators, the distribution of instructional materials* and English teaching programs* Xo perforin this work* the Coordinator founded in September, 1943, the Inter-American Educational Foundation* The foundation entered into bi lateral agreements for specific programs with the minis tries of education for joint contributions of funds, materials, and personnel. Fifteen agreements were signed with fourteen Latin American republics and in 1945 and 1946 some fifty specialists were sent to Latin America. In these two years, nearly 500,000 books, maps, pamphlets, charts, and other teaching aids were sent to the other American nations, and other materials were created locally* Selected administrators and teachers were brought to the United States to lecture, study, and otherwise participate in educational programs. Although much of its work was admittedly of long-range influence, attention was chiefly focused on those activities that would assist the war effort by improving the basic economy. A continuing cor poration with agreements outstanding at the end of the war, the Inter-American Educational Foundation was transferred to the Department of State in May, 1 9 4 6 . Commitments made by the foundation before the transfer were scheduled ^^Rowland, on. cit. * pp. 100-102. . . . 213 ta run through the fiscal year 1948,^°^ Technical assistance urograms«--Some, of the Coordi- natar* s work was similar to that of the Interdepartmental Committee on Scientific and Cultural Cooperation, The Coordinator conducted training programs and inspection trips for Latin American officials, engineers, and techni cians in the United States, and he sent United States ex perts to Latin America to conduct surveys for post-war developments and to help solve Latin American economic and transportation problems,^ 8 Under the original sponsorship of its Division of Cultural Relations, the Office of the Coordinator was instrumental in establishing the Inter- American Institute of Agricultural Sciences at Turrialba, Costa Rica. In 1942, following a pattern similar to that estab lished by the Rockefeller Foundation, the Coordinator established the Institute of Inter-American Affairs as a government corporation to offer training and assistance in health, sanitation, and food supply. Cooperative projects, called servicios, were established in Latin America through the various ministries of health and agriculture, and * L0^U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. National War Agencies Appropriation Bill for 1946, 79th Cong., 1st Sess.,1945, p. 533. * ^Rowland, on. cit.. pp. 9“1Q« .........' 214 professional and technical personnel in these fields were brought to the United States for special training. To encourage the continuity of the program after the war, an, increasing share of the cost each year was home by the Latin American governments and much of the responsibility for the success of the various operations was delegated to the field*In 1949, when legislation was passed author izing its extension to 1955, the institute was active in sixteen Latin American countries conducting a total of 111 twenty-five cooperative work programs* After 1949, the experience of the institute and that of the Interdepartmental Committee on Scientific and Cultural Cooperation were being relied upon to seme as a 112 nucleus for the new world-wide "Point Four" program. ^ By 1952, the Institute of Inter-American Affairs was serving as the regional administrative office in Latin America for all "Point Four" activities under the Technical Cooperation Administration. It was carrying on programs of cooperation with nineteen republics in Latin America in the fields of food production, public health, and basic and vocational 110Ibid., pp. 9-10, 232-36. lllt'New. Law Extends Life of the Institute of Inter- American Affairs," jnie^ecord, V (October-November, 1949), 16-17. 112 U. S., Advisory Commission on Educational Ex change, op. cit«, p. 26. education* Five hundred Americans were then -working with more than, 9,000 local technicians*^^ The Department of State The Division of Cultural Relations*--By 1938, the United States was faced with a rising tide of Axis propa- ganda in Latin America and the need to fulfill the com mitments to exchange students and professors assumed by the Buenos Aires Convention of 1936. It was largely to meet these circumstances that the Department of State estab lished the Division of Cultural Relations. ***^ The departmental order of July 27, 1938, establish ing the division outlined the scope of its activities; The Division will have general charge of official international activities of this Department with respect to cultural relations, embracing the exchange of professors, teachers, and students; cooperation in the field of music, art, literature, and other intel lectual and cultural attainments; the formulation and distribution of libraries of representative works of the United States and suitable translations thereof; the preparations for and management of the participa tion by this Government in international expositions in this field; supervision of participation by this Govern ment in international radio broadcasts; encouragement of a closer relationship between unofficial organiza tions of this and of foreign governments engaged in cultural and intellectual activities; and, generally, the dissemination abroad of the representative intel lectual and cultural works of the United States and 113 Dean Acheson, "Tenth Anniversary of the Insti tute of Inter-American Affairs," Department of State Bulle tin, XXVI (April 14, 1952), 584. ^■^Bemis, op. cit..pp., 326-27. 2X6 the improvement and broadening of the scope of out cultural relations with o ther countries * X13 The order not only directed the new division to supervise the administration of the Buenos Aires Convention for the exchange of students and professors and other cul tural treaties and conventions* but also to "have responsi bility for the elaboration and the carrying into effect of a comprehensive and coordinated plan of activity in this country for the strengthening of international intellectual and cultural relations." In fulfilling its mission, it was to be the departments principal unit for contacting for eign missions of the United States, foreign governments, foreign missions in Washington, and government and "other educational and cultural organizations and institutions."^^ The first efforts of the new Division of Cultural Relations were to stimulate private activity. In the fall of 1939, the Department of State called four conferences, which were attended by about 1,000 cultural leaders in the fields of art, music, education, and publications and libraries. Most of the states of the United States were represented. Given copies of a survey by the National Com mittee on International Intellectual Cooperation, they ^•15U. S., Department of State, "Outline of Tenta tive Program for the Division of Cultural Relations," Washington, June 1, 1939, p., 3 (mimeographed). I16Ibid., 217 studied what further contributions could be made in their fields of interest. These included scholarships and hos pitality for Latin American students, stimulation of Latin American studies in the United States# and new channels for exchanges in the fields of art, music, literature, and publications in medical education and health activities. At the conclusion of each conference, continuation com mittees were established to pursue the projects and recom- 117 mendations on which agreement had been reached. Another device which was designed to stimulate the participation of private agencies was the creation of advisory committees composed of representatives of the foundations, learned societies, universities, and other 118 cultural organizations, as well as government agencies* ° The first and most important of these was the General Advisory Committee, which was formed in 1938* It met two or three times a year in Washington to advise on general policy in planning and execution and help coordinate the ^•^Ben M* Cherrington, "The United States and Inter-American Relations," Department of State Bulletin* II (June 15, 1940), 660-66* ■*--^Ben M* Cherrington, "America's Future Cultural Relations," The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. CCXXXV (September, 1944), 78. 218 119 work of other advisory committees. While the formal membership of the eonmittee was limited to a maximum of twelve members, its meetings were attended by subordinate officers of the government and private agencies represented on the committee, the political officers of the Department of State, representatives of the Coordinator of Inter- American Affairs and of numerous other government agencies, private cultural institutions, learned societies, and endowments. Several advisory committees on special phases of the cultural program were also appointed. In several in stances, they developed from the continuation committees of the four conferences in 1 9 3 9 . These included committees on medicine and public health, cooperation in higher educa tion, exchanges of fellows and professors, adjustment of S., Department of State, "Progress Report of the Division of Cultural Relations," Washington, June, 1940, pp.. 7-3 (mimeographed); "Committees to Advise the Department of State in Cultural-Relations Program," Depart ment of State Bulletin. V (August 23, 1941), 154; Hanson, op. cit.,p. 59. The members of the General Advisory Com mittee are listed on p. 57, n. 38, supra. 120^inutes 0£ the Meeting of May 9, 1941, General Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural Relations, Depart ment of State, Washington, 1941 (mimeographed); idem. September 17-18, 1941; idem, November 5-6, 1941;~icTem. February 25-26, 1942; idem. June 19-20, 1942; idem. Febru ary 23-24, 1943; idem. . June 9“10, 1943.; idem, February 18- 19, 1944. •^Hlinutes of Meeting, of April 4-5, 1940, General Advisory Committee, Division, of Cultural Relations, Depart ment of State, Washington, pp. 2-6. (mimeographed)., 21,9 foreign students, agricultural education, music, and art. All but the first two were continued in existence until 1945. They were variously composed of from six to twelve members of specialists in their fields.-^2 The advisory committees were established not only to provide counsel to the Department of State based on their own experience and knowledge in the field of cultural relations, but also to enlist the active cooperation of the 123 private and unofficial agencies. In March, 1945, the department reported to Congress: Since 1939 the entire program of cultural coopera tion with the other American republics in the fields of American cultural institutes, American libraries, aid to American schools abroad, and the exchange of ma terials in the fields of books, publications, music, art, and educational materials has been handled by de partmental contracts with and grants made to private, nonprofit organizations in the United States and in the other American republics, as well as with collaborating ■l-^Hanson, op. cit., pp. 59-60; "Committees to Advise Department of State in Cultural-Relations Program, Department of State Bulletin. IV (May 17, 1941), 603-605; U. S.,, Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hear ings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1942. 77th Cong., 1st Sess„, 1941, pp. 64-65; U. S., Congress* House, Committee on Appropriations, 2nd Sess., 1943, pp. 374-76; "Advisory Committees for Cultural Cooperation," Department of State Bulletin,. XI (December 31, 19441, 847- 4 S T : ; 123jflinutes of Meeting of February 18-19, 1944, General Advisory Consnittee, Division of Cultural Relations, Department, of State, Washington, 1944, p.. 29 (mimeographed); U.. S . . , . Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hear ings, Department, of State Appropriation Bill for 1945. 78th Cong., 2nd. Sess.., 1944, p„ 282... 220 United States Government agencies. It has been found essential to enlist the collaboration of well-known, nonprofit organizations such as the American Library Association, the American Council of Learned Societies, the American Council on Education, etc.124 The official policy of the Department of State was "to implement, facilitate, and supplement the work of private, nonprofit organizations in the United States and not to replace them." Despite this policy, the control of cultural relations in which the department had an interest was gradually assumed by the department. The view of the department by early 1944 was that there could be no dis tinct borderline between deciding of policy and the oper ating of a program. The department had no desire to inter fere with the private work of such agencies carried on before the Division of Cultural Relations was established. On the other hand, the Department has a great deal at stake in the cultural relations program. It believes that the cultural relations program should fit into the structure of American international policy. Any par ticipation in the operation of these programs, there fore, is believed necessary because of the questions of foreign policy which seem to be i n v o l v e d . 125 The result, however, from the point of view of the private agencies was that through acceptance of government contracts they found their authority to execute their plans U. S., Congress,. Senate, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings.. H. R. 2603. , 79th Cong.,, 1st Sess., 1945, pp., 14-15. •^■^Minutes of Meeting of February 18-19, 1944, General Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural Relations, Department; of, State, pp., 38-39 (mimeographed.)., 221 was somewhat limited or that they were reduced to the status of a disbursing or fiscal agent in some cases with out actual responsibility for operations. This was par ticularly true in the case of providing teachers for the cultural institutes. The American Council of Learned Societies had little to do with the selection of teachers. Its only duties were to sign letters prepared for its sig nature, to pay salaries with department funds, and to make explanations to the selective service boards. The control of policy by the Department of State over the Coordinator’s activities was established as early as April, 1941, on instructions from President Roosevelt. The Coordinator, like the department, used both government agencies and private organizations to achieve his objec tives, A Joint Committee on Cultural Relations, composed of three persons, was formed in that year to represent the Department of State, the Coordinator, and the private agen cies through the American Council of Learned Societies: This Committee, which was to function during most of the life of the CIAA, was to do two things: (a) de termine the basic policy to be followed in the hemi sphere with regard to cultural relations, and (b) de termine the division of functions and the allocation of projects and accompanying grants from the Coordinator’s funds to the Department of State, CIAA, other govern ment agencies, and private organizations. Policies and projects approved by the Joint Committee were •^^Ibid. . , pp.. 34-38.. 222 17 7 then submitted to the department for further approval. Further cooperation between the department and the Coordinator was encouraged by giving the Coordinator repre- 128 sentation on the advisory committees of the department. Many suggestions for projects by the Coordinator were submitted by the Division of Cultural Relations* These had been received from many sources, including the series of conferences held in 1939 and their continuation commit tees. The work of the Division of Cultural Relations and that of the Interdepartmental Committee on Scientific and Cultural Cooperation were also closely related* The pro grams of the division were carried out under the commit tee's budget, and personnel of the division served on the committee's secretariat. The division, furthermore, was the customary channel for securing approval from the geo graphic desks of the Department of State for specific committee projects from the point of view of foreign policy. This was true whether the projects originated with the •^Rowland, op. cit.. p. 91. 128t.conanittees to Advise the Department of State in Cultural-Relations Program, " Department of State Bulletin. V (August 23, 1941), 154-55; "Advisory Committee's to the Department of State," Department of State Bulletin. VII (September 26, 1942), 780-81. 129 U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1942, 77th Cong.., 1st Sess., 1941, p.. 70. ” 2.23 division or with the committee's other participating agon* cies in the scientific and technical fields* The objective of both units was to build a broad program of cultural and scientific relations with the other Americas* The conviction that private agencies should carry the major burden of the work in cultural relations at first created a need for only a small staff and budget. At the end of the fiscal year of 1939, the Division of Cultural Relations had a staff of eight employees for which the salary budget was $29,240.^1 The growth of the program during the war years is indicated to some extent by the in crease in personnel. In January, 1942, the division em ployed eighteen persons and was requesting forty for the following fiscal year. ^2 By March, 1944, the division, now renamed the Science, Education, and Art Division, had 103 about eighty officers and clerks. J The growth in the number of personnel was accom panied by a gradual assumption of administrative and •^■^Charles A« H. Thomson, op. cit., p. 160. 1 i U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1940. 76th Cong., 1st Sess., 1939, p. 32. s., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1943, 77th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1942, pp. 99-100. 133u. s., Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. H. R. 4204. 78th Cong..,. 2nd Sess..,, 1944, p. 118. 224 operational resportsibilities. In 1939, the single oper- ating function planned for the Division of Cultural Rela tions was to administer the exchange of professors and students under the terms of the Buenos Aires Convention. Even in this operation that portion of the exchange con cerning contacts in the United States was to be assumed by the Office of Education, while the division made contacts abroad. Actual operations, however, were to await the fiscal year 1941 before Congress provided funds for the exchanges. A similar operational activity to be assumed by the division in the same year was the administration of travel and maintenance grants to leaders, professors, and students in the United States and Latin America as the result of additional funds from Congress to supplement the Buenos Aires Convention. This involved selection pro cesses, the arrangement of itineraries and travel orders, and the reception of visitors in the United States. The second major development in the operations of the Division of Cultural Relations was the appointment in 1941 of the first cultural relations officers to be l-^Ben Cherrington, "The Role of Education in International Cultural Relations, ” Department of State Bulletin. I (July 8, 1939), 21. 13.^Minutes of Meeting of February 18-19, 1944, General Advisory Committee, Division of Science, Education and Art, Department of State, Washington, p. 28 (mimeo graphed) , Z 2 5 . ' attached to the United States missions in Latin America, to supervise cultural activities in the field.-^6 ihis had been recommended in November, 1939, by the conference of educators as an aid to "cultural exchange in general and 1 ^7 education in particular.The need for such officers became apparent in the summer of 1940 when plans were being made for the selection of individuals in Latin America for travel to the United S t a t e s . -^8 The third major area of cultural relations to be taken over by the Department of State was a group of activities previously administered by the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs. On July 1, 1943, the Division of Cultural Relations assumed responsibility for the support of American schools, cultural institutes, and libraries abroad, the distribution of books and translations, and the exchange of art and music. Following the pattern estab lished by the Coordinator, the division continued utilizing 1 J. Manuel Espinosa, "Exchange of Professors between the U. S. and the Other American Republics," Department of State Bulletin, XV (July 21, 1946), 89. "Conference on Inter-American Relations in the Field of Education: Proceedings of the Conference," Depart ment of State Bulletin. I (November 11, 1939), 506. ■^^Minutes of the Meeting of July 9, 1940, General Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural Relations, Depart ment of State, Washington, pp. 7-11 (mimeographed,)., 226 the services of’ specialized non-profit private ©rganiza-* tions; and other government agencies by means of contracts or gran t s-in-aid.The Division of Cultural Relations had cooperated closely with the Coordinator from the begin ning in most of these activities* The transfer to the department was in accord with the general policy estab lished by January, 1941, that the Coordinator was to direct the emergency programs and that the Department of State would administer the long-range cultural activities.-*^® With the assumption of responsibility for this group of activities, the basic framework for the depart ment *s direct participation in cultural activities had been developed. Changes were made subsequently in administra tive arrangements and in policy statements, but the areas of activity were to remain much the same. The principal activities in the field of motion pictures for exhibition in Latin America were carried on by the Coordinator until the end of the war. The Division of Cultural Relations was concerned chiefly with policy clear ance, transportation, and distribution and with assistance ^^Minutes of Meeting of February 18-19, 1944, General Advisory Committee, Division of Science, Education, and Art, Department of State, Washington, p. 29 (mimeo graphed) . ^®U. S.., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1942, 77th Cong..,,, 1st; Ses.s.„,, 1941, p. , 7Q., 22? in cultural and educational subjects* With but limited funds fat motion pictures, the division borrowed films from other government agencies and private sources and adapted them for showing in Latin America* The principal emphasis was on educational and documentary 16 mm* films for spe cialized audiences which could be approached by the cul tural attaches* Much of its work was concerned with facilitating and supervising the production and distribu tion of scientific and technical films for the Interdepart mental Committee* The division participated in a limited production of educational films for the first time in 1943, using the ftands and facilities of the Coordinator but providing its own scripts. It had but limited funds for the purchase and distribution of films and equipment.The division was also responsible for certifying films of an international educational character produced in the United States for the purpose of obtaining preferential customs treatment in 144 other countries* ^■■^Charles A* H, Thomson, op* cit«, pp. 166, 170-71. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings* Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1943* 77th Cong*, 2nd Sess., 1942, pp. 411-12, s., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1944, . 78th Cong*. 1st Sess.* 1943* pp. 78-84. ■^^"Certification of Educational Films,” Department of State Bulletin* VI (March 28, 1942), 263. 2,28 la the field of radio, the Division of Cultural Halations was without funds to produce programs of its own. Its principal functions were to serve as a consulting or advising center and to furnish materials to government officials, agencies, and the private broadcasting com panies. The division was concerned principally with the use of radio for general cultural purposes to describe the people of the United States, their history, their great 1 Afi citizens, and their scientific and artistic achievements. It cooperated with the Coordinator’s staff in producing transcriptions and scripts for broadcast by Latin American radio stations in such cultural fields as music, litera ture, and lessons in the English language. The division itself did not engage in shortwave broadcasting, however. The division's principal interests were to develop a long term program of reciprocal exchanges in cultural areas that would survive the war period,^® Charles A. H. Thomson, op. cit*, p. 166; U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1941. 76th Cong,, 3rd Sess., 1940, p. 5b. l^Hanson, op. cit.« p. 50. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1943, 77th Cong.V 2nd Sess., 1942, pp. 414-15; Report of the Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, April, 1945, pp. 7-8 (mimeographed). •^^Report of the Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, November, 1942, p. 30 (mimeographed) Reorganization of the department in 1944, - - In 19.44, the Department of State began a series of shifts in its organizational pattern that affected the cultural relations program and were to serve as preliminary steps in estab lishing the post-war organisation for cultural and informa tional activities. A departmental order on January 15, 1944, created the Office of Public Information to administer both in formational and cultural activities under the Assistant Secretary of State for Administration. The Division of Cultural Relations was renamed the Science, Education, and Art Division. It continued to administer the programs for exchange of persons and publications, the support of Ameri can libraries, schools, and cultural institutes, and it maintained liaison with both private and government agen cies engaged in cultural relations. Motion picture and radio activities in cultural areas were assigned to the newly created Motion Picture and Radio Division, The Central Translating Division continued activities it had begun in 1940 under the former Division of Cultural Rela tions in translating official addresses, communications, treaties, diplomatic notes, radio and movie scripts, and materials for other government agencies* A Division of Research and Publication was established and a Division of ^^Charles A., H., Thomson, op. cit. , p- 179- 230 Current Information maintained liaison with the emergency agencies.*^ Cultural activities were thus placed for the first time in the same administrative unit as information activities, although the personnel of the latter were more concerned with policy than operations until after the war. In December, 1944, the Office of Public Information became the Office of Public Affairs under the direction of an assistant secretary whose duties included responsibility for cultural relations and both foreign and domestic in formation. The units assigned to its predecessor office were given to the new office and, in addition, it was given the secretariat of the Interdepartmental Committee and a Division of Geography and Cartography. The office was also assigned the function of coordinating the information and cultural programs of other federal agencies with its own programs and with foreign policy. The functions of the cultural relations unit remained largely the same as estab lished in January of the same year, although now it had a new name, The information unit also had been renamed by 151 this time and its functions somewhat expanded. •^^"Organization of the Department of State," Department of State Bulletin. X (January 15, 1944), 43-65. lSlf'organization of the Department of State," Department of State Bulletin* XI, (December 17, 1944), 777- 813., 231 On July 1, 1944# the Division of Science, Educa- tion, and Art had been renamed the Division of Cultural Cooperation, In broad terms, its mission was as follows; The Division of Cultural Cooperation shall have responsibility for formulating policy and for initi ating, coordinating and putting into effect programs of the Department of State designed to encourage and strengthen cultural contact, interchange, and mutual understanding between the people of the United States and those of other nations, *-*2 It continued the functions of its immediate prede cessor, cooperating with private and government agencies, with the Interdepartmental Committee, the geographical desks, and the Motion Picture and Radio Division, In addi tion, it was charged with formulating policies for the Department of State in international educational and cul tural affairs in the transitional and post-war periods and the bearing of such activities on foreign policy. In February of 1944, the Motion Picture and Radio Division received responsibility not only for liaison be tween the Department of State and other agencies in con nection with motion picture and radio activities, but also for the ' ‘ dissemination abroad of printed features and other informational material which was not of an immediate news 152*»j}tvision Qf cultural Cooperation," Department of State Bulletin, XI, (August 27, 1944), 223-24. •^••^Ibid. 232 i r / character." In August* 1944* the division was renamed the International Information Division and given similar duties. Although the functions of the division were chiefly in the area of formulation of policy, coordination, and liaison with other agencies, rather than operational, the basic framework for combining informational and cul tural affairs in one office was now established* The Office of International Information and Cul tural Affairs.--On August 31, 1945, President Truman by executive order transferred to the Department of State from the Office of War Information and the Office of Inter- American Affairs their overseas information functions and created within the department the Interim International Information Service to function until December 31, 1945. At the same time, the President asked the Secretary of State to study proposals for a post-war information service. On January 1, 1946, the new Office of International Infor mation and Cultural Affairs began to function as a peace time organization. 154 "Informational Activities and Liaison," Depart ment of State Bulletin. X (February 26, 1944), 209-11. 155»'Functions of the International Information Division," Department of State Bulletin, XI (September 10, 1944), 283-547 “ 156itpr0p0sa2S for overseas Information Service," Department of State Bulletin,, XIV (January 20, 1946), 57-58., 233 To the new office were transferred without change of functions the Division of Cultural Cooperation, the International Information Division, the Central Translating Division, and the secretariat of the Interdepartmental Com mittee on Scientific and Cultural Cooperation. The Assist ant Secretary of State for Public and Cultural Relations was placed in charge of the consolidated program. The new office was charged with promoting freedom of information among peoples, the exchange of persons, knowledge, and skills, and the coordination of programs and activities of other federal agencies in these areas with United States foreign policy, The office was organized into ten divisions. Five of these were on the operational level. The work of the former Division of Cultural Cooperation was divided between the Division of International Exchange of Persons and the Division of Libraries and Institutes and placed under an assistant director. The work of the former International Information Division, now augmented by the former oper ational functions of the Office of War Information and the Coordinator, was divided into the International Broadcast ing Division, the International Press and Publications Division, and the International Motion Pictures Division 157noffice of International Information and Cul tural Affairs," Department of State Bulletin, . XIII. (September 9, 1945), 387. under another assistant director. Their work was coordi nated by five area divisions, one each for Europe, Latin America, the Far East, the Near East and Africa, and occupied areas under a third assistant director. The ten divisions were responsible to the Director of the Office of International Information and Cultural Affairs, who in turn reported to the Assistant Secretary of State for Public and Cultural Affairs* A Program Planning and Evaluation Board reviewed, coordinated and approved policy and program di rectives, projects, and information materials which usually originated in the area and operational divisions* Under the director, the board was composed of the deputy and assistant directors, the chiefs of the operating and area divisions, and the executive director of the secretariat of the Interdepartmental Committee, of which the Assistant Secretary for Public and Cultural Affairs was the chair man^ 158 office also provided the secretariat for UNESCO* 159 Besides coordinating the work of the media lSS^Qj-gonigation of the Office of International Information and Cultural Affairs,” The Record. II (January- February, 1946), 1; Eric C, Bellquist, ’ ’ The Overseas In formation and Cultural Relations Program of the Department of State," World Affairs Interpreter. XVIII (April, 1947), 54-69. ^•^^Charles A. H. Thomson, op. cit«. p. 210. Con siderable interest in UNESCO developed in the Division of Cultural Relations during the last two years of the war. The nucleus of the post-war UNESCO Relations Staff was com posed of a small group of individuals from the Division of Cultural Relations. Ibid.. pp. 171, 21Q. 2,35 divisions in each country, the area divisions were respon sible for keeping informed of foreign policy through con tact with the political and economic desks of the Department of State, the formulation of plans for each country, send ing out instructions, selecting field personnel, and receiving and evaluating reports from the field, The Division of Libraries and Institutes was respon sible for the program of assistance to the cultural insti tutes, providing professional administrators, English teachers, materials and guidance, It serviced the overseas libraries and disseminated books, periodicals, newspapers, documents, pamphlets, and art and music materials. It also furnished assistance to the American sponsored schools and promoted the teaching of English* The Division of Exchange of Persons managed the program of exchange of students, leaders, specialists, and professors with Latin America, stimulated and facilitated the exchange activities of private organizations, provided information and assistance for visitors, and sponsored 160^ Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Hearings on H. R. 3342, 80th Cong,, 1st Sess,, 1947, pp* 110-12. Wlu. s., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1948. . 80th Cong., IstT Sess,, 1947, pp. 467-68; U*. S. , Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings., Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1949, 80th Cong,, 2nd Sess,, 1948, p, 609., 162 orientation programs for them* ^ ^ Xn September, 1947, following severe cuts in appro priations by Congress, the name of the office was changed to Office of International Information and Educational Exchange* The staff was somewhat reduced, the area divi sions became area sections, and internal channels of com munication were somewhat simplified, but the basic struc ture of the organization remained virtually the same as established in 1946.^^ United States Information and Educational Ex change* --Until 1948, the informational and educational exchange programs operated partly under legislation passed by Congress and partly under executive orders of the Presi dent. Public Law 355, approved August 9, 1939, authorized the government to carry out the activities proposed by treaties, resolutions, declarations, and recommendations of the Inter-American Conferences at Buenos Aires in 1936 and at Lima in 1938, subject to congressional appropriations*^ 4 This was interpreted by the legal advisors of the Depart ment of State to deprive the department of basic authority l^U., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1947, 79th Cong., 2nd Sess.* 1946* pp. 471-72; U. S,. Department of State, Cooperation in the Americas., pp. 55-56. Charles A« H„ Thomson, op.. cit« * pp. 1,93, 197, 2U-14* . I64U ' . - , S . . , „ 53 Star., .1290* 165 to carry on similar programs in other parts of the world. Public Law 63 approved May 3, 1939* authorized the detail of United States Government employees to the American republics, the Philippine Islands, and Liberia, It amended a similar act approved May 25, 1938. These three laws served as basic legislation for the Division of Cultural Relations and its successors and the work of the Inter- departmental Committee.167 In 1942, with funds allocated from the Emergency Fund for the President, the department began a modest pro gram of aiding Chinese students in the United States and sending American technical experts, professors, and micro filmed scholarly and scientific information to China. In 1943, funds were similarly provided for aiding American schools and hospitals in the Near East and for sending technicians, teachers, books and other cultural materials to that area, The Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American 165U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Hearings on H.. R. 3342, 80th Cong., 1st Sess., 1947, p, 148. i66U. S., 53 Stat. 632. •^Rayraund L. Zwemer, "The Interdepartmental. Com mittee; on Cooperation with the, American, Republics," Depart ment of State Bulletin. XI, (September 24, 1944),, 319-21; John V„ Hepler, "Agricultural Collaboration, with. Foreign, Countries,." The Record. IV (February,, 1948),, 4„ 1 fiR Hanson,, op., cit. , , pp., 3-4. 238 Affairs and the Office of War Information were created by executive order, and they were transferred to the Depart ment of State in August, 1945, by the same means. In the absence of basic legislation, the entire program, except for the technical and cultural activities in Latin America, existed until 1948 only under the authority of the annual 169 appropriation act of Congress. Bills to provide basic legislation for a world-wide informational and educational exchange program passed the House of Representatives and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in both 1946 and 1947 but did not come to a vote in the Senate. During the summer of 1947, however, sub committees of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and of the House Foreign Affairs Committee made a personal study in twenty-two European countries of the need for a public relations program in connection with United States foreign policy* This investigation, conducted at a time when communist propaganda was attacking both the United States and the democratic way of life, prompted the reintraduction of the bill in Congress early in 1948* 169 U. S., Congress,, Senate, Committee, on Foreign Relations, Promoting the Better Understanding of the United. States among the Peonies of the World and to Strengthen, Cooperative International Relations. , Report; No. 811 to Accompany H.. R. 3342, 80th, Cong./, 2nd Sess..,,, 1948,, p., 2 , . , ^ ^ Ibid.. pp., 3-4., 239 The resulting legislation was the Smith-Mundt Act, or Public Law 402, which was approved January 27, 1948, and officially known as the United States Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948, The law extended the basic features of the cultural relations programs already developed in Latin America to a world-wide scope and pro vided legislative authority for the information program. The basic objectives of the law were * . , to promote a better understanding of the United States in other countries, and to increase mutual understanding between the people of the United States and the people of other countries. The Smith-Mundt Act provided for the reciprocal exchange of students, trainees, teachers, professors, and leaders, books, periodicals, translations, and the assignment of specialists and government employees abroad. Assistance to schools, libraries, and cultural centers abroad was author ized,. It provided for the dissemination abroad of informa tion about the United States through the press, radio, motion pictures, information centers, and other media. In carrying out the program, the Department of State was authorized to utilize other government and private agen cies. To advise the Secretary of State and the Congress, the act established an Advisory Commission on Information; and, an; Advisory Commission on Educational, Exchange... Each 171U„ S., 62 Stat. , 7- 240 was composed of five members appointed by the President with the approval of the Senate to represent without com* pensation the public interest4 The two commissions also had authority to approve the appointment of special advisory committees in specialized areas of their respec- tive fields. The act provided for the operation of both cultural and informational programs under the direction of the Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs in Washing ton and under the head of the United States missions abroad* Different methods and operating principles, however, sug gested that cultural and informational activities should be kept distinct from each other* Congressional intent to separate the two functions while keeping them under the same unified leadership and broad policies was expressed in 173 the creation of the two advisory commissions. Accordingly, on April 22, 1948, the Department of State established under the Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs the Office of International Information and the Office of Educational Exchange* The former was 172ibid. !73u. s., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Promoting the Better Understanding of the United States among the Peoples of the World and to Strengthen Cooperative International Relations, , Report No. 811 to. Accompany H. R. 3342, 80th, Cong..,, 2nd, Sess...,, 1948,, pp., 4-5« 241 composed of the Divisions of International Broadcasting, International Motion Pictures, and Press and Publications. The latter contained the secretariat of the Interdepart mental Committee on Scientific and Cultural Cooperation, the Division of Exchange of Persons, and the Division of Libraries and Institutes. The executive staff of the Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs was com posed of the five area divisions, which determined policy and coordinated the work of the five media divisions, several special assistants, and the UNESCO Relations T ” 7 / Staff, The program was referred to officially in the United States as the United States Information and Educa tional Exchange, Abroad, it was generally known as the 17 5 United States Information Service. The basic organization of the program as estab lished in 1948 was to last until January, 1952, with the exception of minor changes. In July, 1951, the Division of Libraries and Institutes was renamed the Division of Over seas Information Centers, which continued with the same f 74t'Reorganization of the Public Affairs Area," Department of State Bulletin. XVIII (May 9, 1948), 614-17. 1^Department of State, Report to the Congress: ; First Semi-Annual Report (Washington:, Department of State, June 30, 1948), p. 18 (processed). 242 176 functions* personnel* funds, and records. By 1950, the agency had acquired a general manager who was in charge of operations and was responsible to the Assistant Secretary of State. The latter took general responsibility for 177 general direction and policy. In 1950 and 1951, a National Psychological Strategy Board and a Psychological Operations Coordinating Committee were established. Representing the Department of State, the Department of Defense, the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Resources Board, and the Economic Cooperation Administration and reporting after 1951 to the National Security Council, their functions were to plan and coordinate psychological objectives, policies and opera tions on an interdepartmental basis, including the inter- 178 national information and educational exchange programs. /0 176i*DjLvisiOIl Qf Overseas Information Centers Estab lished, " Department of State Bulletin. XXV (August 6, 1951), 23^rr ” 177u. S., Department of State. Information and Cul tural Cooperation Abroad. Department of State Publication No. 3927 (Washington: U. S« Government Printing Office, August, 1950), p. 2; John M. Begg, "The American Idea: Package It for Export," Department of State Bulletin, XXIV (March 12, 1951), 410. 178npSychological Strategy Board to Coordinate For eign Information," Department of State Bulletin. XXIII (August 28, 1950), 335; "Establishment of Psychological Strategy Board," Department of State Bulletin. XXV (July 2, 1951), 36; U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriations. 82nd Cong., 1st Sess., 1951, pp. 353-54; U., S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations., Hearings. International. Infor mation and Educational Activities., 82nd, Cong., 2nd Sess,., , 1952., pp., 316-17. 243 The International Information Administration**~In January, 1952, the Office of International Information and the Office of Educational Exchange were abolished and a new plan of organisation was instituted* The distinction between informational and cultural activities became less important In terms of administration in Washington. At the same time, it was announced that the agency was given semi-autonomous status within the Department of State as the International Information Administration. Under the new organization, the administrator, who replaced the general manager, was delegated full responsibility by the Secretary of State for the operation of the entire program. The administrator gained a consolidation of authority formerly divided among the general manager, the Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs, the regional bureaus, and the central administrative offices of the Department of State. He was the sole authority, under the Secretary of State, for developing policies, planning, and executing programs 1 cm in the informational and cultural fields. He also ^ U . S., Advisory Commission on Information, Ninth Semiannual Report to Congress (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1954), p. 7. i^O^iison Compton, r 'An Organization for Interna tional Information," Department of State Bulletin. XXVI (March 24, 1952), 443-47 j Howland H* Sargeant, "The Overt International Information and Educational, Exchange Programs , of the United States," Department of State Bulletin. XX,VI (March. 31, 1952) , 484. 244 served as chairman of the Psychological Operations Coordi nating Committee. The Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs was now concerned primarily with domestic public relations and liaison with the American public. His office retained also the UNESCO Relations Staff, which was the principal channel between the Department of State and those inter ested in the activities of UNESCO. A senior staff officer was responsible to the ad ministrator of the International Information Administration for liaison with the Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs, who, with the assistance of the regional bureaus, was now only responsible in the international field for keeping the agency informed of foreign policy ob jectives and current foreign policy decisions that might 1 OO affect the information program. ^ Under the administrator was a deputy administrator in charge of field programs. Four regional bureaus for the four major regions of the world, including the Office of ISlu. S., General Services Administration, United States Government Organization Manual 1952-1953 (Washington? U. S. Government Printing Office, 1952), p.' 82. 182Ibid. 183sargeant, loc. cit.; U. S., Congress, House., Committee on Appropriations, Hearings, International In formation and Educational Activities,. 82nd Cong,:, 2nd. Sess.,, 1952, Part 2., pp. 6„ 15. 243 In,ter*’ American Programs,, assisted him* Their function was the development and execution abroad of country and re gional program plans* the supervision of field operations, and representation of the field missions in Washington* In addition, there was an Evaluation Staff, an Office of Policy and Plans, a Private Enterprise Cooperation Staff, 1 O A and an Office of Management. Assistant administrators were placed in charge of each of the five media divisions, which were now renamed services. These were the International Broadcasting Serv ice, International Press Service, International Motion Picture Service, International Educational Exchange, and International Information Center Service. It was the latter which was charged with maintaining liaison with the cultural institutes* Its functions were briefly described as follows: This service furnishes educational, scientific, and cultural information and materials for distribution through the medium of information and cultural centers maintained abroad by the Department and through other public and private channels. It also assists other governmental and nongovernmental agencies in the re covery of artistic and historic arts and monuments looted or confiscated from war areas. By March, 1952, the International Information Administration was reaching one hundred countries of the S., General, Services Administration, op. cit.. . p* 83* 185ibid.< . world with its programs* The agency employed a total of more than 8,000 individuals* Of these, some 3,000 were employed in the United States, and 1,000 Americans and more than 4,000 nationals of other countries were employed abroad* Radio programs were broadcast daily in forty-six languages, totaling forty-eight program hours, over thirty- eight transmitters in the United States and thirty-seven abroad. Some five hundred local transmitters abroad also broadcast the agency's programs* The International Press Service supplied news daily to 10,000 newspapers with more than 100,000,000 circulation in eighty countries, and it supplied publications and press materials to all overseas missions. Motion pictures were supplied to eighty-six countries in forty languages. There were one hundred twelve active information centers in fifty-seven countries and thirty-four cultural institutes, now called binational centers, all but four of which were in Latin America, About 4,500 persons received travel grants under Public Law 402, the Fulbright Act, and other special funds appro priated by Congress. On August 1, 1953, the International Information Administration was renamed the United States Information Agency and separated from the Department of State, The 1 86 U* S,, Congress, Senate, Conmittee on Appropri ations, Hearings on H„ R, 7289, 82nd; Cong.,, 2nd Sess,,, 1952, p„ 1020. exchange*a£~persons program* however, remained under the jurisdiction of the department as the International Educa- tionai Exchange Service. The Information Center Service, which administered the libraries* book distribution and translation program* and the programs of assistance to cul- tural institutes, American sponsored schools, and English teaching, was transferred to the new organization. At the same time, the overseas information activities of the former Mutual Security Agency and the Technical Cooperation Administration were assigned to the United States Informs* tion Agency. The administrator of the information agency now reported to the President through an arm of the National Security Council known as the Operations Coordinating Board* The reorganization did not alter the status of the program in the field. Summary Cultural relations between the United States and Latin America were generally undeveloped during the nine* teenth century except for occasional visits by American explorers, engineers, scientists and soldiers of fortune and by Latin Americans to the United States for technical training. Gross misconceptions of the culture of each other's regions based on, popular stereotypes prevented any , , Advisory Commission on. Information„ op. cit., , ppn 1.-2. , , 12. . true mutual understanding. Between the two World Wars* the United States he- 1 came more interested in Latin American culture in its academic centers* Modem means of transportation and com munication made possible a greater exchange of information of current and popular interest in both directions* Latin America continued to be interested in technical and scien tific information and training in the United States* but little interest was expressed in American cultural life in other respects. The principal financial support for cultural ex changes between the United States and Latin America was provided by such philanthropic institutions as the Rocke feller Foundation, the Carnegie Endowment, the Guggenheim Memorial Foundation, and other foundations. They not only aided individual exchanges and projects but also provided some financial assistance for the work of the learned societies in international research and cultural exchanges. Among these were the National Committee of the United States of America on International Intellectual Cooperation, the American Council of Learned Societies, the Institute of. International Education, and the American Library Associ ation* While these organizations were at first concerned, with cultural exchanges with Europe, they expanded their interests to other areas of the; world, including, Latin America Taken, as a whole, the; work, of, the foundations; and of the learned societies helped to prepare the way for official government participation In cultural relations* Before 1936, the United States Government had shown only sporadic and scattered interest in international cul- turai relations* During the nineteenth century, the Library of Congress, the Smithsonian Institution, and the Office of Education established contacts of an official nature with other countries for their own purposes* After 1890, the principal center for cultural relations between the United States and Latin America was the Fan American Union in Washington, D. C. Although the United States participated in nine Fan American organizations and sent delegates to conferences on specialized subjects as well as to the Inter- American Conferences, for the most part it merely acquiesced to the wishes of the Latin American countries in the field of cultural relations where it took any action at all. The first active steps by the United States toward establishing a program of cultural exchange with Latin America were taken at Buenos Aires in 1936. In that year, the United States proposed and secured the adoption of the Convention for the Promotion of In ter-American Cultural Relations*. This convention provided for a small program of exchanging students and professors between the United States and the other countries*. Four other conventions, at the same conference and numerous resolutions, recommends-' tions:,) and declarations, at Buenos Aires, in 193.6 and in Lima 250 in 1938 expressed faith in cultural exchange as; a means a£ providing for International understanding which would facilitate the peaceful adjustment of international contro versies* Increasing pressure from the Axis powers in propa ganda, cultural relations, and other activities in Latin America in the five years preceding Pearl Harbor further stimulated the efforts of the United States in cultural relations, To implement its plans in this field, the United States Government established the interdepartmental Committee on Scientific and Cultural Cooperation and the Division of Cultural Relations in the Department of State in 1938 and the Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs in 1940* The Interdepartmental Committee was primarily con cerned with stimulating and coordinating the activities of government agencies in cooperative projects with agencies of the Latin American governments* Its principal efforts were in the scientific, technical and economic fields and its activities were designed to be of mutual benefit to both countries* An important byproduct was expected to be the political rapprochement of the United States and Latin America first for the peace and then the defense, of the Western, Hemisphere., In carrying; out the program, the Department of State supervised, the work of from; twenty to 251 thirty participating agencies of the United States Govern-* meat and coordinated it with foreign policy objectives* After 1949, the work: of the Interdepartmental Committee was absorbed by the "Point Four" program* The Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs was concerned with developing the solidarity of the Western Hemisphere at first through activities bolstering the Latin American economy and then through informational and cultural activities that would support the war effort. In conducting the information program, the Coordi nator used press services, a variety of publications, radio, and motion pictures. His office issued news re leases, commentaries, feature stories, news letters, photo graphs, news-maps, cartoons, propaganda posters, pamphlets, and other publications, including a magazine. Short wave radio broadcasts from the United States and local produc tions and transcriptions provided a variety of news, enter tainment, and other programs designed to stress the friend ship of the United States and Latin America* In the field of motion pictures, the Coordinator secured the cooperation of the motion picture industry in increasing the quantity and improving the quality of commercial films in order to replace Axis; films in Latin America with motion pictures carrying themes; designed to build hemisphere solidarity and ■ increase production for war* This was supplemented with 252 a supply of 16 mm, films shown to non-commercial audiences of many kinds. Xn the principal Latin American cities, “coordination committees” with paid staffs served as the principal agents of the Coordinator in carrying out his programs. Xn the field of cultural relations, the Coordinator provided travel grants in a variety of miscellaneous fields before the entry of the United States into the war. After 1941, the Coordinator placed greater emphasis on educa- tional exchanges, conferences, lectures, and publications. To demonstrate the essentially reciprocal nature of cultural exchanges, the Coordinator stressed a two-way interchange of both persons and materials. In Latin America, the Co ordinator provided financial support for schools, cultural institutes, and the establishment of American libraries in Mexico City, Managua, and Montevideo. After July, 1943, when the Department of State assumed responsibility for administering programs of financial assistance to these activities, the Coordinator further narrowed his operations in the cultural field to assisting Latin American school systems in vocational, health, and rural education, train ing for teachers and administrators, distribution of in structional materials, and English teaching. A program of technical assistance and training was designed to improve the national economies of Latin America* Through the ' 2.53 Institute of Inter-American Affairs, the Coordinator estab lished cooperative projects iti health, agriculture, and vocational education. After 1949, this institute was in corporated into the Technical Cooperation Administration. The Department of State established the Division of Cultural Relations in 1938 to carry out the provisions for the exchange of students and professors under the Buenos Aires Convention of 1936. Xt was also to cooperate in the fields of music, art, literature, the formation of libra ries, the distribution of books in the original and in translation, the preparation of exhibits, and the encourage ment of the participation of private organizations in cul tural exchanges. Its first efforts were directed toward the stimulation of private activity through conferences, advisory committees, contracts and grants-in-aid. General supervision of the work of the Coordinator and of other agencies of the government associated with the program of technical and scientific cooperation was provided by con sultation through a network of committees and by other means. In the fiscal year 1940-1941, the Division of Cul tural Relations assumed responsibility for the operation, of not only the exchanges of the Buenos Aires Convention but also a program, of travel and maintenance grants far Stu dents* teacherss professors.,, and community leaders* In. the 254 same year, the first cultural attaches were appointed to United States missions in Latin America, In 1943, the division assumed from the Coordinator operating responsi bility for the programs of financial assistance to American schools, cultural institutes, and libraries abroad, the distribution of books and translations, and the exchange of art and music. At first, the Department of State was concerned primarily in the motion picture field with policy clear ances, transportation, and distribution of cultural and educational films and in the field of radio with providing advice, consultation, and information for radio broadcasts for cultural purposes. It also maintained liaison with the emergency operating agencies in the fields of press and publications* In 1944, operations in the cultural activi ties and liaison functions in informational affairs were combined first in the Office of Public Information and then in the Office of Public Affairs under an assistant secre tary, In the reorganisation plan, the Division of Cultural Relations became first the Division of Science, Education, and Art and then the Division of Cultural Cooperation, At the end of 1945, operational functions in the fields of press, radio* and motion, pictures were trans ferred to the Department of State from the Office of War Information and the; Coordinator., Through, its Office; of, 255 International Information and Cultural Affairs under the Assistant Secretary for Public and Cultural Relations, the Department of State in January, 1946, became responsible not only for operations in the cultural fields but also in the informational fields, From the former Division of Cultural Cooperation was created the Division of Interna tional Exchange of Persons and the Division of libraries and Institutes. Five area divisions coordinated the work of the two cultural divisions on a world-wide basis insofar as legislation and funds permitted. The new office also included several staff units, the secretariat of the Inter departmental Committee and the secretariat for United States participation in UNESCO. After the passage of the Smith-Mundt Act in January, 1948, the office was reorganized under an Assistant Secre tary for Public Affairs into the Office of International Information and the Office of Educational Exchange. It kept the basic functions previously assigned to it and generally became known as the United States Information Service* In July, 1951, the Division of Libraries and Institutes became the Division of Overseas Information Centers, but its functions remained the same as fgrmerly. In January, 1952, the separation, into two major offices, was abolished and the International Information Administration was; established as. a. serai,-autonomous; 256 organization within the Department of State under an ad* ministratar, who assumed full responsibility under the Secretary of State for the operation of the program* The Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs was now concerned primarily with domestic public relations, the activities of UNESCO, and liaison on policy matters through the five regional bureaus with the operating services* These were the International Broadcasting Service, the International Press Service, the International Motion Pic* ture Service, the International Educational Exchange, and the International Information Center Service, The agency now employed more than 8,000 persons in the United States and abroad who reached one hundred countries of the world through the various services of the five media divisions* On August 1, 1953, the International Information Administration was made completely independent of the Department of State as the United States Information Agency* Only the International Educational Exchange Service was re* tained in the department* The Information Center Service, which administered the overseas libraries, the book distri* bution and translation program, and assistance to schools, cultural institutes, and English teaching, was transferred to the new agency. CHAPTER. IV A SURVEY OF THE CULTURAL RELATIONS ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE IN LATIN AMERICA Introduction Under its broadest meaning in the earlier years of the program, cultural relations included the programs of scientific, technical, and economic cooperation of both the Interdepartmental Committee and the Office of the Coordi nator of Inter-American Affairs* The latter organization, particularly, carried on at first a broad, imaginative pro gram that ranged from exchanges in mechanical and athletic fields through a broad range of academic subject matter to exchanges in the fine arts and music. Although under the broadest definition of *'culture," many of these activities might well have been continued under a program of cultural relations, with the passage of time their scope was considerably narrowed and standardized. The present chapter is concerned only with those that survived the test of time under the administration of the Department of State. The cultural relations activities of the department in the Latin American countries were supervised by cultural attaches in the American embassies* These officers* with their assistants, administered or supervised the exchange-” of.-pers.ons programs.* aid to. American, schools,, the. operations 258 of American libraries, the distribution and translation of books, the presentation of art exhibits, exchanges in the field of music, and the activities of the cultural insti tutes. After surveying the operations of the Department of State in Latin America under all but the last of these headings, the present chapter closes with a somewhat more extensive survey of the work of the cultural institutes. The Cultural Attaches The Conference on Inter-Americ an Relations in the Field of Education called by the Division of Cultural Rela tions in November of 1939 recommended that * . * the diplomatic missions of the American republics include cultural attaches whose duty it would be to aid all those interested in inter-American cultural ex change in general and in education in particular.* In support of its recommendation, the conference observed; Every ambassador and minister has on his staff today military, naval, and commercial attaches, whose busi ness it is to keep in touch with the latest develop ments in their fields in the countries where they are located. Certainly it is equally important for each nation to keep in touch with what is going on in the development of intellectual leadership and effective citizenship elsewhere. ■^"Conference on Inter-American Relations in the Field, of Education:, Proceedings of the Conference," Depart ment of State Bulletin,, I (November 11, 1939),, 506.> ^Ibid..p., 499« 239 As the cultural relations program began to be implemented more fully in 1941, the Division of Cultural Relations began appointing what were known at first as cul tural relations officers to the embassies and legations in the Latin American countries. Plans to increase the cul tural relations activities of the United States made their appointments essential if another function was to be added to the work of the missions in the busy period before and after Pearl Harbor. As auxiliary officers in the Foreign Service, they were expected to develop friendly contacts with cultural leaders, assist the head of the diplomatic missions in cultural affairs, and keep Washington informed of cultural activities in their areas. Two years later their title was changed to cultural relations attache. It was eventually shortened to cultural attache* At the close of 1943, there were twenty cultural officers in sixteen of the Latin American countries. Their average age was 44# and about half of them were college and university professors in a variety of subject matter fields. Others were a literary critic, a magazine editor# an ^Minutes of Meeting of September 17-18* 1941, General Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural Relations* Department of State* Washington, p. 15 (mimeographed); "Foreign Service Auxiliary," Department of State Bulletin* V (October 11* 1941), 283; Ruth Emily McMurry and Muna, Lee* The Cultural Approach. (Chapel Hill.:. University of North Carolina, Press* 1947), p« 214. 260 archeologist, several historians, and a motion picture pro ducer* ^ By July, 1946, there were cultural attaches in the diplomatic missions In each of the Latin American countries and in nine European countries. Their academic fields of specialization continued to be as diverse as during the war years.^ As described by the General Advisory Committee of the Division of Cultural Relations, the cultural officers were expected to . . * have a suitable personality that would assure their ability to work effectively with the people of the country in which they may be located; they should have broad intellectual and cultural interests, and should be capable of understanding and appreciating matters of which they may not have specialized knowl edge; they should have constructive imagination and enthusiasm; their point of view should be that of a mature, educated person, and they should have good judgment and common sense. It may be assumed that they have a fluent command of the language of the country to which they are sent, but they should be willing to en deavor to learn to use the language with distinction, as well as with readiness. Furthermore, they were expected to be familiar “with the psychology, customs, literature . * . and cul tural life of the country" where they were stationed as well as possess "a knowledge of the intellectual life and organizations in the United States." By giving emphasis 'Hlaldore Hanson, The Cultural-Cooperation Program, 1938-1943* Department of State Publication No* 2137 (Washington: U, S* Government Printing Office* 1944)* ppw 60-71* ^McMurry and Lee* op. cit..,"p* .215* 261 at first to their own fields of interest, they were to gain general entree to the intellectual life of the country. They were to interpret "culture" in its broadest sense and include not only the country’s intellectual life but also the welfare of the common man. "In brief, he should serve as a channel for the two-way flow of ideas between the United States and the country of station. One of the immediate reasons for appointing cultural officers to the diplomatic missions was the implementation of the exchange-of-persons programs. Besides assisting the regular mission officers in the selection of individuals for travel to the United States, the cultural attaches also assisted the operation of the programs in the fields of art, music, broadcasting, motion pictures, translation and distribution of books, the cultural institutes and the libraries*^ Students inquired of them about university fellowships, university presidents approached them to se cure visiting professors, teachers asked for advice on Minutes of Meeting of February 23-24, 1943, General Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural Relations, Depart ment of State, Washington, pp. 39-43 (mimeographed)* See also Muna Lee, "The Cultural Relations Attache,The Record,, X (June, 1945), 1-7, which repeats almost verbatim the description provided by the General Advisory Committee* 7 Minutes of Meeting of September 17*18, 194i, General Advisory Consnittee, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, p„ 13 (mimeographed), 262; teaching English as a foreign language, and they were asked to make speeches, write articles, and correct manuscripts Q on almost all phases of life in the United States, The cultural attache served on several committees, worked to remove the barriers between American colonies and citizens of the host country, and traveled to the provinces to ex tend the scope of his program. Many of his activities made news, so that he combined the personal contact with a mass approach through the press and the radio.^ During the Second World War, the cultural attaches serviced the activities of the Coordinator in the cultural fields as well as those of the Department of State. They were ex pected "to report on all of these matters and to submit recommendations regarding ways and means for improving the 10 t program of cultural relations." One cultural attache described his work as follows; Primarily the work of the cultural attache is one of meeting, knowing, and cultivating the many groups in the country to which he is accredited that are not habitually in contact with the political, economic, military, or naval sections of the Embassy— groups that include university and other educational leaders, offi cials of the Ministry of Education, scientific socie ties, musical and artistic groups, writers, journalists, — ||H i K # ) « L > ■ » , ■ ■ ■ P i m I« II II V H util? ^Hanson, op « cit. :« p. 60. ^Howard Lee Nostrand, The Cultural Attache (New Haven; The Edward W* Hasan Foundation, a, cU), pp, 22-2.9» lGtiporeiga Service; Auxiliary,4 , 1 Department of State Bulletin, ) V (October 11, 1941), 283«, and sportsmen.* » * * To these individuals and groups the attache must bring a lively personal interest and, wherever passible, more tangible aid in the form of in formation, books, and occasional fellowships. He must be an intellectual jack-of-all-trades capable of dis cussing intelligently all but the most technical prob lems on a wide variety of subjects. As far as possible, the attache must represent all groups and all classes of American people--one minute a walking delegate, the next a potential vice president of the National Associ ation of Manufacturers, or an interpreter of the Chicago school of poetry, or a purveyor of progressive methods in rural education, if He was not required to be an expert in all fields but he served as a liaison man between the experts of the two countries. To do so, he needed to be an extrovert with "a real and sympathetic interest--and this interest {could] not be successfully feigned," The result was that the cul tural attache received innumerable invitations to attend meetings, concerts, lectures, theatricals, graduations, outings, ceremonies, exhibitions* and contests, and he was often expected to participate actively in these, sometimes as the personal representative of the ambassador* His multiple activities often made his working day sixteen and seventeen hours long,^ During the Second World War, the cultural attaches 13 were members of the wartime Foreign Service Auxiliary» ^Morrill Cody, "The Work of the Cultural-Relations, Attache, * ' Department of State Bulletin. XXI (April 1, 1945), 574-75* ^Ibid„ " F o r e i g n , Service Auxiliary," Department, of State Bulletin., V (October U, 1941), 283,, 264 Their -work was generally supervised by a senior officer of the embassy who was a regular member of the Foreign Serv ice.^ The information work through the press, radio, and motion picture programs was carried on outside the embassy through the "coordination committees** established by the Coordinator. Such work was closely supervised by the political officers of the embassy, however.^ After the war, the Office of International Informs” tion and Cultural Affairs in the Department of State estab lished a public affairs officer in each Latin American capital to handle both the informational and cultural activities. The sice of the office and the type of person nel assigned to each varied from post to post according to the needs of the service. At the larger posts, the public affairs officer was assisted by an information section for the activities in the fields of press, radio, and motion pictures and by a cultural section, headed by the cultural *^In Mexico, the second secretary, who was respon- sible for political reporting to the Department of State and served as press officer for the embassy, not only supervised the cultural activities but also the work of the Coordinator in press, radio, and motion picture activities. See letter from Guy W* Ray, American Embassy, Mexico, D. F,, to Carl, A. Sauer, Division of Cultural Cooperation, Department of State, February 1, 1945; also letter from Guy W* Ray to Dr. Bryn J« Hovde, Chief, Division of Cul-* tural Cooperation, January 30, 1945. •^Donald W'« Rowland, History of the Office of,the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs (Washington:, U« S., Government Frinting; Office, 1947), p., 2.54. 265 •attache* for educational exchange and other cultural activities* the American staff was assisted by a greater number of native personnel in each country.^ The informa* tion staff was usually larger than the cultural staff, and the cultural attache frequently found himself working under 17 a specialist in one of the information fields. Many of the field officers in the program, called the United States Information Service after the war, were inherited from the wartime organizations.1* * Under the Foreign Service Reserve Act of 1946, field personnel were classified as Foreign Service Reserve or Staff officers.^ The organizational framework established in the embassies in 1946 and 194? continued in existence in lf*U. S., Department of State, America**"A Full and Fair Picture” (2nd ed. rev.; Washington: U. S* Government Printing Office, January, 1947), p. 26. 1^Nostrand, on. cit., p. 39* ^Charles A* H. Thomson, Overseas Information Serv ice of the U. S. Government (Washington: The Brookings Institution, 1948), p. 231. Of 126 senior officers in the field posts in 1947, 40 came from the Office of War In* formation and 12 from the Coordinator. U. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings on H> R« 3311. 8Qth Cong., 1st Sess., 1947, p. 983. In Mexico, the information personnel of the Coordinator*s “American Association" moved into the embassy on January 1, 1947, and the new organizational pattern as described above was; established for the post war period. "Your Embassy, ’ * Bui* ietin of the American Society of Mexico., July,* 1947, pp. 6*10. 1%ric G, Bellquist,, "The Overseas Information and Cultural Relations. Program of the Department of State," • WorId Affairs: Interpreter„ XVIII (April.,, 1947), 6 . 7 . , 266 essentially the same pattern throughout the remainder of the period of the present study. ^ In the larger ccmrr tries, such as Brazil, Mexico, and Argentina, from three to ten branch offices were created to handle both Informational and cultural activities in their areas. By 1953, there was a total of forty-two public affairs posts in Latin America. 21 These were staffed by 139 Americans and 480 nationals* * The Exchange of Persons Programs Travel grants for community leaders.*-The travel grant program for leaders was begun in July, 1940* Grants were given to public officials, distinguished persons, mem bers of the professions, specialists, and mature leaders of thought and opinion in many fields. By July, 1946, more than 350 such persons had been invited to visit the United States for periods of two or three months for special study, observation, consultation, or surveys, and to estab lish contact with colleagues in this country. A much smaller number from the United States went to Latin America in the same period. Assistance was also given by the ^Interview with Eugene Delgado-Arias, First Secretary, American Embassy, Mexico, B. F*> August 21, 1953* Congress, House,, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, Supplemental Appropriation.Bill,. 1954, , 83.rd, Cong.,, Ist.Sess,, 1953, p« 626,, 267 Department of State to those traveling on their own or other funds* ^ In 1943* the program was expanded to in** elude technicians with influence among the common people who were less well known but who were constructively inter ested in improving the social and economic welfare of their people in both rural and urban areas.^ By 1949* about 3*000 grants had been given for the exchange of professors, leaders, teachers, and students between the United States and Latin America, excluding government technicians and trainees. The majority of the exchanges involved adults in r\ > positions of active leadership in their fields. In selecting travelers during the Second World War, due attention was given to those with influence who com municated with others either orally or through various types of publications. These included journalists and newspapermen. The program was started with the hope of ^Minutes of Meeting of February 18-19, 1944, General Advisory Committee, Science, Education and Art Division, Department of State, Washington (mimeographed); J. Manuel Espinosa, "Exchange of Professors Between the U. S. and the Other American Republics," Department of State Bulletin. XV (July 21, 1946), 89-93; Hanson, o p. cit.. pp. 16-17. ^U. S*, Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings* Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1944. 78th Cong*, 1st Sess., 1943, p* 326. ^U. S., Advisory Commission on Educational.Ex change, Trading,tIdeas with the World. Department of State Publication No. 3551 (Washington: U„ S* Government Printing. Office,; October, 1949)* p. 24. 268 cementing ties between the American republics and of com" 25 batting Axis propaganda. During the war, it was hoped that such visitors would explain our need for strategic materials, shortages of consumer goods for export, the nature of our war effort, and the determination to win the war. The Division of Cultural Relations reported to Con* gress in 1943 that the Information so released in Latin America was largely uncontrolled: It is our policy to allow entire freedom to our guests for observation in the United States; and we, of course, wish them to exercise freedom of speech in their reports on their visits, and to tell the truth as they saw it.26 During 1948 and 1949, greater emphasis was placed on awarding grants in the academic, professional, and scientific fields. After the ''campaign of truth" began, emphasis was shifted again to influential leaders in other categories, such as government officials, labor groups, youth leaders, and professional leaders in all fields. Even in the case of students, an individual’s prospects of attaining a position of influence in the near future was a ^Minutes of Meeting of February i8**19, 1944, General Advisory Committee, Science, Education and Art Division, Department of State, Washington, p. 22 (mimeo graphed) * 26u. s. t Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1944* 78th Cong** 1st Sess..„ 1943, p, 325* 269 major factor in his selection. The number of grants m s increased especially for leaders in labor, industry, and government, for journalists and radio commentators, and for the exchange of teachers. Emphasis was now placed on those who were leaders, molders, and communicators of opinion who exerted influence in their home countries.^ More atten tion was now paid also to selecting the most representative people from countries where the communists were making their greatest efforts,^ By 1952, there were more than 5,000 civic and pro* fessional organizations, newspapers, industries, educational institutions and individuals who offered assistance to visiting leaders in cooperation with the Department of State.^ Foreign visitors were placed in contact with ^"Educational Exchange Among Free Nations," Depart ment of State Bulletin. XXXV (May 14, 1951), 789* ^Howland H, Sargeant, "The Overt International Information and Educational Exchange Programs of the United States," Department of State Bulletin. XXVI (March 31, 1952), 483-89; Wilson M. Compton, "Mutual Security Requires Mutual Understanding," Department of State Bulletin. XXVI (April 28, 1952), 670; Wilson M, Compton, "Waging the Campaign of Truth," Field Reporter. 1 (July-August, 1952), 14. ^Edward W. Barrett, "The Kremlin*s Intensified Campaign in the Field of Cultural Affairs," Department of State Bulletin, XXV (December 31, 1951), 903* *^U« S., Advisory Commission on Educational Ex change, Sixth Semiannual Report on Educational Exchange Activities (Washington:, U.. S. Government Printing Office, 1952), p., 6., 270 colleagues In this country, Foreign journalists were par ticularly relied upon to write for their home papers "decent interpretations of our way of life and our attitude toward the current world crisis." Photographs of impor tant personages were taken while they were on tour and sent to their home countries as an entering wedge in the press of the country. Documentary films of their trip were also taken for exhibit in their native countries, * * The volume of government-financed exchanges on a world-wide basis after the start of the "campaign of truth" is indicated by the fact that more than 10,000 leaders, specialists, lec turers, editors, teachers, and students were given grants in 1951 and nearly 8,000 in 1952.33 The exchange of professors.--The exchange-of- professors program under the Buenos Aires Convention was found to be slow and cumbersome in operation, limited the choice of the receiving country, and put a financial burden on latin American countries. Consequently, only eight ■^U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriations for 1953. 82nd Cong., 2nd Sess„, 1952, Fart 2, pp, 191-92, S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriations for 1952. 82nd Cong*, 1st Sess,, 1951, Part 2, pp. 956-67, ^Barrett, loc. cit.. p* 905; Wilson Compton, "''Mutual Security Requires Mutual Understanding," Department of State Bulletin, XX.V1 (April 28, 1952), 67Q„ 271 professors were sent from the United States and only one came from Latin America between 1940 and 1946 under the terms of the convention.3^ A special travel-grant program, begun in July, 1941, permitted greater flexibility in the choice of pro- fessors and in supplementing financial support from other sources. It also permitted a greater number of exchanges. Between 1941 and 1946, a total of 157 professors received grants"in-aid from the Department of State. Only twenty- five of these were Latin Americans who were brought to the United States. The remainder were sent from the United States to Latin America because the majority of the re- 35 quests for exchange professors were from there. After the war, the exchange of professors continued much on the same basis but with reduced appropriations. In 1948 and 1949, forty-eight United States professors were sent to Latin America and ten Latin American professors of i came to the United States to teach. Of the eighteen pro" fessors sent to Latin America in 1948, six conducted full year courses and the remainder offered shorter courses, ^^Espinosa, loc. cit. 35Ibid. JOU. S., Advisory Commission on Educational Ex change, Trading Ideas with the World, , pp.. 23, 43; "Foster ing International Understanding," Department of State Bulletin. XX.I1 (February 20, 1950.),, 2.85., 272 including summer sessions- Nine of the eighteen offered courses in the English language and American literature, and the remainder taught courses in United States history* law and government* library science* mathematics* biology* 37 botany, chemistry* art* and physical education. Both during and after the war, the Department of State relied on other government and private agencies to help in the selection processes. Exchange professors were selected on the basis of professional competence in their fields* proficiency in the language of the country visited, and a broad background enabling them faithfully to repre sent their own country abroad.^ In addition to teaching, they were relied upon to publish articles* course outlines, texts, and research papers* to lecture to civic groups and over the radio* to serve as consultants and advisers in their fields* and generally to help broaden the offerings of the institutions they visited. On their return home* they continued many of these activities and shared their experiences abroad with others in their home countries through lectures and HVI, * »■» I l l ' t H ff t l l l *1 ! * *7U. S., Advisory Commission on Educational Ex change* Trading Ideas with the World, p. 43. O Q Espinosa* loc. cit.; U. S.* Congress* Senate* Committee on Appropriations, Hearings on H. R. 3311„ 80th Cong** 1st Sess„* 1947* p. 949. publications."^ Many of them maintained the contacts established abroad long after their departure through the exchange of journals and articles and through other rela tionships.^ The exchange of teachers.""Travel grants were awarded also to small groups of teachers on secondary, ele mentary, and vocational levels. Vocational teachers and English language teachers were brought to the United States by both the Coordinator and the Department of State during the war.^ After the war, the United States Office of Edu cation administered a program for the exchange of teachers for special training, consultation, and observation in professional problems, including vocational guidance and English teaching. A committee representing professional educational associations served as advisers for the program. The trainees visited and consulted with government and private agencies, some thirty public schools, eight univer sities and an equal number of state departments of educa tion. The Office of Education also assisted in exchanges ■^Espinosa, loc. cit.; U. S., Advisory Commission on Educational Exchange, Trading Ideas with the World. p, 43. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1945. 78th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1944, p. 306* ^Hanson, op. cit.. p. 17; U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill, for 1944, 78th Cong,,,, 1st Sess,., 1943., pp., 32,6.-32,.) 274 o£ teachers without the use of United States Government funds Small groups of English teachers in Latin America were brought to the United States during and after the war for specialized training in their field* They spent from four to six weeks in studying the English language in universities, three or four weeks in observing and teach** ing languages in high schools, and two or three weeks in various cities of the United States, including Washington, to complete their professional training and to acquire a general knowledge of this country* Some of those who received such travel grants were graduates of the English seminars offered in the cultural institutes in Latin America*^ The exchange of teachers was considered an important part of the program, because T,it is the teachers of the young who are going to inculcate in them the 42U. S., Advisory Commission on Educational Ex change, Trading Ideas with the World* pp. 43-44* ^U. S*, Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings* Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1945* 78th Cong#, 2nd Sess., 1944, pp. 286-87; Francis J. Colligan, Exchange of Specialists and Distin guished Leaders in the Western Hemisphere* Department of State Publication No. 2414 (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1945), p. 6; Dorothy Greene and Sherly Goodman Esman, Cultural Centers in the Other American Republics, Department of State Publication No. 2503 (Wash* ington; U« S* Government Printing Office, 1946), p„ 9* 275 understanding of the •way of life we like best.n^ Of more than five hundred teachers from foreign countries who came to the United States in 1952 under government grants, about AC 20 per cent were English teachers, J The exchange of students.— Because of wartime con ditions, the United States sent to Latin American a total of only forty United States students from 1939 to 1946, but some 800 Latin American students were given grants to come to the United States during the same period.^ Of these, 29 were sent from the United States and 125 from the 15 other signatory nations came from Latin America under the Buenos Aires Convention.^ The number of students aided under the travel and maintenance grant programs rapidly increased from 18 in 1940-1941 to 234 by the end of 1943. Most were graduate students, and they came from every one of the Latin American countries to study in more than a ^U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1947, 79th Cong,, 2nd Sess., 1946, p. 559. ^-*U. S., Secretary of State, Ninth Semiannual Report of the Secretary of State to Congress on the Inter national Information and Educational Exchange Program. Department of State Publication No. 4867 (Washington; U. S, Government Printing Office, January, 1953), p. 23, ^McMurry and Lee, op. cit., p. 212. ^William A. Shamblin, "Inter-American Exchange Fellows," The Record, XI (December, 1946) , 26; William A, Shamblin and Thomas E* Cotnerr "Student Exchanges under the Buenos Aires Convention," The Record. . Ill (April, 1947), 26. , 276 . 7 0 hundred colleges and universities in the United States* In 1945, the Department of State awarded travel and main" tenance grants to supplement financial support from other sources to 315 of the 3*323 Latin American students in the United States.^ The number of students from Latin America continued to increase after the war until by 1952, there were more than 7*000, of whom 1,185 came from Mexico,Of the more than 30,000 foreign students in the United States in 1952, less than 10 per cent received some support from United States Government funds. Seventy-five per cent of the foreign students A Q Hanson, op. cit., p. 11. ^9U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1947, 79th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1946, pp. 473-75* ^John W. Gardner, Let*s Talk about the Foreign Student in America (New York; Foreign Affairs, 1952), p. 3, The figure of 1,185 from Mexico in 1952 may be compared with the total of 1,058 who came from Mexico over a five- year period from 1935 to 1940 and with the 1,064 who came from all of Latin America in 1938. "Students from the Other American Republics," Department of State Bulletin, IV (March 29, 1941), 386. ^Wilson Compton, "Mutual Security Requires Mutual Understanding," Department of State Bulletin. XXVI (April 28, 1952), 670. Of the 30,000 students, almost 6,000 were studying engineering, the most popular subject. The other subjects in the order of preference were social sciences, medical sciences, physical sciences, business administration, religion, education, agriculture, and the fine arts. Some 3,700 students were enrolled in the general liberal arts courses in the first two years of col lege. Nearly half the 3G,QQQ were engaged in graduate study. Gardner, loc. cit* Ill coming to the United States -were not students in their own countries* They were promising young people for the most part already practicing their professions,52 In 1946, the Department of State reinstated its travel grant and Buenos Aires Convention programs for American graduate students to travel to Latin America, The Office of Education cooperated with the department in ad- ministering these grants.53 Ten travel grants were awarded in 1946 and eighteen were awarded in 1948,54 The number of students going to Latin America from the United States was not expected to compare with the number coming from Latin America, however, because of the limited educational facilities in the Latin countries,55 52u. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings on H, R. 7289. 82nd Cong,, 2nd Sess., 1952, p. 1228, "Removal of Wartime Objection to Study Abroad,1 1 Department of State Bulletin, XIII (October 28, 1945), 701; "Resumption of Travel Grants for Study in Other American Republics," Department of State Bulletin, XIV (February 3, 1946), 179-80; "Latin American Fellowships," Department of State Bulletin. XXVI (June 30, 1952), 1023. ^^Richard H. Heindel, "Understanding the United States Abroad," Department of State Bulletin, XV (Decem ber 8, 1946), 1063; U. S.* Advisory Commission on Educa tional Exchange, Trading Ideas with the World, pp* 43-44, 55u. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1945, 78th Cong., 2nd Sess*, 1944, pp. 299-300. The twenty Latin American republics had. about sixty-six insti tutions of collegiate or university rank and some fifty independent "faculties;#,of which .only twenty-five or 278 Selection committees composed of Latin Americans, resident United States citizens, and the cultural officer of the embassy conducted preliminary screening of students in Latin America. Applications were then forwarded to the Institute of International Education, which received a grant-in-aid from the department to serve as an information center and clearing house between the students and the uni versities in the United States which were granting scholar ships. The Department of State then gave official approval for travel or maintenance grants* ^ The type and amount of the awards were determined on the basis of merit, academic standing, financial need, contributions from other sources, knowledge of English, and the ability to place students on 57 scholarships with the universities. ' At the close of the thirty were national universities. By contrast, there were some 1,800 colleges and universities in the United States to attract Latin American students to this country, 56u« s., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1945, 78th Cong,, 2nd Sess*, 1944, pp. 302-303; U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1947. 79th Cong., 2nd Sess*, 1946, p. 478; Lloyd V. Berkner, Science and Foreign Relations. Department of State Publication No. 3860 (Washington; Department of State, May, 1950), p. 57 (processed); U. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings on H. R. 7289. 82nd Cong,, 2nd Sess., 1952, pp. 1230-37, S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for, 1947, 79th Cong,.* 2nd Sess*, 1946, p. 478, war and In the period immediately following, students were also required to he studying a field which needed develop” 58 tnertt in their home countries* While efforts were made to eliminate personal and political influence on the part of the applicant in securing a grant, It was hoped that those selected would become influential on their return to their own countries.^ In the immediate post-war period, emphasis was placed on having foreign students obtain a ‘'full and fair picture1 ' of the United States through associating with .American students, visiting American families, and having other first hand experiences.^ By 1951, however, the political objectives had been sharpened toward using the exchange program as a means of checking communism. The Department of State worked closely with educational insti tutions to see that students were given orientation courses, greater opportunities to live in American homes, and oppor tunities to participate in community activities in addition ^Harry H. Pierson, ‘'English Is Also a Foreign language," Department of State Bulletin. XII (March 18, 1945), 457; U. S., Department of State, Airgram, "Student Fellowship and Scholarship Program for 1949 Fiscal Year,” November 27, 1947* 59u. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1947. 79th Cong,, 2nd Sess*, 1946, p* 478* ^U. S., Congress, House, ConEaittee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1948, 80th Cong*,, 1st Ses.s»* 1947# p„ 523,, 280 to attending regular classes. To Implement this program, the department relied on the many foreign student advisers and exchange committees on college campuses.^ Orientation services., ""ln 1939, the conference of educators recommended that Latin American students he given some orientation to American college life and other assist- 6? ance. * The major responsibility for this service to stu dents was assumed first by the Institute of International Education. It provided a reception center in New York and Washington and provided counseling and guidance through publications and personal interviews in the two cities and on college campuses. The Institute handled such problems as placement, transfer of credits, professional field trips, summer plans, group insurance, loan funds, and in formation on government regulations on visas, selective service, and internal revenue matters. It also fostered the establishment of a system of foreign student advisers on university and college campuses to assist with this pro gram and to forward two reports a year from each student. 6LU. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropri ations, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1952. 82nd Cong., 1st Sess*, 1951, Part 2, p. 1936; U.'S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriations for 1952. 82nd Cong., 1st Sess. j , 1951, pp. 994-95, " ™ C o n f e r e n c e on inter-American Halations in the Field of Education: Proceedings of the Conference,u loc. cit., pp. 301-502* 281 These were digested and sent on to the United States mission abroad.33 By 1951* the number of foreign student advisers working with the Department of State and the £ A Institute of International Education had grown to 270. In 1942* the Office of the Coordinator of Inter- American Affairs provided a grant to the National Educa tion Association to establish a center in Washington, D, C., where students, in-service trainees, and other visitors might be given practical review courses In English and orientation courses in American history* government* cus toms* and university life* In 1945* the Department of State assumed administrative responsibility for the grant and general supervision* and the staff and services were enlarged„ In 1946, it was transferred to Wilson Teachers College in Washington* D. C., and in 1947 the Office of Education cooperated in administering the center's activi ties*^3 6%. s*, Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, H* R« 2603, 79th Cong*, 1st Sess*, 1945* pp. 88-89* 64U. S.* Congress* Senate, Committee on Appropri ations, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1952. 82nd Cong.* 1st Sess*, 1951, Part 2* p* 1782* 33Margarat 1*. Emmons, "Orienting Foreign Students and Trainees," The Record, XV (July-August, 1948), 10-17; U. S., Department of State, Activities of the Interdepart mental Committee on Scientific and Cultural Cooperation, Department of State Publication No* 2622 (Washington; U* S* Government Printing Office, June 30* 1946), p« 25. 2QZ Short summer orientation courses at other colleges and universities of a similar type were also offered first with the assistance of the Coordinator and subsequently with that of the Department of State. Immediately after the war, such orientation courses were limited to four or five institutions, but by 1951 more than a dozen colleges and universities offered summer orientation courses* Greater emphasis was now placed on American history, cul ture, customs, and university life and on guided tours to industrial plants, public works, and points of esthetic and historical interest.^ In 1943, the Coordinator and the Department of State jointly established a reception center at Miami, Florida, to meet students and distinguished visitors* In 1946, it was taken over by the Department of State.Re ception centers were also established at New York, New Orleans, and San Francisco, in addition to the ones at Miami and Washington. Their purpose was to help with 66u. s., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1946, 79th Cong., 1st Sess., 1945, p. 256; U. S., Department of State, Cooperation in the Americas. Depart ment of State Publication No. 2971 (Washington; U. S. Government Printing Office, January, 194S), p. 70; "Addi- tional Orientation Courses Planned," The Record. II (July, 1946), 17; "Orientation for Life Abroad," The Record. VII (March-April, 1951), 47. 67U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings* Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1946^ 79th Cong., 1st Sess*., 1945, p., 256., 2 S3 customs and immigration formalities, interpret* make travel reservations* and help with appointments. Xn 1950* the five service canters aided more than 14,000 official and /IQ unofficial visitors in the educational exchange programs. Aid to American Schools During 1941* various government agencies began to receive appeals for aid from schools sponsored by American citizens in Latin America. The requests reflected a need for funds to repair and replace buildings* equipment* li- braries and books* pay salaries for teachers* and to pro vide educational facilities that would be equal to those of the German colonies and serve as models for the national school systems.*^ A field survey by the Coordinator in 1941 and 1942 confirmed the reports and, after consultation with the Department of State* a grant was given to the American Council on Education to assist the schools. It formed a service bureau, the Inter-American Schools Serv ice* in 1943 to administer a program of aid to American schools* This consisted of recruiting teachers, purchasing ^U. S.* Department of State, America--"A Full and Fair Picture.1 r p. 15; U* S., Department of State, Informa tion and Cultural Cooperation Abroad. Department of State Publication No. 3927 (Washington; U. S, Government Printing Office* August* 1950), pp. 3-4. ^Minutes of Meeting of February 25-26* 1942, General Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, pp. 45-46 (mimeographed). 284 supplies in the United States, distributing reports cm edu cational methods and teaching aids, and supplying various types of other educational advice, information, and assist ance to administrators, teachers, and patrons of from about 200 to 270 schools. Many of these were founded by American religious organizations and industrial concerns. In addi tion, small cash grants were awarded to from ten to twenty of the twenty-four independent American community schools each year for new projects or to meet temporary emergen- 70 cres, The financial contribution of the United States Government was not large. In 1943, the Coordinator granted $27,000 to the American Council on Education for the opera tion of the Inter-American Schools Service. In subsequent years, government grants ranged from $75,000 to $200,000 a year. In 1948, it was $171,000 and in 1950 it was $160,000. In contrast, local income from tuition, gifts, and con tributed services from local sources ranged from $3,000,000 to $6,000,000 per year. Some of the local contributions were made by business firms and individuals, both Americans and nationals. In many cases, Latin American governments ^Hanson, op. cit., pp. 28-31; American Council on Education, Inter-American Schools Service (Washington; American Council on Education, n. d.), pp. 2-4; U. S., Department of State, Cooperation in the Americas, pp. 88- 89; U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1950. 81st Cong., 1st Sess., 1949, p. 260. 285 contributed by exemptions from taxes and import duties, gifts of land, rent-free buildings, and supplying necessary public utilities without charge*71. While fiscal and administrative policies and the relations of the program to foreign policy were determined by the Department of State and its missions abroad, the determination of the schools' educational policy was left entirely to their local boards of directors of resident Americans and nationals,7' * In framing policy for assist ance to these schools, the General Advisory Committee looked for an acceptable 25-year plan. It was agreed that assistance should neither be "for the promotion of empire*1 nor "in a missionary spirit, as conferring benefits upon the peoples among whom they are established": Somewhere in between these extremes is, in our opinion, the position which we should take* We are interested in these schools because our nationals, scattered through the other Americas in increasing num bers, desire such schools for the education of their children. For that reason, and because of the fact that a large percentage of the students of these schools are nationals, we want these schools to be at least an adequate expression of our educational life* We would 7*U. S., Department of State, Cooperation in the Americas, pp. 88-90; Roy Tasco Davis, "Schoolroom Embas sies," The Record, V (January, 1949), 5; U« S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriations for 1952* 82nd Cong., 1st Sess., 1951, Part 1, p, 949* S*, Department of State, Cooperation in the Americas, p. 88; U. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings on H. R. 4016, 81st Cong..,, 1st Sess., 1949, p. 209* 286 also expect these schools to comport themselves In such a way that they would be entirely acceptable to the government and to the people of the country in which they function.73 Subsequent statements of policy supplemeitted but did not alter these fundamental views. The schools were adequately to ^represent, within the orbit of local require ments, the theory and practice of United States education" in order to give to the community abroad an understanding and appreciation of United States educational principles* Sponsored schools should complement rather than compete with the work of national educational institutions, and the curriculum should be broad enough to meet the needs of American and foreign students. Such schools should offer courses in the language, literature, history and geography of both the United States and the Latin American countries in which they were located. They were expected also to provide a congenial atmosphere where children of both United States and Latin American citizens might associate; Since childhood associations are considered to exert great influence on the conduct and thinking of the mature individual, it is thought highly important that every effort be exerted to achieve first-class schools with surroundings conducive to the growth of closer ^Minutes of Meeting of September 17-18, 1941, General Advisory Conanittee, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, pp. 71-75 (mimeographed). 28? friendship and understanding between nations in the generations to come, 74 In 1943,. it was estimated that some 42,000 of the 47,000 pupils enrolled in the 200 schools aided by the Department of State were children of nationals. In 1948, the 270 schools receiving aid had approximately 60,000 stu-* dents enrolled, of whom it was estimated more than 90 per cent were nationals. Another 40,000 were on lists waiting to enroll. It was estimated that the schools reached another million persons through their varied community activities,^ Because funds were inadequate for public education in Latin America, many of the upper class families pre ferred to send their children to private schools with a selected patronage, better physical facilities, smaller classes, broader courses, and special emphasis on foreign languages. Many of the graduates found the bilingual and binational education provided appropriate preparation for employment in commercial concerns, both American and national, and for admission to colleges and universities ^"Aid to U. S* Sponsored Educational Institutions Abroad," The Record, I (April-May, 1945), 1-4; U. S., Con gress, Senate, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings on H. R. 4016, 81st Cong., 1st Sess., 1949, pp. 269-70. 75 Hanson, op. cit., pp. 29, 51. ™U. S., Advisory Commission on Educational Ex change, Trading Ideas with the World, pp. 18-1.9* in the United States* Ministers of education also found the leadership of the American schools useful in developing their own educational systems.^ American libraries The initial aid to the library program in the Americas came from the Office of the Coordinator of Inter- American Affairs. Through a grant of $S3,QQ0 to the Ameri can Library Association, the Benjamin Franklin Library was opened in Mexico City in 1942. After the American Library in Nicaragua and the Artigas-Washington Library in Monte video had been established in 1942 and 1943 through grants to the American Council of learned Societies, the Inter national Relations Office of the American Library Associ ation took over the responsibility for their administration. After 1943, funds for the program were received from the Department of State. These funds amounted to more than $300,000 between 1943 and 1946.^ The major function of the Department of State, in addition to supplying funds, was the formulation of over-all policy. An advisory com mittee representing the department, the Library of Congress, ■ MM ■ 9 H| W ■ I W 1 * 1 I P 'm>i *1 ^Roy Tasco Davis, "American Private Schools in Latin America," The Educational Record, XXV (October, 1944), 327-36, ^Viola I. Mauseth, Executive Assistant, Interna tional Relations Office, American Library Association, "American Libraries in Latin America," Washington, Decem ber 14, 194S (mimeographed,)* 289 and Che American Library Association assisted in this work* Most suggestions for operation came from the libraries themselves and were approved or modified by the advisory committee*1 * By mutual agreement* the three libraries were turned over to the Department of State at the end of 1946 for operation in connection with the overseas libraries established by the Office of War Information in other parts of the world.^ The American Library Association continued in an advisory capacity, and the three original libraries were operated under local boards of directors appointed jointly by the American Library Association and local authorities until July 1, 1948, After that date, funds for the operation of the libraries from the Inter departmental Committee on Scientific and Cultural Cooper ation were no longer available and they came under the ^Helen r „ Pinkney, "The Division of Cultural Co operation" (unpublished research paper, Division of Re search and Publication, War History Branch, Department of State, December, 1945), p. 41. ^Henry James, Jr., "The Role of the Information Library in the United States International Information Program." Library Quarterly, . XXIII (April, 1953), 83.. Subsequently, another library was established in Buenos Aires, and branches of the Benjamin Franklin Library were established under the.same name in Guadalajara and Monterrey in Mexico.,. A reading room was temporarily oper ated in Puebla., 2 . 9 0 direct administration, of the department and the arabas® sies.^ Operated by public librarians, the activities of the three libraries covered a broad scape: They were founded primarily to function as model public libraries abroad and operated on the principles of free access to printed materials for everyone, assistance by the staff in using these materials and in answering reference questions, extension service to the com munity, and use of discussion, lectures, films, ex hibits, music, and the like to promote the library's program* The aims of this program were to teach good library service by example and to serve the cause of international understanding and peace by means of cul tural exchange. It can be said that the Biblioteca Benjamin Franklin in Mexico City did, and still does, represent this kind of an overseas library* ^ By 1947, these three libraries were circulating more than 241,000 books and attracting 485,000 readers every year. They procured from the United States books that were unavailable on their own shelves, and they pro vided a microfilm service for readers with the assistance of the library of Congress, the National Research Council, and various universities in the United States* They also supplied libraries in the United States with information on ^"Responsibility for Administration of Libraries in Mexico, Nicaragua, and Uruguay,1 1 Department of State Bulletin,. XIV (January 12, 1947), 76; Minutes, of the Meet ing of November 14, 1946, Board of Directors, Benjamin Franklin Library Association, Mexico City, pp* 39-42; Andy G. Wilkison, "Report of the Director for July, 1948," Benjamin Franklin Library, Mexico City, p*, 1 (mimeo graphed) . ^2James, loc. cit* . , , p., 101* 291 'La.tin American publications» The largest of these libraries was the Benjamin Franklin Library in Mexico City* In addition to the usual library services, it engaged In a number of other educa tional activities* Xt offered English classes for Mexican students and teachers of English, arranged lectures in Spanish and English by visiting Americans and other out standing scholars, sponsored musical programs, gave ex hibits of American and Mexican art, and broadcast a book review program by radio. In addition to a two-way micro film service, it maintained a photoduplication laboratory, originally financed by the Rockefeller Foundation, which microfilmed Mexican historical documents and manuscripts for scholars and libraries In the United States. Xt guided the compilation of a union catalogue of publications on the biological and medical sciences in selected Mexican libra ries, a project which was likewise financed by the Rocke feller Foundation. For children, it maintained a small library of children's books in two languages, offered story hours, exhibited free movies on Saturdays, and maintained revolving deposits of picture books. Other activities for children included poster-making, puppet shows, puzzles, and "Responsibility for Administration of Libraries in Mexico, Nicaragua* and Uruguay," loc. cit.,; ’ ’ Department of State Administers U* S., Libraries in Other American Republics,,M The Record., Ill; (February* 1947), 34-35* classes irt painting,8^' The acceptance of the library by the Mexican, people is indicated to some extent by its growth and its use. The original collection of nearly 5,000 books was used by 18,371 persons in its first year of existence. By 1945, there were 133,361 readers.8^ At the end of 1952, it had 23,454 books in its collection, of which 3,500 were in Spanish and the rest in English. It also subscribed to 538 periodicals and newspapers of many types, and had 13,601 pamphlets, government documents, and college catalogues on file. Its registered borrowers numbered 11,409, of whom 8, 600 were adults and 2,809 were children. Of these, 45 per cent were students, 20 per cent were members of the professions, and 10 per cent were teachers,8^ The library’s activities were not confined to Mexico City* Its bookmobile serviced ten villages near the capital, and its extension service by mail made its books available anywhere in the republic. Xt maintained two ^Andy G. Wilkison, "Biblioteca Benjamin Franklin," The Program of the Interdepartmental Committee on Scienti fic and Cultural Cooperation. Department of State Publica tion No. 2994 (Washington: U* $* Government Printing Office, 1947), pp. 22-25. 85Ibid., p. 21. 88E, M. Heiliger,, Director, "U.. S . , Information Center Quarterly Report, October-December,, 1952,," Mexico,, D* F„January, 1953.. small branches In Mexico City,, one, at the cultural Insti- tute and the other at a government housing project* Three branches in Guadalajara* Monterrey* and Puebla contained a total of more than 11*000 volumes* In 1931, more than 250,000 readers entered the doors of the Benjamin Franklin Libraries and its branches, more than 1,000,000 books were circulated for home use, and some 14,000 questions were 07 answered at reference desks. That the library was not only politically acceptable but even desirable was demonstrated at its founding and during Its tenth anniversary celebrations. In April, 1942, at its official opening, President Avila Camacho said, "With the installation of this magnificent reading center, the people of the United States send us a permanent embassy 00 of Pan-American good will." The tenth anniversary cele brations in 1952 were sponsored jointly by the American Ambassador and the Mexican Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Education in a series of ceremonies in the library, the Palace of Fine Arts, and Chapultepec Castle. The Mexican officials not only participated actively but actually took ^ Biblioteca Beniamin Franklin: 1942-1952 (Mexico City: U. S, Information Service, 1952), pp. 2-12, S. , Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1944, 78th Cong.,, 1st Sess.,, 1943, p. 333., 294 the lead in planning and executing the; ceremonies., ^ Further evidence of the library*s political accepta bility is found in a public opinion; survey conducted for the United States Information Service. Half of the inter viewed population of Mexico City and one person in every four in a nation-wide cross section had heard of the li brary. The more than 10 per cent who were aware that the United States was the library*s sponsor were significantly more friendly toward the United States and more ready to advocate active support of United States international policies if needed. Actual patronage of the library was associated with strong feelings of goodwill toward this country and a high degree of approval of its foreign poli cies in the cold war,^ Distribution of American Books Closely related to the establishment of American libraries was the distribution of American books in Latin America. The program consisted of gifts of books and periodicals to the three new libraries established by the ^ The New York Times> June 16, 1952; Novedades (Mexico City), June 26, 1952; El Universal (Mexico City), June 12, 16, 1952. 9^A Report on Attitudes Toward the United States and Reactions to the United States Information Service Program in Mexico: A Summary Digest (New York: Inter- national Public Opinion Research, Inc., 1953), pp., 10-11 (processed), 295 United States, gifts to the Latin American libraries, ednr national institutions, cultural institutes, and individuals, and the promotion of regular commercial sales through book- stores, The principal presentation project from 1943 to 1947 was the "Books for Latin America Project," which was begun by the American Library Association tinder a $140,000 contract signed with the Coordinator in 1942. By the end of May, 1943, a list of 472 Latin American libraries had been approved to receive the books, and a list of 1,279 books and 460 periodicals was sent to them and the American missions. All books on the lists were to be written by United States citizens, printed in English, and published in the United States. Publications included in these lists were selected to enable the foreign reader to obtain a picture of the United States today, its history, culture, and achieve ments in various fields of endeavor. The books em braced fiction and non-fiction, scientific and tech nical writings, reference works, and children's books, both new and old, Participating libraries were to have freedom of choice within their quotas and were not limited to titles on the approved lists. After July 1, 1943, and until the end of 1947, the ^Report of the Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, May, 1943, p. 11 (mimeo graphed) . 9^Ibid., pp. 5-13,, ... 296 **Books for Latin America Project” operated in a similar fashion under grants from the Department of State, An advisory committee representing the department, the Library of Congress, and the American Library Association screened requests for books and made allotments. Selections were made by Latin American librarians from lists prepared by the American Library Association and commercial publishers* In the field, the cultural attaches, the American libraries, and the embassies cooperated In selecting libraries to receive the books and assisted in their distribution, often with appropriate public ceremonies* Xn 1943 and 1944, more than 30,000 books and 41,000 Individual copies of periodi* cals were distributed. The 1945 project distributed 7,219 books and 323 subscriptions to periodicals to 203 libraries In all twenty Latin American countries* The major portion of the requests was in scientific, technical and medical fields, although requests for publications in the belles* lettres class grew considerably. In the 1946 project, in preparation for future changes in administration, full credit was given for the first time to the support given by the Department of State to the program of book distribution, during the preceding y e a r s . ^3 Between 1943 and the end 93u. s., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri- ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1947, 79th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1946, pp. 562-63; Rae. Cecilia Kipp, Executive Assistant, International Relations. 297 of 1947, more than, 100,000 volumes were distributed under 94 allotments totalling $365,000, After the passage of the Smith~Mmdt Act in January, 1948, the direct participation of the American Library Association in the program was ended. Until 1948, the exchange of books was regarded as a reciprocal program, and Latin Americans sent books to the United States in response to the books offered by the American Library Association. From July to December, 1946, the Department of State received from Latin America for distribution in the United States 1,420 books and other publications. Likewise, the American Library Association received about 3,000 books and other items in exchange over a ten-months period. The average reciprocal return from the other American republics was about 250 publications monthly,Furthermore, this type of response tended to increase in quantity toward the end of the five-year "Books for Latin America Project," The Latin American librarians also demonstrated increased professional skill and interest Office, American Library Association, "Report on Books for Latin America Project--1945," Washington, December 10, 1947 (mimeographed); Rae Cecilia Kipp, "Report on the 1946 Books for Latin America Project," Washington, December 16, 1947 (mimeographed). 9^0. S., Department of State, Cooperation in the. Americas, p. 100. ^^Ibid,, p, 101 in selecting books and in general professional advance* meat.^ In exchange for 15*506 items distributed to 524 institutions in 81 cities in Latin America, the library of Congress by 1949 had received in return 34,265 pieces of library materials from 400 institutions*^ The presentation of books to Latin Americans was made in other ways from the beginning of the cultural rela tions program* American books in English and in transla tion were given individually to leading citizens, members of the government, professional groups, university profes sors, writers, editors, and institutions of many kinds in the host country. Particular attention was paid to the foreign libraries and institutions and individuals in the educational systems. Presentations were made by mail, per sonal visits of cultural and information officers, at the overseas libraries, and at formal ceremonies over which the 98 ambassador sometimes presided. The Department of State 96 Kipp, "Report on the 1946 Books for Latin America Project," pp. 1-2. S., Department of State, Trading Ideas with the World, p. 39. ^^Minutes of Meeting of February 25-26, 1942, General Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, p. 24 (mimeographed); U. S.,, Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hear ings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1944. 78th Cong., 1st Sess., 1943, pp. 336-37; "United States Informa tion Centers," Division of Libraries and Institutes, De partment of State, Washington, November 14, 1950, p. 8 (processed); U„ S., Advisory Commission on Educational 299 •Sent out book packets of inexpensive editions o£ classics or works of wide appeal for distribution by the embassies* A small allotment to each embassy provided for the purchase of American publications locally for presentation to insti tutions with special interests or needs. Books were also given as prizes in essay contests, in English classes, and elsewhere.^ To stimulate interest in reading American books, the Department of State participated in book fairs and ex hibits, Traveling book exhibits were shown at book fairs, conferences, cultural centers, and local institutions. Some of the book exhibits toured provincial cities under the auspices of the ministries of education and other interested officials.^0 Exhibits were designed to demon strate general cultural trends, progress in some specific fields, or American skill in manufacturing books. As long Exchange, Seventh Semiannual Report on Educational Exchange Activities (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1952), p. vi; idem, Eighth Semiannual Report on Educational Exchange Activities (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1953), p. 3; U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings, Department of State Appropri ations for 1953, 82nd Cong., 2nd Sess., 1952, Part 2, p* 1193. s., Department of State, Cooperation in the Americas, pp. 100-101. lQQIbid., pp. 99-100; U, S., Advisory Commission on Educational Exchange, Second Semiannual Report, on Educa tional Exchange Activities (Washington:. U., S« Government Printing Office,. 1950), pp« 25-26.« sea as it was in existence, the. Department of State worked closely with the United States International Book Associ** at,ion, Inc,, the export organization of leading American publishers.. The department also maintained a liaison and information service with individual commercial publishers, government agencies, cultural organizations, universities, and foundations in the United States that were interested in commercial problems or cultural exchanges* The work of the Department of State in the exchange of books was supplemented by that of the Library of Con4 * gress, which prepared the United States Quarterly Book List, as provided by the Buenos Aires conference in 1936, It was distributed to libraries, booksellers, students, and professional workers in Latin America to inform them of outstanding United States publications. It also provided books, microfilms and photostats of scientific articles and historical documents, photographs, and printed catalogue cards. The exchange of books was supplemented also by technical publications and information prepared by the Office of Education and the other member agencies of the i m J - ' JJ-"Book Activities of the Division of Libraries and Institutes," Statement prepared for the National Con-* ference on International Educational Reconstruction, November 2,2-23, 1946, Department of State, Washington, 1946, pp> 4-6 (mimeographed)» 301 Interdepartmental. Committee, Translations of American Books Suggestions for the translation of American books into Spanish and publication in Latin America were made as early as 1940 by the General Advisory Committee of the Division of Cultural Relations in Washington and by the 103 American Embassy in Mexico City. w The first concrete steps in this direction were made by the Coordinator. In the summer of 1941, Dr, Lewis Hanke of the Hispanic Founda tion of the Library of Congress drew up a list of books in the fields of biography, essay, history, education, phi losophy, art, public health, nursing, medicine, and child ren's literature which was approved by the Coordinator and the Department of State. With a grant of $75,000 from the Coordinator, he made arrangements with publishers in Latin America to have them translated and published,By S., Department of State, Cooperation in the Americas, p. 31; idem, Activities of the Interdepartmental Committee on Scientific and Cultural Cooperation, Depart ment of State Publication No. 2622 (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, June 30, 1946), pp. 95-96. 103fcjinutes of the Meeting of July 9, 1940, General Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural Relations, Depart ment of State, Washington, pp. 17-18 (mimeographed); Ameri can Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 11,284 to the Department of State, Washington, August 23, 1940. 104j^nutes of Meeting of September 17-18, 1941, General Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, p* 49 (mimeographed) idem, February 25-26, 1942, p., 22„ 302 July, 1943, when the translation program was transferred to the Department of State, the Coordinator had contracted for a total of 117 separate publications, 52 in Spanish, 49 in Portuguese, 15 in English, and 1 in French. By the end of 105 the year, 57 of these had been published. The pattern of agreement with the publishers arranged by the Coordinator during the early war years was to prevail in principle throughout the whole period* Government assistance consisted of the purchase of from one-tenth to one-third of the copies at a discount of 30 to 40 per cent or paying for the translation or translation rights in exchange for copies of the book in equal value. The books acquired by the government were then distributed through its missions, and the publisher distributed the remainder through regular commercial channels. Editions ranged in size from 2,000 copies, particularly during the war years, to 10,000 or even 20,000 copies in some cases by 1952.^^ Government grants for translation were also 10 5 S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1945, 78th Cong., 2nd Sess*, 1944, pp. 311-12. The publication of 15 Latin American books in English was in keeping with the Coordinator’s policy of reciprocity in cultural relations., ^^Minutes of Meeting, of September 17-18, 1941, General Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural Relations, Department, of State, Washington, p. 49 (mimeographed); idem, February 25“26, 1942, p. 22; U.. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings. Department of State. Appropriation Bill for 1944-, . 78th, Cong., 1st Sess.,, 303 given far the Spanish or Portuguese translation, of books that otherwise might not be translated or would be priced so high that the number of readers would be small, Books published In Latin America were not only less expensive, but they were more welcome in Latin America than books published in Spanish or Portuguese in the United States,^® The principal publishing centers in Latin America were located in Mexico City, Buenos Aires, Santiago, and Rio de Janeiro, Mexico City, which had sales outlets through commercial channels in the rest of the Spanish speaking world, received more than 60 per cent of the funds available for Spanish translations in 1952, The embassy there was expected to assist in meeting the need for 1943, p. 336; U. S., Congress, House., Committee on Appro priations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1945, 78th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1944, pp. 310-11; Berkner, op. cit., p. 63; American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 2,137, to the Department of State, Washington, March 12, 1952; U. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings on H, R. 7289. 82nd Cong,, 2nd Sess., 1952, p. 1205. ■^?U. S., Department of State* Cooperation in the Americas, p. 97; Watson Davis, "Books for the New World," The Record, III (June, 1947), 1-2. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1944. 78th Cong., 1st Sess., 1943, pp. 337-38; American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No» 2,296 to the Department of State, Washington, March 15, 1951 (enclosure, "Semi- Annual Evaluation Report of US.IE Activities in Mexico.,, June, L-November 30, 1950")., publications by missions in other Spanish speaking areas* Small allotments, usually worth under $1,0QQ each, were also occasionally given to embassies for the local purchase of books already translated and published which were con sidered to conform to the objectives of the program, Beginning in 1944, the Department of State adminis tered the book translation program under allotments from the Interdepartmental Committee through Science Service, a non-profit organization for the popularization of science, which had developed contacts with publishers in Latin America. By 1947, Science Service had cooperated with forty-three Latin American publishers and fifty-three United States publishers in facilitating translations or purchases. Although the translations included the fields of literature, music, and the social sciences, most of them 10V S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1945, 78th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1944, pp. 310-11; U. S., Department of State, Circular Airgram to American Diplo matic Officers in Mexico, Buenos Aires, Rio de Janeiro, Santiago, Habana, "Reference Non-Government Book Transla tion Program," October 11, 1949; U. S., Department of State, Washington, Instruction No. 15b to the American Embassy, Mexico City, January 8, 1952, H0"More Books on U. S.," The Record, , I (April-May, 1945), 13; U* S.., Department of State, Washington, Instruc tion No. 8,506 to the American Embassy, Mexico. City, March 27, 1946; idem, Airgram. No. A-381, January 2, 1951; idem, . Airgram, No. A-429, December 19, 1952., 305 111 were in the scientific* technical* and medical fields. By the end of 1949* Science Service had arranged for the publication of more than 340 books in translation,’ *^ Suggestions for translations were made by publishers in Latin America and the United States, by cultural officers in the embassies, by various government and private agecr cies, and by Science Service itself.The control of policy* however, rested with the Division of Libraries and Institutes in the Department of State. In 1950, when the "campaign of truth" began, the department's policy shifted from an emphasis on scientific and technical books to literature of other types in order to portray more adequately all aspects of American life and institutions. On December 31, 1949, the contract with Science Service was terminated; henceforth the American missions abroad were to negotiate directly with foreign 115 publishers for translations. 5., Department of State, Cooperation in the Americas, p. 97; Watson Davis, loc. cit.„ pp. 1-4, 112«Report on Latin American Book Translation Project," Science Service, Inc., Washington, December 31, 1950, 5., Department of State, Cooperation in.the Americas, p. 97; Watson Davis, loc. cit»« p* 1; Berkner, pp.. cit«p, 62« 114Berkner, op., cit.,, p., 63« 1 I5 Ib id ., One treason advanced for discontinuing the emphasis on the translation of scientific and technical books was that American exchange professors in science reported to the department on their return that most science courses were taught in English and that the students readily used reference books in English* x Another apparent reason is found in the desire to place greater emphasis on under standing the United States and the international political situation. This shift of policy is apparent in the list of translations arranged by the American Embassy in Mexico City in 1951 and 1952* Of about thirty books, only one was in the field of the natural sciences during that period. Others were designed to show the economic, social, educa tional, musical and literary life of the United States, Included on the lists were titles which made a direct approach to the political objectives of the program. ■^■^Letter from Lawrence S. Morris, Division of Libraries and Institutes, Department of State, Washington, to Mrs. Christina Buechner, Executive Secretary, Committee on Inter-American Scientific Publications, Harvard College Observatory, Cambridge, Mass,, December 15, 1948. kk^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 492 to the Department of State, Washington, August 22, 1951; idem. Despatch No. 267, August 8, 1952. The following titles, referred to in the despatches above, will serve to illustrate the point*, Enrique Castro Delgado, I Lost My Faith in Moscow; Victor Kravchenko, I Chose Freedom; Frederick Martin Stem, Capitalism in the United States, The embassy sponsored a. second, edition of the last two titles. It purchased half of. a. 10,000 edition of the third title, which, was raised in 1951. to 60,000.. A revised 307 The translation program also included government publications under the program of the Interdepartmental Committee. The Department of State established the Central Translating Office in July, 1940, to translate government reports, pamphlets, and bulletins of an educational, scien tific, or technical nature in such fields as public health, sanitation, child care, commerce, agriculture, conserva tion, aviation, and industrial safety,Continued as the Division of Language Services after the war, it had dis tributed to the Latin American countries by 1948 some edition numbered 100,000 copies, of which the embassy pur chased half. Barbara Ward, Policy for the West, and Nevins and Commager, Pocket History of the United States, were under consideration for translation and publication at the close of 1952. Of a list of fifteen books translated to Spanish directly under the auspices of the department between July 1, 1950, and March 9, 1953, six bear titles dealing with communism, six have titles referring to some aspect of United States culture, one deals with the United Nations, and two are on other subjects. U. S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Hearings, Overseas Information Programs of the United States, 83rd Cong., 1st Sess., 1953, Part 2, p. 959. H^U. Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1943, 77th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1942, pp. 367-68* U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1944. 78th Cong., 1st Sess., 1943, pp. 312-18; U« S., Congress, House, Committee, on Appropriations, Hearings. Department, of State Appropriation Bill for 1945, 78th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1944, pp. 280-81. The Central Translating Office also translated statements on foreign policy for press releases, and radio broadcasting, reviewed the scripts of foreign language motion pictures for the Coordinator, and provided inter preting; and translating, services for international, confer ences. and, agreements, related, to. the program, of; inter- American cooperation., 308 3,000,000 copies of 274 translations through embassies, consulates, and local government officials and organiza tions* Many were reproduced abroad in newspapers and maga zines or by means of plastic plates sold by the Government Printing Office."^ After the “campaign of truth" began, the Department of State continued to issue copies of reprints and revisions of translated government publications of a practical or technical nature at the request of American missions abroad. Such publications continued to be in constant demand in Mexico, and it proved essential to continue their distribution in order to provide channels for distributing the growing quantity of pamphlets and other material of a more political nature* S., Department of State, International Tech nical and Cultural Cooperation: United States Participation 1938-1948. Report for the U. S. Delegation to the Ninth International Conference of American States (Washington? U, S* Government Printing Office, 1948), pp. 139-40. 1 90 U. S., Advisory Commission on Educational Ex change, Fifth Semiannual Report on Educational Exchange Activities (Washington? U. S. Government Printing Office, 1951), p* 4; U« S., Department of State, Washington, Air gram, No. A-381 to the American Embassy, Mexico City, January 2, 1951. ■^^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 903 to the Department of State, Washington, October 9, 1951 (enclosure, "Semi-Annual. Evaluation Report of USIE Activi ties in Mexico"); idem, Despatch No. 2,299, March 15,. 1,951; idem, Despatch No., 1., 969* March 11, 1953., 309 Exchanges in the Field of Are The first efforts by the United States Government to exhibit American art in Latin America were undertaken by the Coordinator between 1941 and 1943, Under the direction of the art critics of four art museums in New York, three collections of 300 contemporary American oil paintings and water colors were sent on a 50,000 mile tour of the prin cipal Latin American cities from Mexico to Argentina, where they were seen by 218,000 persons. The Coordinator also distributed more than 8,000 publications on art, including museum catalogues, bulletins, journals, and books, and his office supplied travel grants and scholarships to a few promising art students to study in the United States. The Coordinator also encouraged the reciprocal exhibition of Latin American art in the United States,122 In July, 1943, the responsibility for administering the art program was assumed by the Department of State, and several hundred exhibits previously prepared by the Coordi nator were transferred to the department for distribution in Latin America. These included a graphic arts exhibit of fine books, childrenfs paintings, silk^screen prints and 12^"Exchange of Art Exhibits,” Department of State Bulletin, IV (May 24,, 1941),. 63S-39; Hanson, op. cit. „ pp* 39-41; Rowland., op. cit*,. p. 93.; U., S., Congress, House* Committee on Appropriations* Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1943. 77th Cong.,, 2nd Sess.. f .1942.,,; pp., 471-72.. 310 techniques* lithographs* and photo'-mural and photographic exhibits* most of them portraying aspects of art and life in the United States* To administer the Coordinator's collections and conduct similar activities, an Inter-American Office was established early in 1944 in the National Gallery of Art on funds provided by the Department of State* By the end of its program at the close of the fiscal year 1948, the National Gallery of Art had organized eleven exhibits for showing in Latin America at a cost of $117*000* These in' eluded North American Indian art, French prints from the Rosenwald collection, combat art, water colors and other American paintings, as well as photographic displays. It also prepared and distributed, chiefly to the cultural institutes, twenty-five art reference sets, consisting of color reproductions, slides, and publications on American paintings from the eighteenth century to the present. Reciprocally, it participated in the showing of three Latin American exhibits in the United States and served as a clearing house for information on exchanges in the field Hanson, op. cit.p. 40; Report of the Division, of Cultural Relations, Department of State,. Washington, October, 1943, p. 3, Appendix B, pp.. 15-16 (mimeographed).. 311 of The Department of State supplemented these efforts in several ways. It brought Latin American exhibits, artists, and art students to the United States and estab lished art loan libraries in the cultural institutes in Latin America. In 1946, it purchased collections of more than one hundred original prints by contemporary American artists and thirty-five water colors for exhibi tion over a period of several years by the cultural centers in Latin America. ^ 6 In 1946, the Department of State also purchased for $49,000 a collection of seventy-nine progressive and modem oil paintings by contemporary American artists for exhibi tion around the world over a period of many years. Modem ^Madaline W. Nichols, ^Cultural Relations," Inter-American Affairs: 1944. ed. Arthur P. Whitaker (New York: Columbia University Press, 1945), p. 194; Margaret D. Garrett, Acting Chief, "Quarterly Report of the Inter- American Office to the Department of State and the Art Ad visory Committee,1 1 National Gallery of Art, Washington, October 30, 1945; letter from Carl A, Sauer, Division of Cultural Cooperation, Department of State, to Mrs* Margaret D. Garrett, Acting Chief, Inter-American Office, National Gallery of Art, November 26, 1945; U. S., Department of State, International Technical and Cultural Cooperation: United States Participation 1938-1948. pp. 143-46, •k^Nichols, loc, cit, 12.6"Original Art Works for Cultural Centers, " The Record, , II, (January-February,, 1946),. 18; "Exhibition of Original, American Watercolors,, The' Record, , II, (June, 1946),, 24.-25, 3X2 art was emphasised because of numerous suggestions from foreign artists and art experts and the desire to counter act stereotyped impressions that art in the United States lacked originality and was imitative of academic European schools* The expense and difficulties in securing such art on a loan basis made it more economical in the long run to purchase the collection. Before it was divided into two parts and sent to Europe and Latin America/ it was ex hibited in the United States and given wide publicity with 127 photographic illustrations in current periodicals. Strong opposition to the exhibition of modem art abroad soon developed in Congress and elsewhere. An immediate consequence was that the exhibit was recalled and declared war surplus for disposal at less than cost.^® The permanent consequence of this venture into the field of modem art was a specific prohibition against 127"^emorancjum on Art Program," Office of Inter national Information and Cultural Affairs, Department of State, Washington, February 11, 1947 (processed). ^2-^U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1948. 80th Cong., 1st Sess., 1947, pp. 412-22; U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1949. 80th Cong., 2nd Sess., 1948, p. 519. Similar opposition had been expressed early in Congress even by supporters of the cultural relations program when some untraditional art was selected by four museums for the Coordinator's exhibits in Latin. America in 1941 and 1942* U.. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Department of State Appropri ation Bill for 1943. 77th Cong..,. 2nd Sess.,, 1942,, pp.. 470- 73. goverament-financ ed exhibits laid down as a policy by Con gress during the enactment of the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948, which has served since as the basic legislation for cultural relations. After 1948, the department's program in the field of fine arts was limited to a small number of travel grants to individuals, the dissemination of printed and visual materials, and the facilitation of private projects by volunteer artists and organizations without government funds. Such activities were considered a mere holding operation and inadequate to meet Soviet propaganda against the United States during the cold war.^^ The principal justification for the government- sponsored art exhibits was largely the same throughout the entire period. American art was intended to counteract widely held beliefs, reinforced first by the propaganda of the Axis and then by that of the Soviet Union* that Ameri cans were an uncultured, materialistic, money-mad people who had developed their knowledge of science and technology but lacked artistic and cultural talents. 5., Advisory Commission on Educational Ex change* Seventh Semiannual Report on Educational Exchange Activities (Washington; U. S* Government Printing Office, 1952), pp. 5-6; idem, . Eighth Semiannual Report on Educa tional Exchange Activities (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1953), pp* 7-9* 5., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1944, 78th Cong., 1st Sess., 1943, p. 333; U, S., Congress* House, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Hearings, 314 Another justification for the exchanges In this field was that the visual arts were considered to appeal to the emotions as well as to the reason of both the educated and the illiterate without the need for interpreters or translators. The desire of people of all classes to be considered cultured was expected to bring them to the art exhibits in the cultural institutes in Latin America, where it was hoped that they would become interested in other aspects of American culture through boohs, English classes, and other means. Exchanges in the Field of Music Out of the conference of music leaders called by the Division of Cultural Relations in 1939 grew the first programs for exchanges in the field of music sponsored by the Coordinator, the Fan American Union, the Library of United States Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1947, 80th Cong., 1st Sess,, 1947, H. R. 3342, p. 72; U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hear ings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1948, 80th Cong., 1st Sess., 1947, p. 417; U. S., Advisory Commission on Educational Exchange, Eighth Semiannual Report on Edu- cational Exchange Activities (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1953), p. 313; American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 1,170 to the Department of State, Washington, December 3, 1952. ■^■^Minutes of Meeting of February 25*26, 1942, General Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, Appendix 3, p. 1 (mimeo graphed); U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1944, 78th Cong,, 1st Sess,, 1943, p, 333. Congress and the Department of State. The principal financial support at first was provided by the Coordi nator. After 1943, the Department of State made grants- in-aid to assist the program. In addition to extending aid to other agencies, the Coordinator sent the Yale University Glee Club on tour of Latin America in 1941, awarded travel grants to music stu dents and professional musicians of both the United States and Latin America, and established music loan libraries in each of the capital cities of Latin America. The Coordi nator produced a comprehensive series of recordings of American music of all types for broadcasting by Latin American radio stations. Motion picture films devoted to American music were also distributed to Latin America.^4 With the financial support of the Coordinator, the Pan American Union established a Music Division to serve as a clearing house of information on both classical and popular music of the Americas* It published booklets on American music, stimulated the commercial publication of Latin American music, maintained a reference collection of ^^Hanson, on. cit.. pp. 42-43. •^■^U. S«, Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1946~ 79th Cong,, 1st Sess., 1945, p* 248* ^•^Hanson, op. cit.pp. 41-44* 316 folk songs and compositions,, and provided music for examin ation and loan. Funds to continue the program subsequently came from other sources, including the Carnegie Corporation 1315 and the Fan American Union itself. The Library of Congress published an encyclopedic Guide to Latin American Music for use by universities, radio stations, and music publishers, prepared from col lections in its archives more than twenty albums of re corded folk music of the United States, and recorded or received in exchange native folk music of Latin America. Fart of this program was administered under the program of the Interdepartmental Committee* After 1943, the administration of the music loan libraries was assumed by the Library of Congress under the auspices of the Department of State, which continued to develop them. By 1948, American music loan libraries had been established in twenty-two cities, including all the capitals, of Latin America. Their collections contained i o -c Hanson, loc* cit.: U. S., Congress, House, Com mittee on Appropriations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1942* 77th Cong., 1st Sess*, 1941, pp* 70-71* ■^Hanson, o p. cit., p. 42; U, S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1943, 77th Cong*, 2nd Sess., 1942, pp. 346-48; U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1944. 78th Cong., 1st Sess*, 1943, pp. 297, 334-35; U. S., Department of State Instruction No. 275 to the American Embassy, Mexico City, June 30, 1948. 31? orchestral scores, chamber music with parts, instrumental, vocal, choral, bank, and folk music, popular music with orchestrations, recordings, music education material and musical publications. Three special depositories existed in Rio de Janeiro, Montevideo, and Santiago. Cultural institutes and the three American libraries in Latin America served as custodians of the music libraries. The Department of State also sent recordings of popular and classical music, radio-phonograph combinations and song books to the cultural institutes to encourage the study of American music.The department, in addition, took steps to meet specific requests for music, to provide information, and to facilitate contacts between musicians 139 abroad and sources of American music. ^Report of the Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, November, 1943, Appendix B, pp. 15-16 (mimeographed); U. S., Department of State, Cir cular Instruction to Certain American Diplomatic and Con sular Officers in the Other American Republics, ’ 'Material for American Music Loan Library, ” May 30, 1945; idem. International Technical and Cultural Cooperation: United States Participation 1938-1943. p. 147: "Widespread Per- formances Abroad of American Music, ” The Record. Ill (June, 1947), 22-23. S., Congress* House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1944. 78th Cong., 1st Sess., 1943, pp. 334-35; Greene and Esman, Cultural Centers in the Other American Republics* pp. 16-17; U, S., Department of State, Cooperation in the Americas, pp. 77-78. ^^McMurry and lee, op* cit.. p. 221; U* S., Con gress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1948. 80th Cong,,,, 1st Seas.., 1947V pp. 434-35* The Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 made no specific provi- sion for exchanges in the field of music. After its enactment, the departments appropriations in the field of fine arts and music were too modest to permit any degree of emphasis in these areas except for a few travel grants, publications, and the facilitation of private projects 1/1 conducted on a volunteer basis. Some recognition was given to music also in films and in radio activities. Musical programs were broadcast abroad with the cooperation of private groups, and recordings were produced for broad* cast by foreign radio stations.After 1950, one or two films a year were devoted to demonstrating some aspect of American music, resuming a program begun during the war.^* The program of exchanges in the field of music was undertaken to counteract misconceptions regarding American musical ability created by jazz and motion picture music 140U. S., 62 Stat. 7. 5., Advisory Commission on Educational Ex change, Seventh Semiannual Report on Educational Exchange Activities (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office. 1952), pp. 5-6; idem. Eighth Semiannual Report on Educa tional Exchange Activities (Washington; U. S. Government Printing Office, 1953), p. 7, 5., Congress, Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Hearings. Overseas Information Programs of the United States, 83rd Cong., 1st Sess*, 1953, Part 2, pp. 1208-22. 5., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations,. Hearings. Department, of State Appropriations for 1952, , 82nd. Cong.,, 1st Sess..,, 1951, pp« 970-71., 319 and to build up a wider knowledge and respect for American music in Latin America* After the Second World War, music exchanges were justified on the grounds that they contributed to correcting the misconception "that our cre ative efforts were derivative or imitative of European 145 music and not worthy of an artistically mature nation." During the "campaign of truth," it was believed necessary to give greater emphasis to music in order to combat Soviet propaganda, which played upon the widespread impression that the United States was lacking in moral and spiritual values and creative ability in the purely cultural fields* Music was used in films to build up American prestige and in radio programs to "sugar-coat" propaganda messages, to enliven the programs, to attract an audience and increase interest, and to demonstrate that the United Hanson, op* cit*« p. 42; U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1942. 77th Cong., 1st Sess., 1941, p. 71; letter from Luther H. Evans, Librarian of Congress, to William T. Stone, Director, Office of International Information and Cultural Affairs, Department of State, Washington, May 6, 1946. 14-5"widespread Performances Abroad of American Music," The Record. Ill (June, 1947), 22-23. 146^ s., Advisory Commission on Educational Ex change, Eighth Semiannual Report on Educational Exchange Activities (Washingtoni U.i S.> Government Printing Office* 1,953), p. 7., 320 147 States was not devoid of culture. The Cultural Institutes The growth and development of the Institutes*— A principal focal point for many aspects of the foregoing activities in the Latin American countries was the bi national cultural institute. Operating under such varied names as instituto. centro, clube, academia, uniao, and associacdo. the cultural institutes provided an institu tional framework for the activities of cultural exchange between Americans and Latin Americans. The first cultural institute to be established was the Instituto Cultural Argentino-Norteamericano in Buenos Aires in 1927. Its founders were resident American busi ness and professional men and outstanding Argentine intel lectuals and leaders in various fields, many of whom had studied or traveled in the United States and wished to strengthen the ties between the two countries through edu cational and social activities, Its principal activities included English classes, a small library, lectures, and other facilities. Twenty years after its founding, ICANA, W7U. S., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings, Department of State Appropriations for 1952, 82nd Cong., 1st Sess** 1951* pp. 970-71; U. S., Congress, Senate* Committee on Foreign Relations, Hearings. Overseas Information Programs of the United States.. 83rd Cong., 1st Sess** 1953, Part 2* p. 1208* 321 as it became known, from its initials# owned its own build ings# had a library of 5#000 volumes# an administrative staff of 20 persons and more than 60 teachers with an en- rollment of 4#000 students* In the 1930fs, other institutions of the same type were founded for similar purposes in seven other major cities of Latin America* By 1940# cultural institutes were operating in Havana# Port-au-Prince# Sao Paulo# Rio de Janeiro# Santiago# Lima# and Caracas. All were established through private initiative before the United States Govern- UQ meut began its program of assistance to such centers. ^7 Stimulated by support from the United States Government, the number of cultural institutes and the num ber of persons being reached by their activities showed a steady growth in the period under consideration. The num ber of cultural institutes increased from the eight in existence before the war to a total of twenty-seven inde pendent and approximately forty branch centers by 1947.^*^ ■^Leonard Ross Klein, "Making Friends with Our Neighbors," Bulletin of the Pan American Union* LXXXI (September, 1947), 468* """" ■^James, loc. cit. * p. 81; Edmund R* Murphy, "Co operation with Cultural Centers in the Other American Republics," The Program of the Interdepartmental Committee on Scientific and Cultural. Cooperation* . Department of State Publication No. 2994 (Washington; U.. S. Government Printing Office# 1947), p< 26« l^OjQein, loc*. cit. „ p., 468; Murphy, loc. cit. . . p* 31* 322 By 1952, there were thirty cultural centers in Latin America, and the program had been expanded to include four new such institutions in the Middle East and the Far East, making a total of thirty-four, ^*1 Cultural institutes existed in all the countries of Latin America except Panama and El Salvador. In 1943, the total enrollment in the cultural insti- 153 fcutes was 12,000 students. By 1945, they had some 10,000 dues-paying members, more than 24,000 students en rolled, and a total attendance at all types of public 154 functions of nearly 150,000 persons. For the calendar year of 1950, the thirty principal cultural institutes in Latin America showed a membership of nearly 25,000, an enrollment in English classes of more than 50,000, and an attendance at public programs of more than 600,000 per sons* 1510. s., Congress, House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriations for 1953. 82nd Cong., 2nd Sess*, Part 2, p. 171. 3-52^ 3^ Department of State, r , Assistance to the Cultural Centers Program,” Division of Libraries and Insti tutes, Department of State, Washington, April 14, 1949, Attachment No. 1 (processed). •^%cMurty and Lee, on. cit»» p. 216* 154^ s, y Department of State, America— "A Full and Fair Picture” (1st ed« rev«‘ Washington: U, S. Government Printing Office, June, 1946), p* 8, *5%. S., Department of State, Newsnotes: Activi ties of Cultural Centers in Latin America (Washington: Department of State, December, 1950),: p.. 1,9 (processed.)* 323 Financial support.--In 1940, the Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs began receiving re quests from American embassies in Latin America and from the cultural institutes themselves for financial assistance* After surveying the situation and consultation with the Department of State, the Joint Committee, and the General Advisory Committee, the Coordinator began making small grants-in-aid to some of the cultural institutes in 1941 for publications, equipment and materials for the services of professionally trained American citizens, and for small cash grants to help meet local operating expenses. In 1943, the program of assistance to cultural centers was taken over and continued by the Department of State. The Coordinator's initial grants were for $20,000 to help three institutes in Brazil and $30,000 to the Ameri can Council of Learned Societies to aid institutes in some 157 half dozen other countries. By early 1942, the American Council of Learned Societies had been allotted $63,500 by Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriations for 1952. 82nd Cong., 1st Sess., 1951, Part 2, p. 1919; Rowland,, op. cit.« pp. 94-95, ^^RoWland, loc. cit.; Minutes of Meeting of Sep tember 17-18, 1941, General Advisory Committee, Division of • Cultural Relations;, Department of State, Washington, pp. . 6-9 (mimeographed)« the Coordinator to be used as grants to the institutes*i58 Coordinator funds for the fiscal year of 1943 amounted to $271,850, but because the Department of State planned to encourage the institutes to become more self-supporting toward the close of the war, only $182,100 was requested of Congress for the fiscal year of 1944. The wartime plans to reduce the amount of United States Government aid to cultural institutes after the war failed to materialize as the institute program continued to develop* Between the Second World War and the Korean War, the annual appropriations for cultural institutes averaged about $500,000 a year.^® After the "campaign of truth" was begun, the Department of State budgeted $850,308 for the fiscal year of 1951 but reduced its request to Congress for the fiscal year of 1953 to $658,961**^ l^Sjiinutes a£ Meeting of February 25-26, 1942, General Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, p. 16 (mimeographed); Rowland, loc* cit« 159U. Congress* House, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings* Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1944* 78th Cong** 1st Sess*. 1943, p* 339* ^■^Klein, op* cit*. p. 475; David Hellyer, Around the Good Neighbor Network. Department of State Circular No* 6569 (Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, May, 1951), p* 4 (reprinted from The Rotarian, February, 1951)* S.,, Congress, House, Committee on, Appropri* atiotts, Hearings* Department, of State. Appropriations for 1953, 82nd Gong„„ 2nd S.es.sV, 1,952, Part 2, pp* 166-71*, 325 During 1943, approximately half the total expenses of operating the cultural institutes -was met locally, and in nearly half the institutes the local support exceeded the contribution from the United States.While appro priations by Congress increased steadily from 1941 to 1948, the amount of funds raised from local sources abroad was increasing faster than contributions by the United States Government. By the end of 1946, nearly 60 per cent of the cost of the entire operation was derived from local sources. Approximately this same proportion of self- support continued to prevail during the fiscal year of 1 1951. The principal sources of local income were tuition fees from English classes, membership dues, contributions from local business firms and individuals, grants-in-aid or free services from host governments, and miscellaneous receipts from local activities and gifts in the form of property and materials» Control of policy.--Despite assistance from the •^^Hanson, on. cit.. p. 24. ^%urpby* loc. cit.. p. 31. 164g4 Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings. Department of State Appropriations for 1952. 82nd Cong*, 1st Sess., 1951, p. 1718* U, S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropriations, Hearings., Department of State, Appropriations: for 1953. 82nd Cong.,, 2nd Sess;*, 1952, p. 1201, ^%urphy, loc. citi,pp« .31-32,* 326 United States Government in the form of financial grants* in-aid, equipment and materials, and the services of English teachers, it was established as a matter of policy as early as 1941 to leave the direction of the cultural institutes largely in local hands except for guidance and suggestions from the United States, To implement this policy during the war years, the American Council of Learned Societies served as a fiscal agent to transmit funds from the Coordinator to the institutes, but it 166 avoided any attempt to exercise control. On January 1, 1945, the American Council of Learned Societies discon tinued its services as a fiscal agent, and the administra tion of financial assistance and guidance was assumed di- 1 67 rectly by the Department of State, The function of the department was to serve . . . as a clearing-house of information on the centers, transmitting ideas developed in one to the others; ad vising on administrative techniques, particularly the expenditure and accounting of center funds; and develop ing the programs in line with the cultural objectives of the United States Government, -*-68 166f4iriutes of Meeting of September 17-18, 1941, General Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, p. 6 (mimeographed), ■^•^^Letters from Carl A. Sauer, Division of Science, Education, and Art, Department of State, Washington, to Albert H. Marckwardt, Director, English Language Institute, and Charles H. Stevens, Cultural Officer, American Embassy,, : Mexico City, June 30, 1944. ^^Dorothy E. Greene, "The Informal Diplomats,,! t The . American Foreign Service Journal, XXXII (October,, 1946),, .?« 327 While the amount and type of control exercised hy the Department of State varied according to circumstances and problems faced by the institutes, in general it was the consistent policy of the department to allow a large meas ure of local autonomy in order to encourage local responsi bility: It has been the policy of the Department of State to consider these institutes as autonomous organiza tions in which nationals rather than United States citizens take the leading part. The wisdom of this policy is now in evidence. Prospects are encouraging that the nationals may assume responsibility, corsDensrr rate with the position of authority which has been granted to them, for development of income from member- ship dues, fees for English classes, and other availa ble sources.169 The post war policy of the department was in prin ciple similar to that established during the war years. In testifying before a congressional committee in 1949, a representative of the department stated: Our policy has been to let the stimulus come from private citizens, American citizens and citizens of the particular country at the start, and if there is a center organized and it is non-political and they do carry out the type of activities which we are author ized to assist, then we consider the matter of assist ance. ■'•70 The administrative organization,— In general, the 1-6^ R e p o r t of the Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, December, 1942, p* 2 (mimeographed)* 170U. £>„, Congress, House, Committee on; Appropri ations, Hearings,. Department, of State Appropriation Bill, for 1950. 81st. Cong.,,, 1st Ses.s.«, 1949, p> 793.., • 328 institutes were located in attractively furnished buildings in or near the center of the business sections of the cities in which they were located. They were equipped with several classrooms, an auditorium, a library and reading room, a comfortable lounge, several offices, and a tearoom. Outdoors were generally found attractive gardens or patios 171 suitable for outdoor events. * The typical cultural institute was an autonomous cultural society incorporated under the laws of the host country. The charter generally provided that the society be a non-political, non-sectarian, and non-profit organiza tion organized for the purpose of encouraging mutual under standing between the United States and the country concerned through instruction in the English language and other aca demic, cultural, and social activities* The governing board was usually composed of nationals and resident American citizens, who were leaders in intellectual, professional and business affairs of the community. Both board members and officers were democratically elected by the members at large, who paid membership fees to help finance the insti tute, 172 After the program of assistance by the United States Govemment was begun in 1941, the administration of the *at - n.f . r A, a \ i n i - i i? . l^lQreene and Esman, on., cit.,* p. 4« ^72Murphy„ loc.' cit. , * pp.. 25.-2,6.* 329 cultural institutes was entrusted to an American director or executive secretary nominated and paid, by the Department of State but formally elected by the governing board and subject to its direction and supervision. The director was assisted by from two to five English teachers, likewise nominated and paid by the department but officially elected by the board. In 1952, the thirty-four binational centers, as the cultural institutes were now called, employed a total of ninety-three American employees serving on grants of funds from the Department of State. Their average annual compensation was §4,000 per year, plus an average quarters and living allowance of §2,000 in addition to travel ex penses. In 1947, when the American grantees numbered 84, there were some 300 teachers who were employed locally to assist with the English teaching program. Nationals of the country were chosen to teach the language of the host coun try. If the book collection in the center's library was large, a national or an American was selected to serve as librarian. Other employees were clerks, stenographers, janitors, and servants. l73Ibid. Sfs Congress,, Senate* Committee cm Appropri ations* Hearings,, Department of State Appropriations,for 1953, 82nd Cong..,. 2nd Sess.., 1952, pp.. 1199-1200.. • ^73Murphy,. loc. cit. . , . pp. 26, 32., 33G English classes.— One of the principal activities of the institutes was instruction in the English language* Tuition fees from such classes helped support the insti tutes. The classes were intended to help reduce the lan guage barrier to tinderstanding the United States both through publications and through direct contact with Ameri can citizens* Classes were available in beginning, inter mediate, and advanced English at all hours of the day, but the largest enrollments occurred in the later afternoon and evening hours, when the students were free from their regular employment* *^6 The students * motives for studying English were varied. University students found that they could not only meet the foreign language requirements of their own univer sities but they also often needed to know English to study courses in medicine, dentistry, engineering, and the sciences, since many of their advanced courses used text books in English. There was always the hope of qualifying for a scholarship to the United States* but, with or with out a scholarship, English was needed to qualify for ad mission to American colleges and universities,^7 one observer reported as follows? r i n n l»ifs u iiq » i n iiii [ii j t i, ^ Murphy* loc* cit* , * p* 2.6; Klein* loc., cit, * p„ 469-, 1-7'A*, C» Howell, "Teaching. English in Guatemala.* 1947’ , - " ' South Atlantic. Bulletin., XIIX (May* 1947 );„ 6-8:* 331 Some come because English is a necessity in their busi ness or professions, and others because they want greater enjoyment from American movies, magazines, and radio programs; still others seek to appreciate more fully our culture and civilization* In many cases the knowledge of English is a valuable social accomplish ment and often it provides a key to a richer life. This universal demand has resulted in the enrollment of many varied groups—-from pre-school youngsters to adults of many occupations and professions— from ele vator operators to cabinet ministers.178 In addition to the regular courses in English, which often led to a certificate of proficiency after two to four years of study, the institutes offered many special courses to meet local demands. Special courses were estab lished for such groups as doctors, dentists, nurses, lawyers, physicists, university students and others. Among the special classes were lessons by radio, courses for government officials, army officers, women with social and family interests, business men, and technicians* The vocabulary and subject matter in each course were selected to meet the interests of the students concerned.*^9 The more advanced students of English were offered special conversation classes and courses in American litera ture and history * Resident Americans abroad and members Klein, loc* cit. ^•^Murphy, loc. cit»; Klein, loc. cit.. p. 470; U. S., Advisory Commission on Educational Exchange, Two Wav Street, Department of State Publication No. 3892 (Washing ton: U. S. Government Printing Office, December, 1950), p« 7. 180Greene and Esman, op* cit * , , £» 5* . 332 of the Foreign Service were provided an opportunity to learn or to review Spanish, Portuguese, and French in special classes taught by native teachers or in social situations. One of the results of offering courses in English in the cultural institutes was the demand for intensive courses and summer seminars for native teachers of English in the Latin American school systems. Intensive work was given in American pronunciation of English, phonetics, grammar, oral and written composition, teaching methods, and American literature. This formal training in English was supplemented by lectures and round-table discussions on American civilization and culture, educational films, conversational practice, teas, dances, community sings, and other social activities designed to draw the national teachers into closer contact with Americans and their customs. On their departure from the seminars, the nation al teachers were presented with gifts of books and teach ing materials. An important by-product of the English seminars was the formation of associations of English teachers which kept the teachersr contact with the cultural institutes alive by making them their headquarters for lpC_j_jCLt.i. p« » 31. 333 regular professional meetings during the academic year* The popularity of the English seminars was indi cated by their growth and support* One of the first such seminars was offered in 1943 to forty-seven teachers of English in Quito, Ecuador* They taught in eight cities in twenty-four different schools.By 1930, twenty-five of the centers had developed seminars which attracted more |Oi than 750 national teachers of English each year* In 1951, seventeen such seminars were held with 951 local teachers, who in turn taught more than 100,000 students* From the beginning of the seminar program early in the war years, the ministers of education in Latin America gave it their official support and collaboration. They urged their teachers to attend, granted them diplomas and other official recognition, paid their travel expenses, and in at least one case required attendance.Throughout ■^^Kieln, loc. cit., p* 471; Murphy, loc. cit,, pp. 27, 30; "Breaking the Language Barrier," The Record, VII (May-June, 1951), 21. -*-^^Hanson» op. cit,, pp. 53-54, 5., Advisory Commission on Educational Ex change, Eighth Semiannual Report on Educational Exchange Activities (Washington; U» S. Government Printing Office, .1953), p. 7, 5., Department of State, Waging the Truth Campaign, Department of State Publication No, 4575 (Wash- ington; U, S, Government Printing Office, June, 1952)., jp* 28. ^88Ibids; Hanson, op. cit., p., 54; Klein, loc. cit.,; ~vBreaking the Language Barrier," loc* cit., p« 22» 334 the entire period under study, the Department of State, the Coordinator, the In t er-American Educational Foundation, and the United States Office of Education assisted the seminar program. The latter agency awarded travel grants to the more successful English teachers to visit the United States to observe American teaching methods, teach under super vision in American schools, attend advanced workshops, and visit major cities in the eastern part of the United States.187 A major problem facing American teachers early in the program was the lack of adequate textbooks and teaching materials. Surveys of existing manuals and texts in use in the Latin American school systems revealed that most of them were unsuitable for teaching American English because of their emphasis on Great Britain or because of local legislation regarding their content. As viewed by the Department of State, . . . the problem, then, was to produce textbooks for use in teaching English at the cultural centers which not only would faithfully present the contemporary language of the United States but would also reflect its way of life and the habits and ideals of its people. During the Second World War, American teachers who 187Klein, loc. cit.; Greene and Esman, op. cit., p* 9. 188“Breaking the Language Barrier, ' * loc. cit. . J 2 * 1.8 if 335 were sent to the institutes devoted a major portion of their energies to writing suitable textual and cultural materials for study by Latin Americans. Some centers be came publishers of their own texts, and their use spread to 189 Other centers and to the national school systems* In 1951, the Department of State commissioned the American Council of Learned Societies to develop texts and records for teaching American English to foreigners. One of the major objectives of the new texts was to present an accurate picture of American community life and culture as well as to teach American English.The project was still in progress in 1953* The libraries of the institutes.— A second major area of educational activity in the cultural institutes was the maintenance of small libraries. Early in 1942, a basic list of about 1,200 titles of books on American culture was drawn up from the master list of 6,000 compiled by the Library of Congress to comply with the Buenos Aires Con vention of 1936, and arrangements were made for sending regular book packets and government publications in English •^^Greene and Esman, op. cit. . pp.. 6-8; Murphy, loc. cit.. pp., 26-27; U. S., Advisory Commission on Educa tional Exchange, Eighth Semiannual. Report, on Educational Exchange Activities (Washington; lh S., Government Printing. Office, 1953), p, 7« 190."Breaking the Language Barrier,n loc. cit. . . pp., 22.-23. 336 161 and in translation to the cultural centers** Although the practice of sending book packets made up by the Department of State continued, most of the books in the collections assembled in the cultural institutes in Latin America were works ordered by the institutes them selves to meet their specific needs and the interests of the community being served. Emphasis was placed on acquir ing books that best represented American cultural and scientific achievements and that would foster a sympathetic understanding of the United States among the patrons of the institute l i b r a r y . ^2 This policy in general was continued after the passage of the Smith-Mundt Act in 1948 and it was reaffirmed in 1953**^ The institute collections consisted chiefly of works in English, but a few translations were included. Besides works of cultural or scientific significance, the collections contained fiction, belles-lettres, works of a ■^■1-Report of the Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, January, 1942, p. 21 (mimeographed); idem. February, 1942, pp. 31, 34. ^ 2Josephine C. Fabilli, "Libraries in United States Cultural Centers in the Other American Republics," The Record. , IX (June* 1946), 10-11; Klein, loc. cit. . . p. 472; Murphy, loc. cit., p. 28. ^-^Robert L« Johnson, Administrator, "Policy State* ment Regarding, the.Book and Library Program," International ; Information Administration, Department of, State, Washing ton, July 8, 1953, pp.. 1-7 (mimeographed,;, wireless file, American, Embassy, Mexico City). 337 popular or specialized nature designed to attract new readers or special groups, and books about the host country for Americans who patronized the institute. Other materials included a representative collection of periodicals, pam phlets, pictures, prints, and children*s books. Of par ticular utility value were collections of reference works, such as encyclopedias, dictionaries, standard biographical works, and bibliographical tools, which enabled the insti tute librarians to answer most questions about the United States or the host country, especially the former* The total number of books in the institute libra ries in Latin America grew considerably after the beginning of the program of assistance. As of December 31, 1943, there were nearly 19,000 volumes in the institute libra ries, By 1947, they contained 76,541 books.At the close of 1950, the collections in the thirty principal cul tural institutes in Latin America totalled 145,145 volumes. With the exception of the institute in Havana, which had some 18,000 volumes, the institute libraries ranged in size from, less than 1,000 books in the. smallest at Mexico City to •^^Fabilli, loc. cit. , pp. 10-12;. Klein, loc. cit. ; Murphy, loc*. cit* . ■*■9^Hanson* op. cit*, pp, 67-68. 196ifMemhership, Attendance, and. Library Services in Cultural Centers in 1947," The Record., . IV (March*April, 1.948), 31.' 338 mote than 8,000 in the largest ones at Rio de Janeiro* S2o 197 Paulo, Guatemala, and Caracas. Located in one or two rooms of the cultural insti- tute and furnished as comfortably and as attractively as possible, these libraries were accessible not only to the students of the institute but also the public. They served persons from every walk of life--the sons of presidents as well as those of laborers, intellectuals and people only recently having learned to read* Service was also available to learned societies, educational institutions, government officials, and other special groups. Unlike most libraries in Latin America, the cultural center libraries allowed books to circulate freely to the homes of readers* Long term loans of certain books for which copies were available were made to schools,, and gifts of books and inter-library loans were made between cultural centers and local libra ries. Since the institute libraries were classified accord ing to the Dewey decimal system and American library prac tices were followed,, local librarians found them appropriate training laboratories and models, for professional study* *^8 Because of the coverage provided in Latin. America » 7 U. s., Department of State, Newsnotes: Activi ties of Cultural Centers in Latin America (Washington,:; Department of, State, 1950),. p.. 19 (processed.), , i98Fabilli„ loc* cit... pp., 9-16;. Klein,, loc. cit.,; Murphy1 , , loc., cit. , by the institute libraries, the Department of State by 1952 had established only six information centers in that part of the world* Three were located in Mexico at Mexico City. Guadalajara, and Monterrey* The other three were in Managua, Montevideo, and Buenos Aires. The cultural and social urograms. — A third major area of activity in the cultural institutes was the supple mentary cultural and social program. This consisted of lectures, musical programs, art exhibits, dramatic presenta tions, and numerous social events which were attended by both nationals and resident Americans* Lectures on a wide variety of topics formed a regular activity in the cultural institutes. Visiting and resident American professors, scientists, diplomats, busi ness men, artists, musicians, librarians, and others, under both public and private auspices, contributed lectures in their specialties to audiences assembled by the cultural centers. Institute staff members, returning exchange stu dents and other travelers to the United States, as well as local intellectuals and public leaders were invited to S., Congress, Senate, Committee on Appropri ations, Hearings.. Department of State Appropriations for 1952- 82nd Cong-,, 1st Sess.., 1951, pp.. 1716-17* 200u; Advisory' Commission on Educational Ex,4 3 change,, Eighth Semiannual Report on Educational. Exchange, Activities (Washington:, U„ S.. Government, Printing; Office,, 1953), p., 8 Murphy,, loc. cit. , , p„ 29 340 discuss their special fields of interest* Informal lectures followed by a question and answer period of the open forum type attained considerable popularity in some areas* While American life, culture, and civilisation were the subject of many of the lectures, topics native to the host country which were of interest to local audiences were frequently included in the lecture program. In keeping with the bi- national character of the centers, the lectures were given sometimes in English and sometimes in the language of the country, Music became an important part of the cultural activities of the institutes. Concerts and recitals featured both national and American musical talent for institute audiences. Many of the institutes formed choral groups which sang both in English and the native language for institute audiences. Community singing by students and members also became a feature of institute musical activity* Through gifts of classical and popular recordings, together with radio-phonographs and public address systems, the Department of State encouraged the patrons of the institute to become interested in American music and composers. In some of the centers, music loan libraries were established to circulate orchestral scores and sheet music* Radio ^■^Klein.* loc*. cit.,Murphy, loc. cit* , , p., 29? Greene; and Esman, .op. cit. , , p* 1.6* 341 programs in some centers featured American music* Exhibitions of both American and national artists attracted many Latin Americans to the institutes* Collec tions of reproductions of some of the better known American artistic works and an art reference library were presented to the institutes, and several collections of original prints, water colors, sillc-screen prints and other American artistic accomplishments were sent on tours of the cultural centers by the Department of State immediately after the Second World War,^03 After the passage of the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948,, which discouraged this activity, the insti tutes had to rely on the voluntary efforts of American and national artists for art exhibits. The cultural institutes provided a center for social activities where Americans and nationals had an opportunity to get acquainted. Americans traveling in Latin America found the institutes a convenient place to locate information about the host countries and to meet Latin Americans. Receptions, luncheons, dances, teas, and ■^^Klein* loc. cit.. p. 473; Greene and Esman, op. cit., pp. 16-17.;. U. S., Department of State, Cooper ation in the Americas, pp* 77‘ *78. •^^KleiUf loc. cit.. p. 474; "Original. Art Works for Cultural Centers," loc. cit. ^ Advisory Commission on Educational Ex change,. Seventh Semiannual.Report on Educational Exchange Activities (Washington; U* S. Government Printing Office," 1952),. p. 6 = > 342 other social activities provided a friendly, informal atmosphere for such purposes* Many of the institutes not only organized social or hobby clubs for members and stu- dents but they also arranged special events for the child ren of members. Assistance to other activities.— Although the cul tural institutes were semi-independent binational organiza tions operating under the direction of local boards of directors, they nevertheless gave considerable assistance to other aspects of the information and educational ex change programs. From the beginning of the program of assistance by the United States Government, they helped in the process of selecting candidates for travel grants under the exchange- of-persons program. They cooperated with the United States Office of Education in selecting English teachers for training in the United States, They processed applications for scholarships, interviewed candidates, gave them English examinations, and provided them with information and orien tation for study and travel in the United States, Alumni associations, formed from groups of students who had studied in the United States, made the institutes their headquarters ^^Murphy, loc. cit*. pp* 29, 3X; U. S., Department of State, Cooperation in the Americas, p* 78; "Books Per form, Vital Service in Campaign of Truth,1 1 ” Publishersr Weekly, November 18, 1950 (reprint), a, p« and helped in this process. Exchange professors, special ists, and lecturers from the United States receiving grants from the Department of State for travel in Latin America were assisted in making contacts with local organisations and individuals in their fields of interest, in arranging for lectures, and in finding materials needed for their work* Assistance was rendered the informational program of the department through the provision of facilities for the exhibition of documentary films, slides, film strips, and exhibits of photographs about the United States. The activities of the cultural centers likewise furnished a considerable amount of favorable newspaper publicity through news releases, feature stories, news stories, and announcements. Similarly, they provided information, activities, and speakers for local radio broadcasts. In all these activities, they usually cooperated whole heartedly with the cultural officers and other members of the public affairs sections of the embassies and consulates ^%urphy, loc. cit.. p. 31; U. S., Advisory Com mission on Educational Exchange, Seventh Semiannual Report on Educational Exchange Activities (Washington; U* S. Government Printing Office, 1952), p. 6; U« S*, Department of State,, "Assistance to the Cultural Centers Program," Division of Libraries and Institutes, Department of State, Washington, April 14, 1949, pp. 3, 13 (processed). in Latin America* ^ 344 Summary Although the cultural relations program required the cooperation of many individuals, both voluntary and paid, the principal American officers abroad responsible for its success were the cultural attaches. Called cul tural relations officers when first appointed to American missions in Latin America in 1941, their title was changed in 1943 to cultural relations attache and finally shortened to cultural attache. During the Second World War, the cultural officers were assigned to American embassies and legations as mem bers of the wartime Foreign Service Auxiliary* They were specialists in a variety of subjects in American colleges and universities, museums, publishing firms, and other cul tural institutions. Their work was supervised by a senior officer of the mission who was a regular member of the Foreign Service and who at the same time supervised the work of the coordination committees outside the mission in such media as the press, radio, and motion pictures* After the war, cultural attaches were given status as Foreign ^C^Murphy, loc* cit*> p* 29; U. S*, Advisory Com mission on Educational Exchange, Seventh Semiannual Report ; on Educational Exchange Activities (Washington:' th S., Government Printing Office, 1952), p* 6; U. S., Department of, State, "Assistance to the Cultural Centers Frogram, pp.. 5-13... . 345 Service Keserve or Staff officers and found their work supervised by a public affairs officer, whose duty it was to supervise both cultural and informational activities under the direction of the Department of State. Some of the wartime staff remained with the program to form the nucleus of the post-war United States Information Service. The cultural attaches were expected to be sociable individuals endowed with linguistic ability, broad intel lectual and cultural Interests, imagination, enthusiasm, and mature common sense. They were expected to have a sound knowledge of the intellectual life of the United States and to be able to use their own specialties to gain entree into the intellectual life of the host country in order to stimulate a two-way flow of cultural exchange between the United States and Latin America and between resident Americans and the native population. Part of their work consisted in supervising and reporting on the other phases of the cultural program con ducted by the Department of State in the exchange of per sons, aid to American schools, libraries, and cultural institutes, the distribution and translation of American books, and exchanges in the fields of art and music< At the same time, they engaged in a variety of cultural activities locally on their own initiative, such as speak ing, writing, serving on committees, and participation, in 346 cultural ceremonies* They were often invited or sent as representatives of the ambassadors to concerts, lectures, theatrical performances, schools and colleges, and other cultural events and institutions. One of the principal functions of the cultural attaches was to supervise the exchange-of-persons program. This was divided essentially into five basic categories: leaders, specialists, professors, teachers, and students. During the Second World War and during the Korean War, close attention was given to selecting those persons who could in fluence thought and opinion in many fields in their own countries, although exchanges of value to the individuals and to the Latin American countries were included during all periods. Greater emphasis was given in general to bringing persons from Latin America to the United States, rather than the reverse, except in the case of the exchange of pro fessors, Travelers in both directions were relied upon to engage in a variety of activities that would assist in ex plaining and disseminating knowledge about the United States abroad. The Department of State encouraged individuals, institutions, and organizations in the United States to offer professional and social hospitality to foreign visitors, and it organized special reception centers, orien tation courses, and tours of inspection for them. Except for the selection processes and the contacts that were 34? arranged for them, visitors in both directions were allowed to communicate freely with other people regarding their impressions of the United States* To improve the services and facilities of American schools in Latin America, first the Coordinator and then the Department of State provided funds to the American Council on Education to establish and operate the Inter" American Schools Service, which assisted in recruiting teachers, purchasing supplies, and providing educational advice, information, and other types of assistance to more than 200 schools* Small cash grants were awarded annually to between ten and twenty schools for special projects or improvements. This assistance was provided without attempt ing to interfere with local control of educational policy or local programs of assistance to such schools. In order to qualify for assistance, these schools were expected to demonstrate American educational principles, to be accepta ble to the government of the host countries, and to offer courses and activities that would meet the needs of both Americans and nationals in such a way that the foundation for future international friendships would be established. The schools were patronized particularly by those families whose children expected to enter international trade or study in the United States. American libraries were established in Mexico City,. 348 Managua, and Montevideo with funds from the Coordinator in 1942 and 1943, they were operated by the American Library Association with grants of money from the Department of State from 1943 through 1946, by the department itself with the advice of the American Library Association until July 1, 1948, and after that date by the department as part of its system of overseas libraries, which were established during the war in other areas of the world by the Office of War Information, Subsequently, additional libraries were established in Guadalajara, Monterrey, and Puebla in Mexico and in Buenos Aires in Argentina, They were operated as small American public libra ries, lending books and other printed materials for home use, providing reference, extension, microfilm and inter- library loan services, and serving as a center for dis cussions, lectures, exhibits, films, musical programs, children*s programs, English classes and similar cultural activities* In Mexico alone in 1951, more than 250,000 readers used the libraries and more than 1,000,000 books were circulated for home use, Mexican officials, including the country*s Presidents, Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Education, and lesser officials, as well as a cross section of the public, expressed favorable attitudes toward the libraries and the government which sponsored them. The cultural relations program, distributed books, periodicals* and bibliographical materials to the libraries established by the United States, cultural institutes, native educational institutions, and individuals, and it promoted the sale of American books and translations through commercial sales outlets. In the program of dis tributing books, the American library Association was par ticularly active from 1942 until the end of 1947* An advisory committee representing the American Library Associ ation, the Library of Congress and the Department of State established policy, screened requests, and made allotments for the distribution of more than 100,000 volumes selected by Latin American librarians from prepared lists between 1943 and 1947. Books were also distributed to leading individuals in Latin America by cultural officers, American librarians, cultural institute personnel, and by others associated with the program. The cultural relations pro gram also facilitated book exhibits and book fairs spon sored by commercial publishers and other private and govern mental agencies of both the United States and Latin America. An active contributor to the book program was the Library of Congress. The Hispanic Foundation of the Library of Congress also took part in the translation program during the war years. Government assistance in the form of agreements either to supply translations or to purchase a portion of an edition stimulated the translation and publication of American books in Latin America through commercial channels, From 1944 to 1949* the Department of State administered the book translation program through Science Service* a non profit organization for the popularization of science. After 1950, the department operated directly through its own cultural and information officers in arranging for the translation of American books. Greater emphasis was now placed on translating books that would stress American life, culture, and institutions, the position of the United States in the international political situation, and the threat of communism to international peace and security. Scientific and technical pamphlets were distributed both in English and in translation from the beginning of the pro gram. After 1950, pamphlets of a more political nature were included as well. First the Coordinator and then the Department of State undertook to stimulate interest in Latin America in American art through exhibits, publications, and exchange of persons interested in art. From 1944 through 1948, the National Gallery of Art cooperated with the Department of State in this program. When the department purchased a collection of modem art for exhibition abroad over a period of years, strong opposition developed with the pub lic and in Congress so that the Smith-Mundt Act, which was 351 passed early in 1948, discouraged further exchanges in this field except in the fields of exchange of persons and in publications. Exhibits of American art in foreign coun- tries have since relied primarily on voluntary efforts and such materials as might be available abroad. As in the field of art., exchanges in the field of music were promoted first by the Coordinator and then, after 1943, by the Department of State, Travel grants were extended to musicians, music loan libraries were estab* lished, and recordings and motion picture films devoted to American music were distributed to Latin America, The Pan American Union and the Library of Congress published American and Latin American music, maintained reference collections, prepared musical albums, and issued musical publications. Recordings, equipment, and song books were distributed by the department to the cultural institutes, and a liaison service was provided to facilitate contacts between foreign and American musicians. After the passage of the Smith-Mundt Act in 1948, the department lacked appropriations for exchanges in the field of music except for a modest program of travel grants, publications., one or two films a year devoted to music, and radio broadcasts by means of recordings. Music was also used incidentally with radio programs and motion pictures irx the information pro-* gram, 352 Hie cultural Institutes in Latin America served as a principal focal point for many aspects of the cultural relations program in Latin America* Between 1927 and 194Q, eight cultural institutes were established independently before the program of assistance by the United States Government was begun* By 1952, there were thirty principal cultural centers in Latin America, a number of branch centers, and four similar institutions in the Middle and Far East. The thirty principal cultural institutes in Latin America in 1950 had a total membership of nearly 25.000, an enrollment in English classes of more than 50.000, and an attendance at public events of more than 600,000 persons. A program of financial assistance and guidance to cultural institutes in Latin America was begun by the Co ordinator in 1941 and taken over by the Department of State in 1943. Between the Second World War and the end of the Korean War, the annual appropriations of the department to the cultural institutes ranged from $500,000 to more than $850,000 per year. In this same period, nearly 60 per cent of the total cost was derived from local sources such as tuition from English classes, membership dues, and contri butions, grants-in-aid, and free services from local busi ness men and host governments. Although the Department of State provided financial support, guidance, and American administrators to those institutes -which were organized and operated according to acceptable standards, the control of local policies was left in the hands of a board of directors composed of Latin American community leaders and resident American business and professional men* Assisting some 90 American directors and English teachers sent by the department were more than 300 locally employed teachers. The institutes offered an organized curriculum in the English language, American literature, history and cul ture, and courses in the language of the host country* Special courses for selected professional groups, govern ment officials, and Latin American teachers of English were designed to broaden the appeal and areas of influence of the institutes* English teachers found that their attend ance at special intensive seminars and membership in associations of English teachers at the institutes were officially encouraged by ministers of education. Many of the more successful English teachers were given travel grants for further study in the United States* The institutes also provided small libraries which not only served the instituted members and students but also the general public. Collections of books, periodicals, pamphlets, and reference materials served the intellectual interests of many groups of Latin Americans, including 354 local librarians* with whom the institute libraries vain* tained close contact* A supplementary cultural and social program pro vided a variety o£ activities to supplement the English classes and the library program* This consisted of lec tures, musical programs, art exhibits, dramatic presenta tions, hobby clubs, and miscellaneous social events de signed to appeal to both the native population and resident Americans* The cultural and social program was binational and bilingual in nature, so that it often achieved the effect of blending the two cultures. The cultural institutes also assisted other phases of the cultural and informational programs. They helped to select candidates for travel grants, gave them English examinations, and provided them with information about the United States. Alumni associations of former students in the United States, exchange professors, and other travelers made the institutes their headquarters. The institutes also provided facilities for the exhibition of films, photographic displays, radio broadcasts, and newspaper publicity in cooperation with the cultural and information officers of the embassies. The general pattern of activities developed by the cultural institutes in Latin America as a whole was not necessarily characteristic of each one of them individually. Local interests and circumstances, a.s well as the experi* mental nature of the cultural relations program in its earlier years, made for different patterns of development in each of the institutes. Indeed, one of the assets of the program in its formative years was its ability to adapt itself to a variety of conditions. To understand more fully something of the nature of these individual differ* ences, the place of the cultural institutes in the cultural relations program and their relationship to American for* eign policy, the present study now turns to a more detailed examination of the activities of the Mexican-American Cul tural Institute In Mexico City, CHAPTER V THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INSTITUTE IN MEXICO COT' AS A COOPERATIVE, BI.NATIONAL INSTITUTION Introduction The cultural relations program in Mexico was begun and carried on during 1941 chiefly by a clerk in the Ameri can Embassy in Mexico City* Toward the end of the year, a regular Foreign Service officer, recently released from the Division of Cultural Relations in the Department of State, was assigned as second secretary in the embassy and given responsibility for cultural relations as one of his duties. In January, 1942, the Department of State sent an associate professor of Spanish as an auxiliary officer in the Foreign Service to serve as the embassy's first full-time cultural officer in Mexico City* He reported to the second secre tary, who supervised his work as closely as his other duties of political reporting and supervision of the work of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs in the fields of press, radio, and motion pictures permitted. In the spring of 1942, the Office of the Coordi nator provided funds to establish the Benjamin Franklin Lihrary in Mexico: City* It was managed by American librari ans. under the general guidance of a board of directors com posed, of Mexicans and resident Americans* It was intended at first to function both as a lib.ra.ty and a general Ameri* can cultural center. At the same time, a small group of Mexican intel* lectuals and American citizens,, assisted by the cultural officer, established the cultural institute and named it the Institute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Cul- turales. It outlined an ambitious program of cultural relations -with the United States, but its principal activity during the war years was to supervise the administration of scholarships and fellowships awarded by the Institute of International Education and the United States Government* Early in 1942, the Benjamin Franklin Library began offering courses in the English language. In 1943, the Coordinator provided a grant of funds to the University of Michigan to establish the English Language Institute in Mexico City, which took over the English classes started by the library. When the work of the University of Michigan was terminated in the summer of 1944, the cultural insti~ tute assumed the responsibility of administering the English Language Institute as its second major function* Funds for this purpose were provided by the Department of State. From their establishment until 1947, both Institu* tions were housed in the building of the Benjamin Franklin Library and received their principal financial support from 35& the United; States* The library building proved to be too small to house the expanding library* English teaching and cultural programs. Moreover* until the close of 1944* there was a separate director for each of the three insti tutions* which gave rise to some problems of coordination and sponsorship of cultural activities. At the close of 1944, there was a change in the administration of the cultural program in Mexico, The cul tural officer in the embassy and the directors of the li brary, the English Language Institute, and the cultural institute returned to their peacetime academic positions. In the interests of both post-war economy and centralized administration, the newly appointed director of the Benjamin Franklin Library was assigned responsibility for administering all four offices. He was given a desk in the embassy, where his work was expected to be unobtrusively supervised by the first secretary. Although assistants were assigned to him for each of the three institutions in the library building, it was not until the summer of 1946 that a cultural assistant was appointed in the embassy. The reduction in the number of top administrative personnel to direct it reduced much of the work of cultural relations to a holding operation except for the library, which occu pied the center of the stage during this period. This cen tralized administration of the cultural relations program 359 likewise created some problems, inhibiting the development of the cultural institute* During late 1946 and early 1947, the post-war organizational pattern that was to prevail through 1953 was established. The administrative organization within the embassy was designed to correspond to that of the governing 1 agency in the Department of State* A public affairs officer with the rank of first secretary was assigned to the embassy to supervise the work of both the informational and cultural activities. The American Association, which had served as the "coordination committee" under the Co ordinator, was disbanded, and its employees in the fields of press, radio and motion pictures were transferred to the embassy under the public affairs officer. A press attache was assigned at the same time to head up the press section, and by 1951 the radio and motion picture sections were also headed by attaches with diplomatic rank. A cultural attache arrived from Washington in December, 1946, and took charge of the cultural activities under the general supervision of the public affairs officer. At first, he was aided in his work by a single cultural assistant, but by 1949 an assistant cultural attache was assigned and at the height of the program in 1951 there ^Chapter III describes the administrative organiza tions developed by the Department of State to supervise the cultural relations program.. ................................. Z6Q were two cultural assistants. By 1953, however* only the cultural attache and one cultural assistant remained as greater emphasis was placed on the informational aspects of the United States Information Service. The cultural attache and his assistants supervised the work of the exchange1 'of’ persons programs* the Benjamin Franklin library* the cul- tural institute* and other activities in the field of cul tural relations* A new director was assigned to the Benjamin Franklin Library in the spring of 1947. A professional librarian, he was the first director who had chosen to devote his career to government service in this field. Since July 1, 1943, the library had been assisted, supervised and financed by the Department of State, On July 1, 1948, it officially ceased to exist as a cooperative Mexican-American cultural activity and was transferred from the jurisdiction of its binational board of directors to that of the embassy, where it was placed under the supervision of the cultural attache. In 1952, its supervision was given to the information sec tion of the embassy, which planned to convert it Into a con ventional United States Information Center in accordance with a policy of emphasizing unilateral informational activities during the "campaign of truth," ^Further information on the administration and activities of the Benjamin Franklin Library may be found on pp. 288-94, suora* 361, In the summer of 1947* the cultural institute was reorganized as a separate institution, assigned its own American executive director, and moved into its own build ing* It continued to participate in the administration of student scholarships and assumed responsibility for English teaching under its own name, abolishing the English language Institute, It also assumed responsibility for many of the cultural activities previously sponsored by the Benjamin Franklin Library, such as lectures, musical programs, art exhibits, film showings, and other cultural and social activities. Unlike the library, it continued to function under a binational board of directors as a cooperative bi national cultural center, and it offered a cultural program with both Mexican and American themes which were designed to bring representatives of the two nationalities together. Its principal contact in the embassy was the cultural attache, who worked closely with it in developing its pro gram. From 1942 to 1947, the cultural institute had led a precarious existence. Much of the time and energy devoted to It was concerned with the problems of survival, coordination with the activities of the library, seeking adjustments to the leadership exerted by Americans in cul tural relations, and the establishment of a stable organ izational pattern. A review of the problems faced by the 362 cultural Institute in its efforts to become an established institution gives some insight into a number of factors that appear to merit some consideration in operating a pro* gram of cultural cooperation in Mexico* These are best understood by studying its historical development during its formative years. The founding of the Cultural Institute The initial organization.-""Interest in the forma tion of a cultural institute in Mexico City existed some eighteen months before its first formal business meeting took place in February, 1942. A small group of American citizens long resident in Mexico and various groups of Mexican intellectuals held a number of preliminary confer ences on the subject during that time. The original plans were to organize only a small discussion group. As the conferences progressed and some members of the Embassy staff took part in them occasionally, the plans were gradually broadened. • * « One of the principal sponsors of the institute was the head of the Mexican branch of an American public utility company, who for many years had been pursuing cul tural activities in Mexico as a hobby. It was in his home that the first formal business meeting took place on ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 10,154 to the Department of State, Washington, May 17, 1943. February 26, 1942.^ This first: meeting was attended by two representatives of the American Embassy* the director of the Benjamin. Franklin Library* the principal of the Ameri-" can School in Mexico City* and the manager of the utility company. The seven other persons present at the first meeting were Mexican scholars and intellectuals interested in international intellectual cooperation.^ It was at this meeting that the group adopted the name, Instituto Mexicano^Norteamericano de Relaciones Cultu- rales, for the cultural institute that they were founding* The Benjamin Franklin Library was accepted as a place to work on the invitation of its director. At this first business meeting* the group elected as honorary president the president of the Colegio de Mexico, a prominent literary critic* writer and lecturer; executive president* the chief of the Mexican Commission on Intellectual Cooperation of the Ministry of Education; first vice president, the dean of the School of Philosophy and Letters of the National University of Mexico; second ^Letter from Charles H« Stevens, Cultural Assistant* American Embassy, Mexico City* to Charles A. Thomson* Chief of the Division of Cultural Relations* Department of State* Washington, March 13, 1943. c : •'American Embassy* Mexico City* Despatch No. 399 to the Department of State* Washington, March 18, 1942* 6Ibid. 364 vice president*. the principal o£ the American High School in Mexico City:; and as secretary* the manager of the utility 7 company. Despite the fact that several of the members of the founding group held positions with their respective govern ments* the meeting was considered private and unofficial, and the organization they were founding proposed to depend O more on private initiative than on public agencies. Spon sorship by the two governments was not contemplated either in Washington or in Mexico City, The Mexican Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs, Jaime Torres Bodet, in a conversation with Ambassador George Messersmith indicated his approval of the Mexican membership of the organization and was will ing that it should continue in existence. He agreed with the ambassador that it would be preferable to avoid official subsidies from either government,^ Support from Washington was likewise at first tenta tive and temporary, At the request of the institute a grant of $500 was provided in June, 1942, to meet small running expenses but it was made with the understanding that it was to be considered a "non-recurring grant," In 1942, a ^Ibid, 8Ibid. 9American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 2,185 to the Department of State, Washington, June 18, 1942* 365 cultural institute in Mexico City was not considered esserv* tial to the cultural relations programs In view o£ the fact that the Benjamin Franklin Library was planned and established to serve most of the purposes of a cultural institute, the Department has never contemplated the expenditure of additional funds for other organizations of the institute type in Mexico City. It is, therefore, improbable that any considerable financial assistance will be forthcoming for aid to this newly created Institute. However, in view of the fact that establishment of the Institute is a fait accompli, that some financial assistance has been recommended by the Embassy and by Mr. H. M. Lydenberg, and that the membership of the Institute appears to be of exceptional quality, the Department and the American Council of Learned Societies have approved a grant of $500 for the necessary expenditures of the Institute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales.^ The possibility of future financial support from the Department of State was not entirely precluded, however, after an inspection trip to Mexico City in June and July, 1942, by Dr. Waldo G, Leland, Director of the American Council of Learned Societies, Dr. Leland recommended that similar grants be made during the period of organization, experimental activity, and formulation of objectives, which he thought might take one or two years. After it was permanently established and its program in operation, Dr, Leland thought that support should come for the most ^U. S., Department of State, Instruction No* 892 to Ambassador George E* Messersmith, American Embassy, Mexico City, June 18, 1942. Mr* Lydenberg was the first director of the Benjamin Franklin Library. part from local sources,^ Objectives of the Institute.— At their first busi ness meeting on February 26, 1942, the founders of the institute asserted a need for coordinating the efforts of various cultural groups in both the United States and Mexico* An effective coordination and a joint effort among those who are concerned with the preservation of spirit- ual values present bright prospects in the Americas and will contribute a great deal to better understanding between the inhabitants of the several republics across political frontiers.1* 2 Cultural and intellectual objectives were estab lished as of primary importance, but the political objec tive of mutual understanding throughout the Western Hemi sphere is apparent in the statement above. It is equally apparent in a release to the public press by the Mexican Commission of Intellectual Cooperation of the Ministry of Education less than two months later, In this release, it was stated that the institute would place particular em phasis on encouraging other institutions of the same type to accomplish similar tasks to the end ^Waldo G* Leland, "Letter-Report to Mr. Charles A* Thomson, Chief of the Division of Cultural Relations, U, S. Department of State, on Observations Respecting Cultural Relations Between the United States and Mexico, Made During; a Brief Visit to Mexico City, June 26-July 3, 1942,u p. 3 (mimeographed)* •^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 399 to the Department of State, Washington, March 18, 1942, 367 * . 4 . that in, the not-too-distant future cooperation and the desire of mutual understanding will crystallize in a work of continental scope and convert the ideals of union and solidarity of the peoples of the New World into a stimulating reality.1- * The charter officially adopted in 1943, however, omits any reference to political objectives and limits the scope of its operations to the United States and Mexico: The fundamental objective of the Mexican-American Institute of Cultural Relations is to promote and strengthen cultural relations between Mexico and the United States of America by all the means it considers appropriate* ^ The intellectual and academic interests of the mem bers are reflected in the cultural activities in which they proposed to engage in reaching their fundamental objective: 1. It will establish relations among the scien tific, educational, and cultural institutions of all kinds of one country and those of the other, and it will establish official relations with the Government of Mexico through the Mexican Commission of Intel lectual Cooperation and with the Government of the United States through the appropriate agency or agen cies* 2. It will encourage the exchange of teachers and students of Mexico and of the United States. 3. It will cooperate with the institutions of both countries which grant scholarships. 4. It will receive and act as host to the teachers, intellectuals and artists of the United States, 5. It will encourage the knowledge of the Spanish language in the United States and of English in Mexico* • ^El National (Mexico City), April 21, 1942* ^Institute Mexicano^ Norteamericano de Relaciones Cultutales, Estatutos (1943), Art* IV, Registro Publico de la Propiedad del Distrito Federal, Mexico, September 3* 1944* 368 6* It will encourage the exchange of books, publications, works of art, bibliographical indices and information on all types of cultural activities, and it will arrange for the translation of Mexican and Ameri can works, 7. It will take advantage of the trips of Mexican and American writers, teachers, intellectuals and artists to strengthen good relations between the two countries and it will publicize cultural activities in Mexico and the United States, 8. It will invite visiting foreigners to present public cultural functions in accord with the purposes of the institute* 9. It will organize discussions and lectures which will make known in one way or another the thought of both countries, 10, It will organize discussions in which topics of general interest for Mexicans and Americans are pre sented. The initial program of activities,--This extensive program of the institute was largely confined to the plan ning stage in 1942, Although the Benjamin Franklin Library provided headquarters for business meetings, the institute had no staff or office equipment. One of its principal achievements consisted of mailing out some 600 announce ments and letters concerning the founding of the institute. This work was performed by its secretary,^ Ibid* Tbe suggested activities of the new insti tute as formulated at the first meeting on February 26, 1942, were reported in American Embassy, Mexico City, Des patch No. 399 to the Department of State, Washington, March 18, 1942, and in the unofficial by-laws forwarded with Despatch No, 7,827 to the Department of State, February 24, 1943. No substantial difference exists between these two statements of suggested activities and those finally incor porated into the official charter adopted in 1943, from which the statement of proposed activities above was taken. ^Letter from J. M. Zilboorg to Carl H« Milam, Executive Secretary, American Library Association, Chicago, Illinois, April 22, 1942,. 369 The high standards set by the institute;, a member* ship limited to twenty-seven, the general lack of funds, and the leadership of the Benjamin Franklin library in bi- lateral cultural affairs tended to limit the activities of the institute to those of an advisory nature. A lecture program was not executed in order not to compete with lec tures sponsored by the library, monographs and translations planned on various phases of cultural life in Mexico and the United States were not written because of the lack of funds, and publicity about the institute was virtually negligible. As yet, the institute enjoyed no legal status with the Mexican Government because no permanent charter had been written although several preliminary drafts pro viding the basic objectives and organizational pattern had been prepared. Except for business meetings and a mailing address at the Benjamin Franklin Library, such activity as existed was carried on in the private homes and offices of the members and then coordinated by the secretary at his business office.^ Nevertheless, some progress was made during the institute's first year of existence. Four of the members were included on a list of more than twenty Mexicans promi nent in cultural and educational circles who were awarded ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 10,154 to the Department of State, Washington, May 17, 1943* 370 grants by the Department of State to travel to the United States. In cooperation with the library* the institute is also sponsored several lectures. The most substantial activity of the institute during its first year was that performed by its scholarship selection committee.^ The embassy reported: The principal functioning of the Instituto is that of interviewing and accepting suitable applicants for scholarship recommendations and this work has been car* ried on during the past year by the American secretary . . . at his private office utilizing the services of his own private secretary who also received a small stipend from the funds of the Instituto, In his capacity as a member of the General Advisory Com mittee of the Division of Cultural Relations, Dr, Stephen Duggan* President of the Institute of International Educa tion in New York, had suggested that the institute assume 21 this responsibility early in 1942, The scholarship selection committee was headed by the chief of the Mexican Commission on Intellectual Cooper ation in his capacity as president of the institute. By September 10, 1942, it had selected its first group of twenty students from a list of sixty-one applicants, and ^Idem, Despatch No. 6,693, January 14, 1943. 19Ibid. ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 7,827 to the Department of State, Washington, February 24, 1943* 2-^ldem, Despatch No,> 1,538., May 25, 1942* 371 their names were forwarded to the Department of State by the embassy*^ The presentation of the scholarships to the sixteen winners chosen in the department was made at the Benjamin Franklin library on the evening of October 24 with a ceremony that included as speakers Manuel Sandoval Vallarta, a leading Mexican physicist and formerly profes sor of physics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Rodolfo Brito Foucher, Rector of the National University of Mexico, Edward G. Trueblood, Second Secretary of the Ameri can Embassy, who read Ambassador Messersmith's address, and Carlos Contreras, a prominent Mexican architect, who spoke on the work of the Guggenheim, Rockefeller and Carnegie Foundations. The secretary of the Institute presented the sixteen scholarship winners, two of whom spoke for the whole group.^ The Reorganization of the Institute In 1943 Sources of dissatisfaction.--Although the cultural institute appeared to have made an auspicious beginning with its program of cultural relations through the adminis tration of scholarships for Mexican students, this activity shortly proved to be a source of dissatisfaction and dis sension among its members* ^ Idem. Airgram A-309, September II, 1942* ^ E1 Universal, (Mexico City), October 2,5 „ 194-2,.> 372 “The chief cause for dissatisfaction was the delay in payment of the students who proceeded to the United States on scholarship awards at the end of last year/' wrote an officer of the embassy to the Department of State* Although unfavorable publicity was kept from the public press only with difficulty, personal letters written by the students in the United States to their families and friends in Mexico created some apprehension among prospective can didates for scholarships over the possible lack of financial support if they accepted a scholarship. This situation disturbed the members of the institute who had been associ- 0 / ated with the scholarship awards in 1942. The honorary president of the cultural institute was reportedly so dis pleased that he submitted his resignation in February, 1943, although no action was taken on it, and he expressed his 25 views on the situation quite freely about the city. The secretary of the institute reported also that he had received some criticism from Mexican educators con cerning the increasing number of scholarships being made available by seven distinct scholarship programs handled by the institute and that these educators feared the conse quences of an overzealous campaign to grant scholarships, ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 10,711 to the Department of State, Washington, June 11, 1943« ^-*ldem. Despatch No, 10,773, June 15, 1943.. The members of the institute feared that the increasing number of scholarships would tend to lower the caliber of students they selected to go to the United States, that this would lower the prestige of the students who had been selected the first year, and that the results of this policy would be inconsistent with the importance and aca demic reputation of the members of the institute. For these reasons and because of the delayed payments to the winners of the previous year, the secretary delayed making public announcement of the availability of scholarships for the academic year 1943-1944. His publicity efforts were limited to making personal approaches to the various gradu ate and professional schools in Mexico City in order per sonally to persuade students to make application for the scholarships. The limited publicity added the embassy to the list of those who found the administration of the 26 scholarship program unsatisfactory. During the spring of 1943, the secretary showed an increasing tendency to assume most of the responsibility for the institute. His unilateral approach to scholarship matters filled a vacuum left by the other officers and members, who were busy with many other occupations and had little time for the affairs of the institute. On some matters* possibly in the interest of expediting his work* ^Idem* Despatch No,« 10, HI, June 11, 1943« the secretary took matters up directly with officials in the United States without consulting or informing the presi dent of the institute. Not all the motivation for this direct approach seems to have been based on a desire for efficiency in administration, for there was some indication that the secretary thought it desirable to keep control of the organisation in American hands at the time that he took office despite a cooperative and friendly approach on the part of the president of the institute. The discontent over this situation became so great at one point that the president of the institute considered resigning his office, although he proposed to remain as chairman of the scholar ship selection committee. He held this appointment di rectly from the Institute of International Education and, as chief of the Mexican Commission on Intellectual Cooper ation, he was in a position to be of great aid to the work of the institute. Efforts were made, therefore, to dis courage the president from resigning because of his official position, his cooperative attitude, his many con tacts in educational circles, and his consequent value to the institute. The adoption of a charter,— The principal result of the dissatisfaction with the administration of scholarships . was the creation of a fundamental charter, which gave the cultural institute, legal status; under Mexican law* One of the first steps in this direction was made by the prepara tion of a set of tentative by-laws that were designed to give more responsibility and control to the president and the board of directors. The president was to be given authority to make appointments, to sign all correspondence with cultural institutions abroad, to authorise expendi tures approved by the board, to call meetings of the board, and to be the channel through which problems were presented to the board. In the board of directors, consisting of the president, two vice-presidents, two secretaries, and a treasurer, was vested the authority to maintain contacts with Mexican and American governmental authorities, to establish major policy, to approve projects, to organize public functions, to attend to foreign visitors in Mexico, to establish fiscal policies, and to audit reports from the treasurer. Except for the requirement that he keep the president informed of all correspondence and secure his approval before answering it, the secretary's duties were not defined, A study of the proposed by-laws indicated that they were intended more to correct specific difficulties than to establish a complete fundamental charter. Accordingly, it was suggested that current problems could be more effec tively and less obviously solved by preparing a complete body of by-laws which eliminated temporarily objectionable 376 practices at the same time that a complete statutory frame* work was constructed* It was proposed that the fundamental charter describe fully the election and duties of officers, the official bodies of the institute* the regulations regarding the membership* the powers* privileges* and responsibilities of these groups* and the means of support. Acting on these suggestions, a small group of mem bers of the Institute headed by the president held several meetings for the purpose of drafting a new charter. By mid-September, the charter was nearly completed. It clearly reflected Mexican points of view and provided for Mexican leadership and control of the institute. This was encouraged by the embassy in order to secure their cooper ation. The charter in its draft form provided for a board of directors composed of a president, a vice president* a secretary* a treasurer* and five additional members. Con trol of the institute by the Mexican members was to be provided by specifying that the first three officers must be Mexicans and that the treasurer and two of the addi tional members might be Americans. In charge of the most important function of the institute, the scholarship selec tion committee was to be made up exclusively of Mexicans, Full authority to execute all resolutions of all committees was: to be given to the president. The latter planned to 377 present a panel of names for election to the board of directors at a general meeting of all members to be held in the near future*^ The possibility of either constitutional or political control of the institute by Americans was thus to be almost entirely eliminated* The general meeting of the institute members, held on November 4, 1943, endorsed the principal plans of the president and this informal constitutional committee. It accepted the unfinished draft of the charter and then pro ceeded to elect new officers from two previously prepared panels of candidates. With the addition of a second vice president, the new board of directors was composed of nine members, two-thirds of whom were Mexicans. A resident American banker was elected to the office of treasurer, and the cultural assistant in the embassy and another resident no American were elected to the board of directors. The final form of the charter, which was officially created on April 17, 1944, and notarized on May 20 of the same year, was designed to concentrate control in the hands of the Mexicans by providing that six of the nine members ^Letter from Charles H. Stevens, American Embassy, Mexico City, to W. L, Schurz, Assistant Chief, Division of Cultural Relations* Department of State, Washington, September 11, 1943* ^American, Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 14,027 to the Department of State, Washington* November 6* 1943 , 378 of the board of directors should be Mexicans and the rest Americans. Unlike the draft charter, it failed to specify which officers were to be Mexicans; however, the document itself reflects that the plan of the draft charter was executed in practice, for the officers listed as charter officers are the ones elected at the November meeting.^ This charter was to serve the institute for the next three years. Unlike the draft form, the charter adopted in 1943 provided that, to the regular board of directors of nine members, there might be added ex officio members to repre sent the various dependencies of the institute or other *3A institutions which cooperated with it. In accordance with this provision, a 1944 publication announcing scholar ships for graduate students reflects that one Mexican and one American had been added to the board of directors. These were the chairman of the scholarship selection commit tee and the director of the English language Institute in ^The charter names the following ^officers Fablo Martinez del Rio, president; Ignacio Gonzalez Guzman, first vice president; Jose Zozaya, second vice president; Francisco Villagran, secretary; Robert B. Gwynn, treasurer; Fernando Orozco, Julio Jimenez Rueda, Harry Mazal, and Charles H. Stevens, members. Of this list, only Gwynn, Mazal, and Stevens are Americans* Estatutos (1943) Transit tory Clauses.. •^Ibid*, Art* VIII- n , “ . — t ■ ■ » K 379 Mexico, who was also on the scholarship committee. Although it was planned for the scholarship selec tion committee to he composed entirely of Mexicans, the charter failed to specify this point. “ This, of course, was unnecessary, since the committee was to be elected by the board of directors, which in turn was controlled by Mexi cans. Furthermore, once appointed, the scholarship com mittee was to continue indefinitely in office. It was to be composed of an odd number of from five to eleven regular members, and it was empowered to invite as ad hoc members specialists in certain fields of study to assist it.“ ^ Seven Mexicans were appointed to the committee at a meeting of the board of directors shortly after its election in November, 1943, On the insistence of the president of the institute, the American director of the English language Institute was appointed to the committee as an expert in the field of English,^3 xn 1944, the number of persons on the scholarship committee was increased to twelve, including ^Institute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales, Becas Para Estudios Post-Graduados, Folleto Informativo No. 1, Mexico, D« F», 1944, The additional members were Manuel Sandoval Vallarta and Albert E» Marckwardt, ^ Estatutos (1943), Art, XVII, ■^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No# 14,199 to the Department of State, Washington,, Novemher 15, 1943* 380 the new executive director of the institute as secretary of the committee* ^ The reconstitution of the board of directors and of the scholarship committee by providing for art overwhelming majority of Mexicans in both cases was a device for assur- ing that the control of the institute would be vested in Mexicans. Another device was the creation of the office of executive director. The desirability of placing a part-time, bilingual secretary in the library to handle institute business had been discussed privately by the cultural assistant in the embassy and the director of the Benjamin Franklin Library 3 3 as early as March of 1943. u This suggestion was approved in principal by the Division of Cultural Relations in May, It was proposed informally to the members of the institute in June that the institute employ a young Mexican 37 to serve as executive secretary, ■^Institute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales, Becas Para Estudios Post-Graduados, Folleto Informative No, 1, Mexico, D. F., 1944. ■^Letter from Charles R, Stevens, American Embassy, Mexico City, to Charles A, Thomson, Chief of the Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, March 13, 1943* ■^U. S., Department of State, Instruction (no num ber) to American Embassy, Mexico City, May 17, 1943. ■^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 10,773 to the Department of State, Washington* June 15, 1943« 381 Shortly afterwards, one of the members of the institute, Eduardo Enrique Rios, with the approval of the American secretary, began giving a few hours of volunteer service a day at the Benjamin Franklin Library receiving visitors, administering scholarship applications, and 38 answering the instituted correspondence. The director of the library reported that this step marked the beginning of closer relations between the library and the institute.^9 It also helped to establish a pattern which was incorpor ated into the instituted charter. The charter adopted at the meeting of November 4, 1943, provided that the president of the institute should name the executive director.^ The new president, who took office immediately, appointed Dr* Daniel F* Rubin de la Borbolla, Director of the National School of Anthropology, to the position, and the appointment was approved by the general assembly.^ His office was officially established ^Idem, Despatch No, 10,711, June 11, 1943. 3%. m . Lydenberg, "Report of the DirectorrLibrarian for June, 1943," Biblioteca Benjamin Franklin, Mexico City (mimeographed), ^Estatutes (1943), Art. X* ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No« 14,02.7 to the Department of State, Washington, November 6, 1943. 382 42 in the Benjamin Franklin Library* Public announcements released in 1944 reflect that applications for scholarships to study in the United States were to be made through him at his office in the library *4^ The charter provided that it would be the duty of the executive director to organize and supervise the offices of the institute, to sign receipts and other docu- ments, to direct all the technical and administrative functions of the institute, and to perform all the functions entrusted to him by the president, the secretary, and the treasurer of the board* He was authorized to participate in board meetings in an informative capacity but without the right to vote*44 He was empowered to be one of two officers, excluding the secretary, to sign checks and other instruments of payment in the name of the institute*4' * The administrative functions assigned to the exe cutive director were subject to control by the board of ^Letter from Charles R. Stevens, American Embassy, Mexico City, to W„ L. Schurz, Assistant Chief, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, Sep tember 30, 1943. ^Institute Mexican©-Norteamericana de Relacianes Culturales, Beeas Para Estudios Post-Graduados* Folleto Informativa No. 1, Mexico, D. F*, 1944; Excelsior (Mexico City), December 5, 1943; El Nacional (Mexico City), Decemr ber 19, 1944; El Nacional. January 20* 1944; Novedades (Mexico City), January 20, 1944, 44Estatutos (1943), Art* XIV* 45Ibid. , , , Art., XV., 383 directors as long as the board continued to function as it was intended4 Other circumstances and problems developed, however, which ultimately prevented these intentions from being carried out as planned. In the meantime, the estab lishment of the English Language Institute in Mexico developed a second major activity for which the cultural institute subsequently became responsible in accordance with its avowed objectives* The English Language Institute One of the purposes of the cultural institute was to encourage the knowledge of the Spanish language in the United States and of English in Mexico.Except for this expression of interest in the study of the languages of the two countries, the institute at first was unable to make an active contribution to this phase of its cultural relations program, but the teaching of English was destined in time to surpass the scholarship program in terms of numbers if not in importance* English classes at the library.--While the Benjamin Franklin Library was still in the planning stage, the General Advisory Committee of the Division of Cultural Relations considered that language teaching; would be one 46lbid„ * Art1 . , I , V 384 of the important cultural activities of the library*^ Even before the formal opening of the library on April 13, 1942, the Benjamin Franklin Free School of English started its first class in March with an enrollment of twelve stu dents meeting three times a week. At the end of the month, A O the enrollment had reached 128 students* By the end of the first year of instruction, there were 254 students en rolled in English classes. When the second year's classes were limited to 165 students, there were 642 on the waiting list,^ English classes by radio were begun in April, 1942, and continued in September over the radio station of the National University of Mexico. Exchange conversation classes between Mexicans and Americans were also arranged through the library. Except for one teacher on contract with the library, the new English school depended at first Somewhat precariously on volunteer teachers, both Mexican and American, who occasionally were unable to continue ^Minutes of the Meeting of September 17-18, 1941, General Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, October, 1941 (mimeo graphed) . ^Francis E* Townsend, "The Historical Antecedents of the English Language Institute in Mexico," Mexican- American, Institute of Cultural Relations., Mexico: City, May 1, 1947 (photostat)» Instruction was not entirely free, for there was a small inscription fee from- 1942, to 1.944. ^Report of the Division of, Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, June, 1943, Appendix; A, p., 1.1 (mimeographed). 385 courses they had started and left their classes stranded, Establishment of the English Language Institute. — Observing the popular demand for English classes and the need for teachers, Dr. Waldo G* Leland, Director of the American Council of Learned Societies, suggested to the ambassador in the summer of 1942 that the English teaching in the library could be organised as a laboratory by the English Language Institute of the University of Michigan, which was conducting research on the teaching of English to Spanish-speaking persons. The ambassador viewed this sug gestion with favor since Dr. Leland favored limiting the size of the program and this seemed a way of meeting recent protests of the private English academies, which had 51 charged the library with unfair competition. The sug gestion was passed on to Dr. Charles C, Fries, Director of the English Language Institute of the University of Michi gan, and he made a two-weeks tour of inspection of the classes in the library to study the possibility of carrying out the suggestion.5^ •^Townsend, loc. cit. Some volunteer, unpaid teach ing continued throughout most of the wartime period. U. S., Department of State Instruction No. 6622 to the American •Embassy,, Mexico City, November 28, 1944. ^Leland, loc« cit. M« Lydenberg, "Director's Report for Septem ber1 , “ Biblioteca, Benjamin Franklin, Mexico City, .1942, p. 3 . (mimeographed)« 386 In November# the Joint Coasnittee on Cultural Relations accepted Dr* Fries* report and reached the deci sion to establish an English language institute in one of the Spanish-speaking republics as part of a plan to supply qualified teachers of English for service in Latin America. ^3 In March, 1943# the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs provided a grant of $15,045 to the University of Michigan to establish the English language Institute in Mexico. Using the facilities and established teaching pro gram of the Benjamin Franklin library# the institute was conceived as a laboratory for training teachers of English in the Latin American countries. The objectives of the institute were to be as fol lows: 1. The testing and development of methods and materials for teaching English to Spanish-speaking Americans under field conditions. 2. The training of North Americans in teaching English to Spanish-speaking Americans through class room study# through practice teaching under field conditions, through improvement of their command of Spanish, and through orientation experience in a Spanish-speaking environment. 3. The cooperation with Mexican educational authorities in training Mexican teachers of English S3 Report of the Division of Cultural Relations.,, Department of State# Washington# November#, 1942# p.. 2 (mimeographed) * 387 through provision of instruction in English and of opportunity for supervised practice t e a c h i n g * ^4 The plan provided for admitting twenty-four trainees a year at the rate of six at a time for three months each* They were to be selected by the Committee on English Teaching under the chairmanship of Dr, Fries* and they were to receive scholarships to cover travel and main tenance expenses for their three-month training period. Dr. Albert II. Marclcwardt of the University of Michigan had been sent in February as an exchange professor of English by the Department of State to the National University of Mexico, He was assigned additional duties of serving as a special adviser and administrator to the new institute for the purpose of supervising the training of the teachers, The University of Michigan was to have general supervision of the project,, provide assistance in writing texts, and serve as a training and resource center in the United States* ^3 The English classes at the Benjamin Franklin Li* brary came under the supervision of the English Language -^U. S., Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs, Division of Science and Education, "Project Authorization: English Language Institute in Mexico," Washington, March Z ? . 1943 (processed). A letter from L. Duggan of the Depart ment of State to the chairman of the joint Committee of Cultural Relations, March 16, 1943, indicated the. approval of the Department of State for the project.. 55Ibid., 388 Institute in March, 1943, although the incidental expenses 5 6 of their operation were still being borne by the library, Formal responsibility was assumed by the English Language Institute of the University of Michigan on July 1 of the same year, when the funds provided by the Coordinator C7 became available* 1 The plans of the Coordinator, however, failed to work out in practice* By the end of the first six months, only seven trainee scholarships had been granted to the English Language Institute in Mexico, although the Coordi nator had provided for twenty-four. The principal reasons were that there was a shortage of available personnel during wartime and the lack of assurance of employment as an English teacher in Latin America after the trainees had finished their training* The need for such teachers by either the Coordinator or the Division of Cultural Rela- tions was limited, uncertain, and spasmodic. Accordingly, plans were made in January, 1944, to 5%. M« Lydenberg, "Report of the Director-Librarian for March, 1943," Biblioteca Benjamin Franklin, Mexico City, p. 7 (mimeographed)* c 7 Letter from Albert K, Marckwardt, Resident Di rector of the English Language Institute, to Daniel Rubin de la Borbolla, Executive Director, Mexican-American Insti tute of Cultural Relations, Mexico City,. August 4, 1944* C O Minutes; of Meeting Concerning English Teaching* Division of Cultural, Relations* Department of State* Wash/*’ ington, January IQ* 1.944* pp.-, 1,-5- (typewritten).. 389 abandon the teacher training phase of the project as of July 1,. 1944, when the Coordinator's contract with the Uni- * versity of Michigan was to expire* In the meantime, the trainees were to continue teaching, receiving the scholar** ship funds as their salary, in order to maintain the con tinuity of the staff in the English Language Institute in Mexico* The limited income of the teachers of $400 for the three-month period allowed by the Coordinator's contract was to be supplemented at the director's discretion out of funds to be raised from tuition charges.$9 use 0£ trainees to supplement the small staff was necessary be cause there were no provisions in the Coordinator's con tract for regularly salaried teachers or supervisors.^ -^Minutes of the Joint Committee Meeting, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington* January 17, 1944, p. 6 (mimeographed). Four and two-thirds of the twenty-four scholarships were used for the support of what was becoming a regular teaching staff* Sixteen teachers were given training under the contract with the Coordinator. "These people received instruction in Spanish, in Latin-American culture, in teaching methods, and in addition they had observation and practice teaching. I be lieve it is fair to say that judged in terms of its educa- tional--not its practical--aims, the program was successful, especially in its later stages when a number of people came down at the same time and could be given work as a group." Letter from Albert H. Marckwardt, Resident Director of the English Language Institute,, to Carl A* Sauer, Division of Cultural Cooperation, Department of State, Washington, September 4, 1944. ^Letter- from Charles- C* Fries, Director of the English Language Institute, University of.Michigan, to Charles- A.> Thomson, Chief, of the Division of Cultural Relations, Department of, State, Washington.,. December 17,. 1943., 390 Although the Coordinator's plan to establish a laboratory for the training of English teachers failed to achieve practical results for the purpose for which it was estab lished, it had the important consequence of establishing English teaching as a major aspect of the cultural rela tions program in Mexico* This eventually became the prin cipal activity of the cultural institute. Transfer of the English Language Institute to the cultural institute.— At least two suggestions for the trans fer of the English Language Institute to the sponsorship of the Mexican-American Cultural Institute had been made to the Department of State by the embassy in the fall of 1943.^ It was also strongly recommended by the director of the English Language Institute, ^ In view of the plan to abandon the teacher-training phase of the work of the English Language Institute in Mexico, the Joint Committee on Cultural Relations recommended that the board of di rectors of the cultural institute be approached on the possibility of assuming responsibility for the English 6 ^-Letter from Stevens to Schurz, September 30, 1943; American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No, 14,282 to the Department of State, Washington, November 18, 1943, ^Letter from Albert H, Marckwardt, Resident Di rector, English Language Institute, to Daniel Rubin de la Borbolla, Executive Director, Mexican-American Institute of Cultural Relations, Mexico City, November .12, 1943* 391 classes.^ This suggestion was in conformity with the stated objectives of the cultural institute, and on Janu ary 20, 1944, the board of directors voted unanimously to accept all responsibility other than financial for the direction of the English Language Institute, The position taken was that the members of the board of the cultural institute would serve as competent Mexican advisers to guide the English Language Institute where it would be of most service to Mexico, A subcommittee of three was appointed for this purpose, The cultural institute planned to provide general policy and maintain contacts with Mexican authorities and institutions, leaving the internal administration and tech nical responsibility to the director. In this reorganiza tion, the English Language Institute was to be responsible to the Department of State through the cultural institute,^ Accordingly, the department began almost immediately to issue Instructions to the embassy in regard to the English Language Institute. ^ Recognition of this transfer was ^Minutes of the Joint Committee Meeting, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, January 17, 1944, p. 6 (mimeographed), ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No, 13,532 to the Department of State, Washington, January 24, 1944. ^Idem,- Despatch No, 15,802, February 11, 1944, 66U ' . . S., Department of State, Instructions No. 5,2.2.3. of February 2, 1944, and No. 5,458. of March 18, 1944, to the .American Embassy, Mexico City, acknowledged by the embassy in its despatches to the depart “ • ment.^ The transfer was not deemed completed by the di rectors of the two institutes, however, until the contract with the Coordinator came to an end on July 1, 1944, and the Department of State assumed financial responsibility for the support of the English classes. Problems of Coordination, 1944-1946 The election of new officers and a new board of directors, the appointment of an executive director, and the transfer of the English Language Institute to the spon sorship of the cultural institute were accompanied by a renewed interest by the members of the institute in ful filling the mission they had set for themselves in their newly created charter. But their efforts to do so ran inevitably into established patterns and vested interests elsewhere in the cultural relations field. Mexican efforts to cooperate.— Late in March, 1944, the board of directors of the cultural institute expressed an interest in assuming greater responsibility for such cultural affairs as lectures, exhibits, and concerts, which had previously been sponsored by the library. It felt that ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 16,950 to the Department of State, Washington, April 12, 1944, 6®Letter from Marckwardt to Rubin de la Borbolla, August 4i ; 1944., 393 the library could confine its work to extending its library services to the Mexican public and to Mexican institutions* The board observed that the cultural institute was formed for the purpose of making known the most important aspects of the culture of the two countries and that with its present financial resources, an appropriate staff* the sympathetic support of institutions in both countries, and contact with prominent Mexicans, it was now in a position to make a more active contribution to the bilateral cul tural relations program. It was encouraged to do so by the embassy: The Embassy concurs with the Board of Directors of the instituto in believing that the Instituto should immediately take action to adopt responsibility for and sponsorship of those cultural activities which now form a part of the activities of the Benjamin Franklin Library* Official recognition of and support for this inter est came almost immediately from an officer of the Depart ment of State in an address delivered on Pan American Day to the members of the cultural institute and students re ceiving certificates from the English Language Institute*70 ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 16,819 to the Department of State, Washington, April 4, 1944* 7®Carl A, Sauer, "Discurso Pronunciado por el Sedor Carl A* Sauer del Departamenta de Estado de los Estados Unidos Ante el Instituto Mexicano-Norteamericano de Rela- ciones Culturales en la Biblioteca Benjamin Franklin el dia 14 de Abril de 1944 a las 19 Horas" (mimeographed). 394 The cultural Institute felt handicapped, however, by the fact that the library had traditionally performed these functions in the past and that It controlled the use 71 of the auditorium. Recognizing the interest of the cul tural institute in taking a more active part in cultural relations, the board of directors of the Benjamin Franklin Library authorized the formation of a joint committee of five persons representing the library, the institute and the embassy to cooperate in planning cultural activities in the auditorium. ^ Shortly thereafter, the institute and the library began cooperating in cultural activities as planned. A book publishers* exhibit was jointly sponsored in May.^ Xn June, plans were made for an American indigenous art exhibit and for a series of lectures on United States history. ^ ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 16,189 to the Department of State, Washington, April 4, 1944. ^Letter from W. C. Longan, Secretary, Board of Directors, Benjamin Franklin Library, to Carl H. Milam, Executive Secretary of the American Library Association, Chicago, Illinois, May 11, 1944. ^Rudolph H. Gjelsness, "Report of the Director- Librarian,1 1 Biblioteca Benjamin Franklin, Mexico City, May, 1944 (mimeographed), ^Daniel F. Rubin de la Borbolla, "Report of the Activities of the Institute Through June 15 Presented by the Executive Director," Mexican-American Cultural Insti tute, Mexico City, 1944 (typewritten) , 395 After achieving a working arrangement for coopera tion with the library in sponsoring cultural events, the board of the cultural institute sought additional outlets for exercising its influence and lending its support. During the temporary absence of the chairman of the board of directors of the library in the fall of 1944, the vice president of that group became acting president. He was at the same time the president of the board of directors of the cultural institute. It was during this period that *r an interesting period of cooperation and mutual understanding" developed that led to further suggestions for the increased participation of Mexicans in cultural relations. Conceiving that the library was not serving a sufficiently large number of Mexicans, the acting presi dent of the two boards proposed that this objective might be achieved if more Mexican opinion were represented on the board of directors of the library to help determine policy.^ Accordingly, he suggested that the cultural 75 The board of directors of the library was com posed of only three Mexicans and six Americans, whose num bers were further increased by the ambassador as honorary chairman and the director of the library as treasurer. American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 26,663 to the Department of State, Washington, October 8, 1945* It is a matter for speculation whether this imbalance in favor of American representatives exercised any influence on the charter of the cultural institute, which provided for a compensating imbalance in favor of Mexican representatives. 396 institute have voting representation on the board of di rectors of the library* At the same time, he also sug gested that the Ministry of Education and the National University of Mexico be invited to send representatives to the library board. In the meantime, the director of the cultural institute, who was a close personal and profes sional friend of the president of the board of the cultural institute and was appointed to his position by him, had informally approached the Mexican Government in the name of the cultural institute to ask for a new building, free of rental charges, for the library nearer the National Univer sity and the governmental and commercial center of the city* Xn short, the president was seeking means to en courage both public and private Mexican collaboration with the program. He was encouraged in this direction by the cultural relations officer of the embassy: The Embassy believes that any aid which the Mexi can Government might offer for the purpose of con tinuing at another location the activities now going on at Paseo de la Reforma 34 would be an appropriate acknowledgement of the value of those activities* This is the reason why we have thought it desirable that our Mexican friends take a close personal interest in the English language teaching, the preparation of text material for the Spanish Language Institute, the Li brary's policies and acquisitions, and the use of and planning for the auditorium. To further stimulate this interest on the part of our Mexican friends we have tried on all possible occasions to bring them into conversations with our distinguished United States visitors who might be thought to have something to offer in the field of cultural cooperation.'® The cultural relations officer reported that the principal reason for the president's proposals was that he was disturbed over the unilateral aspects of the financial support of the cultural relations program and he was there fore attempting to interest the Mexican Government in 77 taking a more active part. ' The attitude of the Mexicans involved was coopera tive. The cultural relations officer was able to report to an officer of the Department of State as followst The group that we now have is probably as important a group intellectually as it is possible to gather to gether. Times and people change; however* right now we feel that the present group is solidly for U. S. collaboration. The present Board members* officers of ■^Letter from Charles H. Stevens, Cultural Assist ant, American Embassy, Mexico City, to W. L. Schurz, Assistant Chief, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, September 11, 1944. ^ ibid. A possible interpretation of the proposals to increase both the Mexican financial contribution and the Mexican representation on the board of directors of the library is that there must have been a desire on the part of the Mexicans to control, or at least to influence to a greater extent, the cultural relations policies. When questioned on this point, the former cultural relations officer denied that there appeared to be any desire to con trol policy* Rather, he believed that the Mexicans were motivated more by a desire for an equal status in order to cooperate more effectively. Interview with Charles H. Stevens, Dean of the Sumner School, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, April 14, 1953. The chief proponent of the proposals was non-committal on the subject* Inter view with Pablo Martinez del Rio, Mexico City, August 5* 398 the Ministry of Education, and almost the entire ad* ministration of the University are close personal friends of mine who are more interested in collabora tion with the United States than with any other country, and, consequently, we are seeking to find with them the formula which will put our Library and our English lan guage activities on a sound basis for the future, The plans for more building space and for the co operation of the Mexican Government, however, were post poned until a later time. The plans for the closer co operation of the library and the cultural institute through overlapping membership on their respective boards of directors were laid aside in favor of cooperation through centralized administration controlled by the United States. This policy came about as the result of a number of cir cumstances. Centralized American administration,— In the fall of 1943, after a change in administration in the library and during the reorganization of the cultural institute, the director of the English Language Institute had recom mended that all three agencies be housed in one building: Moreover, I believe that these diverse activities would gain in effectiveness if there were a single co ordinating head whose business it was to see them as part of a single directed movement, and to furnish aid and effective means of implementation whenever the situation demanded. It is absolutely essential that Letter from Stevens to Schurz, September XI, 1944, 399 this head by a part of the Cultural Relations Division of the local embassy* The recommendation was both a criticism of the existing situation and an outline of future organizational plans. By 1944, the growing English language Institute and the increased activities of the cultural institute, both using the library as their headquarters, prompted the cul tural relations officer of the embassy to write to Washing ton; The four principal activities of our cultural center--the Library, the English Language Institute, the research of the Cultural Institute, and the use of the auditorium— all depend one upon the other and yet there are three directors plus the nebulous American Library Association. The cultural relations officer and the Mexican director of the Cultural Institute are not automatically informed of the activities of the Library and the English Language Institute, and this is not conducive to effective planning. The criticism of having too many directors in the cultural relations program was partly met at the end of 1944, when the first director of the English Language Institute departed to resume his post at the University of Michigan. At the suggestion of the embassy, his successor ^Letter from Stevens to Schurz, September 30, 1943, forwarding a memorandum from Albert H. Marckwardt, Resident Director of the English Language Institute, "Suggestions Toward an Integrated Program of Intellectual Cooperation.1 ( ^Letter from Charles H. Stevens, American Embassy, Mexico City, to Carl A. Sauer, Division of Cultural Co operation, Department of State, Washington, September 5, 1944. was to be known as the supervisor of English courses. He was to be responsible to the director of the cultural institute, who in turn was responsible to the board of di- 81 rectors of the cultural institute. This reduced the number of directors operating cultural activities in the Benjamin Franklin Library to two. Centralized administration was not the only con sideration, for other officers in the embassy had an eye also on a reduction in government spending in the post-war period. It considered that a single administrative head over all three institutions would not only improve effi ciency of operation but it would also enable the cultural relations program to survive when appropriations to employ high-salaried personnel were reduced after the war.^ The embassy, furthermore, felt that nthe person principally responsible for the expenditure of American funds in Mexico must be an American citizen.r' He was not to dictate teaching policy in the English Language Insti tute, but he was to have authority to allocate space, to determine the use of the auditorium and to settle other administrative problems,QJ ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 21,951 to the Department of State, Washington, December 12, 1944. 82idem, Despatch No. 19,701, August 26, 1944. ^ Idem, Despatch No. 2.2,151, December 27, 1944.. 401 In accordance with these specifications, the embassy moved the newly appointed director of the Benjamin Franklin Library in December, 1944, into a position of administrative authority over all three institutions, and the Mexican executive director of the cultural institute left his post. This change was made without the prior knowledge of the officer in the Department of State who was charged with the supervision of the department's relations with cultural institutes.^ The change was also made with out consulting the board of directors of the cultural institute. It was not until six months later that the board formally acknowledged, for another purpose, what was already a fait accompli.Thenceforth, the director of the cultural institute was to be an American citizen. The trend toward economy and centralized control ^Office memorandum from Carl A. Sauer to Herschel Brickell, Bryn J. Hovde, and Charles A. Thomson, Division of Cultural Cooperation, Department of State, January 10, 1945. This same memorandum states that the department had given the director of the library no authority over the English teaching program and that the move was made by the embassy without the prior knowledge of the author. He was somewhat embarrassed because less than a year previously the division had agreed that the cultural institute was to have over-all policy leadership in collaboration with the department, and he had so stated publicly to the members of the cultural institute in an address to them at the library in April, 1944, Supra, p„ 393. ^Minutes of the Meeting of the Board of Directors, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, July 23, 1945 (typewritten, in Spanish), was not confined to the library., the two institutes, and the scholarship program. It was also extended to the cul tural relations office in the embassy. When the second secretary of the embassy, who was charged with political reporting as well as the supervision of both the informa tion and cultural relations programs, asked informally early in 1945 for a replacement for his recently departed cultural relations officer, he was overruled by the ambas sador. The latter further added to the work of the di rector of the three institutions by assigning him the addi tional duties of serving as cultural relations officer and supplied him with a desk in the embassy. His work was f t f i supervised by a senior officer in the embassy. During 1945 and 1946, the director of the Benjamin Franklin Library continued to be responsible for the administration of the library, the English Language Institute, the cul tural institute, and the work of the cultural relations officer in the embassy. While this arrangement provided for centralized administration of cultural relations and may have made a contribution to internal harmony and efficiency, it had several other consequences which were somewhat less beneficial, ^Letter from Guy W. Ray, American Embassy, Mexico City, to Carl A. Sauer, Division of Cultural Cooperation, Department of State, February 1, 1945; American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 26,653 to the Department of State, Washington, October 8, 1945, 403 Before leaving Washington in the fall of 1944* the new director of the library had been advised to look to the embassy for guidance,Evidence that he did so is largely lacking because of the scarcity of written reports to the Department of State. Reports prepared by the staff of the English Language Institute did not reach Washington for more than a year.®** Nor did the director report regularly oq on the activities of the Benjamin Franklin Library. the reasons for this lack of reporting are not apparent, but it is a fair estimate that one of the factors was that his multiple duties probably allowed him little time for this phase of his work. Under such circumstances, there could be little guidance In policy matters from Washington* Similarly, there was little formal guidance from the board of directors of the cultural institute. The minutes of a meeting of the board of directors of the ^Letter from Stevens to Sauer, September 5, 1944* ®®Letter from Carl A. Sauer, Assistant Chief of the Division of Libraries and Institutes, Department of State, Washington, to Francis E. Townsend, Acting Supervisor, English Language Institute, Mexico City, March 5, 1947. In this letter, Mr. Sauer commented that "as a matter of fact, we had to read The New York Times to see what was going on in our programs in Mexico." gq The library of the University of Michigan has a nearly complete set of extant reports on the Benjamin Franklin Library from its founding in 1942 until 1950, and the reports for 1945 and 1946 are notable for their ir regularity. Similar lacunae can be observed in the files of the Department of State and of the New York Public Library., cultural institute in June, 1947, reflect that there was not a great deal of business transacted before that date because there had been few meetings and none on a regular basis.^ The vice president of the board, in a conversa tion in Washington with an officer of the Division of libraries and Institutes of the Department of State in April, 1946, stated that the director did not submit re ports either formally in writing or informally in conversa tion to the board regarding the developments in the insti tute and its program of operations and that the board had not had a meeting as such in more than a year. He observed that, under the charter of the cultural institute, the board was granted power to determine policy for the cul tural institute, but as time went on it became apparent that such power in fact resided in the director of the library and that this situation apparently had the support of the embassy. Furthermore, members of the board were not informed of the presence of distinguished American visitors to Mexico so that they might be given recognition by ban quets, lectures, and other cultural activities. Under such circumstances, he reported, the board was becoming less and ^Minutes of the Meeting of the Board of Directors, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, June 4, 1947 (typewritten, in Spanish)., 405 less useful.^ This report is substantiated by other evidence of the determination of policy by the administration rather than the board of directors. In April, 1944, the approval of the board of directors of the cultural institute was required when the director found it necessary to raise the tuition fees of the English Language Institute in order to Q O meet increasing local expenses. * But when it became necessary in 1946 to raise tuition fees again, the decision was made by a staff meeting within the English Language Institute despite its theoretical subordination to the board of directors and the precedent set in 1944.^ Furthermore, on the resignation of the supervisor of English courses, the teaching staff itself was permitted by the director of the library to decide, first, whether ^Memorandum from Carl A. Sauer, Division of Libra ries and Institutes, Department of State, to the ILI staff, including R. H. Heindel, L. S. Morris, Lionel Landry, Anne Boardman, Dr. William Schurz (ADA), Walter Prendergast (ADA), Herschel Brickell (IEP), "Cultural Institute and Library Affairs in Mexico, D. F.," April 19, 1946. 09 * Letter from Daniel Rubin de la Borbolla, Execu tive Director, Mexican-American Institute of Cultural Relations, to Albert H. Marckwardt, Resident Director, English Language Institute, Mexico City, April 18, 1944. ^Francis E. Townsend, Supervisor of Courses, "English Language Institute in Mexico Bulletin,1 1 Mexican- American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, August 21, 1946 (mimeographed). 406 his successor should be appointed or elected and, then,, to choose the successor by election*^ Although there had been no precedent until then for consulting the board of directors on this particular type of problem since the two predecessors had been appointed by the Department of State, the opportunity for seeking the cooperation of the board in solving a problem of policy was clearly missed. This policy stands in sharp contrast with that of 1943 and 1944 and after 1947, when the board in general was expected to control both policy and appointments. Mexican proposals."-Under such circumstances, the patience of the board of directors was not to last indefi- nitely. The vice president of the board of directors of the cultural institute told an officer in the Department of State that the director was a man of good faith, zeal, hard work, and energy., but he deplored his lack of consultative contacts with and reports to the board of directors. Sug gestions had been made to the director that closer contact with the board would be appreciated, but they generally went unheeded. On one occasion, it was made known to the ambassador that the Mexican members on the board would be satisfied to exercise either an executive or purely ad visory and consultative function, but they wanted to know ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No, 1,199 to the Department of State, Washington, September 17, 1.946. clearly either from the embassy or the department, or both, what their function was to be. They did not want to be in a position of having authority given to them in writing only to find that their advice and cooperation were not required and not wanted in practice. The visit of the vice president to the department to discuss the problem was a measure of both the disappointment experienced by uni lateral control and the interest in cooperation in the administration of the cultural relations program. With the arrival of a new ambassador in Mexico City, he inquired whether the unilateral policy might not now be changed in favor of a more cooperative program. For that purpose, he presented a proposal for the merger of the boards of di rectors of the library and the cultural institute.^ The proposal to merge the two boards of directors was in a sense a continuation of the earlier efforts in 1944 to equalize Mexican participation in the cultural relations program. 96 In July, 1945, six members of the board of directors of the cultural institute met with the director and officially confirmed him in his position as director of the cultural institute. They then suggested a merger of the boards of directors and named a president of 9 ^Memorandum from Carl A. Sauer to the XL! staff, April 19, 1946, Supra, ppt 392-96* 408 the combined board* Except for the director and arte other* the individuals at this meeting were Mexican* They sug gested the formation of a new institution to be called the Benjamin Franklin Cultural Institute of Mexico (Instituto Cultural Beniamin Franklin de Mexico) and that the two parent organizations be legally dissolved. They planned to call meetings of the two boards of directors and of the general assemblies of the two associations for this purpose shortly afterwards,^7 Subsequently, the two boards, without direction from the embassy, met in a joint meeting and agreed that the merger of the two organizations was highly desirable. It was also suggested that, at the same time, the merger be used to drop out inactive personalities. Their plans in cluded the appointment of committees with advisory and supervisory functions in the fields of English teaching, library policy, scholarship selection, publicity, and func tions for visiting Americans of distinction. Their pro posals were disapproved by the ambassador, however, without explanation, ^Minutes of the Meeting of the Board of Directors, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, duly 23* 1945 (typewritten, in Spanish)* 98 Memorandum from Carl A* Sauer to the ILX staff, April 19, 1946* 409 American opposition to the proposals* ’ — Neverthe less, the embassy reported to the department that it was opposed to the merger on the grounds that the library would probably always draw on the United States Government for its financial support and, therefore, should "remain pre dominantly under the control of Americans” in order to be "free of any criticism that might interfere with Congres sional appropriations." The Cultural Institute, on the other hand, should be of another sort, namely, one in which Mexicans desirous of promoting better relations between the two countries might play a more prominent role and exercise their own initiative. The embassy was of the opinion “that the practical advantages to be gained from a formal and legal union can and are being attained by combining the administration” under a single director. Furthermore, the library was sponsored under Mexican law by an association which had a contract with the American Library Association. Dissolu tion of the Benjamin Franklin Library Association and the formation of another one would require writing a new con tract. 99 xhe embassy was thus making a distinction between the two organizations on the grounds of financial support and a certain amount of satisfaction with the status quo. The embassy was supported by the department in ^9American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 26,663 to the Department of State, Washington, October 8, 1945, 410 maintaining a clear separation of the two organizations "to avoid all confusion of administrative responsibility., fiscal burdens, and cultural assignments," The department, however, was especially interested in building up the cul tural institute: It is also suggested that the library carry on only such public relations functions as are necessary to the successful management of a library, and that all other cultural or information functions having to do with international cultural exchange be assigned to the cul tural institute, 1^0 To these instructions, the director was able to reply that the work of the library and the cultural insti tute had been kept separate during his administration as much as possible: Activities such as academic work, including all classes, production and correction of English examina tions for scholarship candidates and others wishing to have a test of their knowledge of English, including some teachers of English, radio and press activities related to the teaching of English, lectures, concerts, programs, social activities and the like, including luncheons and other activities for distinguished visi tors, are conducted by the Institute, (almost exclu sively) [sic]1Q1 Nevertheless, sponsorship by the cultural institute of such activities was obscured by the fact that these events took place in the Benjamin Franklin Library and by lOOy^ ^ Department of State, Instruction No, -8,426 to the American Embassy, Mexico City, February 27, 1946* ■^^Amerlcan. Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No, 1,199 to the Department of State, Washington, September 17, 1946* the Iatter*s preeminent reputation.: In the interests of accuracy of the record, how ever, it should be here observed that notwithstanding the scrupulous effort to carry on such activities in the name of the Institute, the general public and those who patronize such activities, including both Mexicans and those of the American Colony in Mexico, constantly refer to the activities as if they regarded them as offered by the Benjamin Franklin Library* As long as all such activities are housed or take place in the Library building, it seems unlikely that the public will consider them as other than an integral part of the Beniamin Franklin Library program and organiza tion, 102 The centralized, unilateral administration, the multiple duties of the director, and the single location for all cultural relations activities in the library build ing inevitably prevented the emergence of the cultural institute as an active, independent, and cooperative enter prise. An officer of the embassy described it in raid-1946 as follows: The latter organization, as of June 30, 1946, exer- cises few functions other than formal control over the English Language Institute, which teaches more than 2,000 people the English language and has its main classrooms in the building of the Biblioteca Benjamin Franklin, and over the Scholarship Selection Committee, which makes recommendations to the Institute of Inter national Education regarding applicants for scholar ships in American colleges and universities,103 Reorganization of the Institute in 1947 The dissatisfaction of the Mexican members of the 102Ibid. ^American, Embassy,, Mexico; City, Despatch No*. D-3.82 t o the Department of State* ‘ Washington* July XQ* 1946*. 412 board of directors of the cultural institute in 1945 and 1946 might have been expected to dampen their enthusiasm for international cultural cooperation, particularly after the failure of their attempts to assume a more active role in the administration of the library and the institute. They responded favorably, however, to suggestions from the Department of State in 1947 for the reorganization of the cultural relations program along lines which allowed for their participation on a more nearly equal basis. American suggestions for reorganization.~-During the last six months of 1946, the Department of State and the American Embassy in Mexico City made comprehensive plans for the reorganization of both informational and cul tural affairs.In accordance with new policies in Washington, the Benjamin Franklin library was eventually to be included in the program of the department as a United States Information Library abroad. Like others elsewhere of different origin, it was to become an integral part of the embassy* Financial support and administration would have to come entirely from the United States by the end of fiscal year 1948s Meanwhile it must be kept in mind, that the Biblio- teca has been performing many services ordinarily per-" formed; by cultural institutes* that those services could be expanded and extended* and that the operation 3 ~ - Q 4 j'demf t Despatch; N ' o # > 112’ , , , September 9* 1946., 413 of cultural Institutes as cooperative entities deriving a sound portion of their support from their host coun tries has never been called into question with regard to the propriety of appropriating funds for them under the legislation governing Cooperation with the American Republics. In order to receive grants-in-aid distinct from appropriations for the library and in order to continue the cooperative aspect of the cultural relations program, the department urged the embassy to keep the institute in existence and to expand its activities. Cultural activi ties and programs not strictly of a library nature were to be entrusted to the institute. It particularly wanted the institute to remain as the sponsoring institution for English teaching, which would have to remain more self- supporting in the future, and as a vehicle for future cooperative efforts in the cultural relations field, Accordingly, the embassy made plans to continue the cultural institute under a director whose salary was to be paid by the Department of State. Additional local support was expected. The English Language Institute in Mexico as such was to be eliminated and its work was to be taken over by the cultural institute, The salaries of seven teachers 5., Department of State, Instruction No. 490 to the American Embassy, Mexico City, October 23, 1946. 106lbid, 5., Department of State, Telegram No. . 795 to the American Embassy* Mexico City, July 26 * 1946* were to be paid by the department and the rest through local funds. The embassy recommended, however, that the name of the institute be changed to include the name of Benjamin 108 Franklin because of the prestige of the library. To accomplish these fiscal and administrative pur* poses, the two institutions were to be separated and placed under separate administrations. Both administrators were to be American citizens of professional caliber. Although they were to be outside the personnel structure of the embassy, they were to report to and receive instructions from the cultural attache. Mexican participation in the reorganization.— The gist of the department's plans for the separation of the library and the institute and the reorganization of the latter were discussed with the president of the board of directors of the institute. Accordingly, he called a meet* ing of the board for November 14, 1946. He learned, how ever, that certain members were going to inject matters into the meeting that he deemed inappropriate, so that when the board assembled, he announced there would be no meeting and took them to the University Club for a private discus sion and an informal meeting. This action was indicative ^^American Embassy,, Mexico City,. Despatch No. 1,131 to the Department of State, Washington,, September 9* 1946., S.,, Department of. State,, Instruction No. 490 to the American Embassy* Mexico; City,, October 2,3» .1946., 415 not only of their attitudes toward the plans but also toward the previous record of the cultural relations pro-* gram. The Mexican members of the board were sensitive about the fact that the institute had been dependent en* tirely on funds from the United States Government and had received no contribution from the Mexican Government. They were appreciative of assistance from the United States, but they were displeased about participation in a unilateral program. One member of the board informed the embassy that the Mexicans did not want to participate in a program to which they were only lending their names. The members of the board were prominent people with ideas of their own* If they remained on the board of directors, therefore, they must have some authority, and they could not do that so long as all the funds of the organization came from the United States Government and American business men. Accordingly, they wanted to work for the negotiation and signing of a cultural convention between the governments of the United States and Mexico. They felt so strongly that a cooperative cultural program between the United States and Mexico was needed that some of the members were in favor of resigning, if this could not be achieved* At this informal meeting, it was decided that a committee would be named to study the revision of the charter of the institute and to 4X6 consider the possibility of securing agreement to a truly cooperative Mexican"American cultural convention similar to no one that had been proposed in 1944. ^ The minutes of the meeting of the board of direc** tors of the institute at the library on November 21, 1946, indicate that the gist of the suggestions of the Department of State for reorganization and renewed activity of the institute were read to the members. The executive director, who had been appointed by the embassy in December, 1944, announced his resignation to the board, and a committee of four Mexicans and one resident American was named to revise the charter.No further action was planned, however, until the arrival of the new cultural attache in the near future. The cultural attache and the president sketched ■^•^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 1,887 to the Department of State, Washington, November 18, 1946, Several members of the cultural institute had taken an active part in the discussions on the subject of a bilateral cultural convention in September, 1944, between Jaime Torres Bodet, the Mexican Minister of Education, and John W. Studebaker, the United States Commissioner of Education* This subject is presented in Chapter XIX of the present study, ■^"Slinutes of the Meeting of the Board of Directors, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, Novem ber 21, 1946 (typewritten, in Spanish), 112 American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No*. 1,922- to the Department of State, Washington, November 21, 1946* 417 tentative plans far the reorganised institute in Decera- 113 her, In early March, a luncheon meeting of the hoard of directors was held at the University Club. At this meet ing, the cultural attache was appointed to the committee to revise the charter as a replacement for a Mexican member who had resigned because of duties elsewhere. This commit tee now consisted of three Mexicans and two Americans. The board also discussed a change of name for the institute, considered enlarging the American membership on the board, and resolved to ask the Department of State through the cultural attache to nominate the director of the institute for election by the board. Plans were also made to have the president of the institute arrange a meeting with the rector of the National University, the Minister of Educa tion, and the Minister of Foreign Affairs for the purpose of asking for their support and that of the Mexican Govern ment in enlarging the scope of activities of the institute and in arranging for financial assistance from the Mexican 114 Government. The formal revision of the charter took place at ■^Letter from Morrill Cody, Cultural Attache, American Embassy, Mexico City, to Carl A. Sauer, Assistant Chief, Division of Libraries and Institutes, Department of State, Washington, December 11, 1946, ^American, Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 2 , 9 1 0 . to the Department of State, Washington, March 18., 194-7. 418 the meeting of the general assembly of members in the Benjamin Franklin Library on March 24, 1947, and it was formally notarized and recorded with the Mexican Government IIS on August 7. Although the general assembly was composed of ten Mexicans and only two Americans, there is little evidence that the decisions on the proposals to reorganize the institute were made along national lines, as had been the case in 1943. On the contrary, the Mexicans volun tarily relaxed their efforts to control the institute in favor of achieving in practice the principles of equality and cooperation* This was indicated at several points in 116 the process of revising the charter. The only proposal of significance rejected during the meeting of the general assembly was the suggestion to change the name of the institute. This was originally a Mexican suggestion, but it had been presented formally by the embassy with the approval of the Department of State, The proposal was to change the name either to Instituto 117 Beniamin Franklin or Centro Beniamin Franklin. ^^Idem* Despatch No, 3,191, March 28, 1947; Insti- tuto Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales, Estatutos (1947), Oficina Federal de Hacienda Central, Mexico, D, F», August 7> 1947, ll%inutes of the Meeting of the General Assembly* Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, March 24* 1947 (typewritten, in Spanish), ■^l^Minutes of the Meeting of the Board of Directors,-, Mexican,-American Cultural Institute* Mexico City, Novem ber 21* 1946 (typewritten* . in Spanish),, 419 A similar change had been proposed by the Mexicans at the time that an attempt was made to merge the library and the cultural institute in 1 9 4 5 . It had been tentatively approved by the president and several others in December, 1 9 4 6 . And it had been discussed at a preliminary meet- ing of several members of the board earlier in March. But the general assembly voted almost unanimously against a change of name on the grounds that the original name already held prestige in Mexico and that the shorter name was not descriptive of the functions of the institute.^ 1 It might be added that the original name reflected the binational character of the institute and symbolized a co operative enterprise undertaken by equal partners, of which the Mexicans were the senior by virtue of being mentioned first. The general objectives of the institute remained the same. Only one unnecessarily restrictive phrase was removed from the list Of objectives; Henceforth, the insti tute would no longer limit its approach to the Mexican •k^Idem. July 23, 1945. ■^Letter from Cody to Sauer, December 11, 1946* l^Sunra. p. 417. k^Americao Embassy, Mexico^ City,, Despatch No., 3,191 to the Department of State, Washington, March . 2 . 8 . , 1947* 420 Government through the Mexican Commission cm Intellectual Cooperation* It would now be free to contact any appro* priate agency of either government.^22 The board of directors was to be increased in num ber from nine to eleven. Five of the board members were to be Mexicans by birth and five# Americans, all elected by the general assembly. An eleventh member was to represent the students and was to be elected by them.’ * * 22 It was expected that the student member of the board would be Mexican. This meant that the board of eleven members would be officially composed of six Mexicans and five Americans# so that the balance of voting power would be in Mexican hands. However, the presence of five Americans on the board brought the status of the latter to a nearly equal position. "This expanding of American participation in the Board of Directors was not suggested by the Embassy but by the Mexican members themselves, M wrote the cultural officer to Washington,124 The American membership was further increased by the addition of the cultural attache and the American director as ex officio members, The outgoing president ^22Supra, pp* 367-6S. Estatutos (1947), Art, XV, ^^Estatutos. (1947), Art- VXH« ^24American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No- 3,191 to the Department of State, Washington, .March; 28,• 1947- 421 (a Mexican), who was also president of the board of direc- tors of the library, was also to serve in an ex officio capacity. Ex officio members were allowed a voice but no vote, but the addition of two Americans and one Mexican in this capacity to the board meant that Americans had equality in representation, ^ They at first followed, nevertheless, the former pattern in the election of officers* The board elected Mexicans as president, vice president, and secretary* Only the treasurer was American By 1952, this prac tice had been altered by electing an American to the posi tion of vice president as well as to the position of treasurer* ^7 Similarly, the composition of the scholarship se lection committee, which henceforth was to be appointed by the board of directors for a two-year term to coincide with that of the board, was no longer to be determined by Mexi can standards alone* The members expressed a willingness to conform to the general practice for appointment of such committees as established by the Institute of International I25Ibid, ^^bEstatutos (1947), l^'Curso Intensive para Frofesores de Ingles," Institute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales, ; Mexico, 1952.) 422 Education and the Department of State. Furthermore* despite the previous dissatisfaction with the administration of the institute by an American, the members accepted the provision that the Department of State would nominate the executive director and that he would be formally elected by the board of directors. The board as a whole, instead of the president alone, was 120 henceforth to perform this function. ^ Two weeks after the revision of the charter, the new board of directors met in the Benjamin Franklin Library. The meeting in general was marked by enthusiasm and deter* mination to make the institute one of the leading cultural organizations in Mexico, It appointed seven committee chairmen and gave them authority to select the other mem* bers of their committees. These committees were designated house, membership, financial, social, scholarship and inter* change, publicity, and education. It was at this meeting that they elected officers for the next two years and established the scholarship selection committee in con" 13D formity with American standards. ■ * - 28American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 3*191 to the Department of State, Washington, March 28, 1947« Chapter XII of this study contains a more complete discus* sion of the composition and activities of the scholarship selection committee* 129Ibid, ■^^Americ.an. Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No.. 3',29Q to- the; Department of State, Washington, April, 14, 194.7,, • 423 To assist the scholarship program, the offices of the institute were to have a directory of schools, colleges and universities in the United States for Mexicans inter ested in studying in the United States and a similar direc tory for American students interested in study in Mexico. Plans were made to house the institute separately from the library, to acquire a regular staff, to issue a publica tion, and to participate actively in the intellectual and cultural activities of the city through lectures and other activities. These lectures and activities were to be con cerned with developing artistic, scientific and cultural themes both of the United States and Mexico. ^1 The extensive plans made during March and April, 1947, provided much of the basic structure and thinking that were to guide the institute during the next six years. It was evident that the board of directors intended to put its equalitarian and cooperative views on bilateral cul tural relations into practice. This cooperative attitude, unmarked by any subservience or noticeable maneuvers for position, is all the more remarkable, considering the recent period of lack of cooperation in some aspects of the cultural program, and the leadership asserted by the United ^^■"Boletin Para los Socios," Institute Mexicano- Norfeamericano de Relaciones Culturales* Mexico, D„ F., Num., 1,, April, 1947 (mimeographed) . « 424 139 States through financial control* Cooperation After 1947 After the institute was reorganized in 1947, the board of directors met regularly as the governing body on an average of once a month, It also participated in the meetings of the general assembly of members conducted annually during the five-year period *^3 Although an institution of the size that the cul- tural institute eventually became probably can not be operated without encountering some problems that produce conflicts, the record since 1947 indicates that the organ izational structure established in that year set the stage for more harmonious and cooperative relationships* Never theless, the administrative structure of the institute con tained elements conducive to friction should the occasion for it arise* A focal point for such problems was the executive director of the institute* ■^32it should be pointed out that the interests of the members of the board of directors were not limited to bilateral cultural relations* They offered the cooperation of the institute to the Department of State and to the Mexican Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Education in con nection with the forthcoming conference of UNESCO to be held in Mexico City in November of 1947, Ibid* •^•^Libro de Actas de Asambleas Generales y Sesiones del Comite Directive, Institute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales, Mexico City* Vais,, I and II, April, 1947* ta May, 1953., . Administrative relationships.*-As reconstituted in 1947, the cultural institute accepted the provision that the Department of State would nominate the director and that he would he formally elected by the board of direc tors.*^ According to the terms established by the depart ment, the director was made subject to supervision and control by two entities, the board of directors and the embassy (and through the embassy by the department): Your immediate supervisor will be the officer in charge of information and educational exchange at the American Embassy. You will be responsible to him in so far as the interests of the United States are con cerned and to the Board of Directors of the Center in so far as the policies of the Board are concerned, so long as those policies do not run counter to the interests of the United States. The authority of both groups over the director was rein forced with the provision that he might be dismissed at any time "with the approval of either the Board of Directors of the Center or the Embassy or both.”*^6 This dual responsibility to two groups of officials of different nationalities and occasionally with different purposes provided the elements of conflict should either *^Supra. p. 422* ^^Letter from Clarence A. Canary, Acting Chief, Institutes Branch, Division of Libraries and Institutes, Department of State, to Mr. John Elmendorf, Instituto Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales, Mexico, D« F*, November 15, 1950* ' L36Ibld* 426 group of supervisors find its policies and interests in strong opposition to those of the other. Administratively, it placed the director in an untenable position should a conflict arise. After the reorganization of the institute in 1947, however, cooperation, rather than conflict, marked the relations of the director with the board of directors. In 1948, it was reported that the board was "reasonably co operative” and that only rarely was there any opposition to the suggestions of the director.This was not to say that the members of the board did not have different degrees of competency, interest in the institute, and opinions on matters of policy. As might be expected under such circumstances, the members of the board occasionally did not operate in per fect harmony. Nevertheless, the leading members were genuinely interested in the institute and in relations between the United States and Mexico. A report of the director in 1950 reflected that the ^Francis E. Townsend, "The Cultural Center in Mexico City,” Department of State, Washington, November, 1948 (typewritten). 13&American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 1,897 to the Department of State, Washington, November 9, 1948; letter from Philip Raine, Cultural Attache, American Embassy, Mexico City, to Edmund, Murphy, Division of Libra ries and, Institutes, Department of State, Washington, November 17, 1948« 42? board was interested not only in the welfare of the insti- Cute and in active cooperation but also in exercising genuine supervision: The Board members have collectively and individu ally exhibited a definite and continuing interest in the Institute. They are regular in attendance at Board meetings and serve in other capacities as well. Mem bers of the Board are often asked and often accept the job of introducing speakers at the Institute's public lectures, and they perform other similar services for the Institute on numerous occasions. In effect, the control which the Board exerts is quite considerable. In financial matters, expendi tures must be approved by the Board if they exceed the amount normally kept in the petty cash box or if they deviate in any appreciable measure from the budgeted allotment. In matters of public policy, they are most concerned to know in advance what are the plans of the Director, and they have on occasion determined certain policies of such a nature as to cause the Director to make minor concessions or changes in his concept of Institute policy. It must be said that these controls are welcomed by the Director, since they come from men and women who have a real concern for the basic pur poses of the Institute.139 In 1953, the director of the institute reported that the board of directors actively participated in the problems of finances, membership, housing of the institute, and general administration. They also contributed to the selection of cultural activities and the planning of lec tures in cooperation with the American director and his assistants. While the allocation of large amounts of funds was governed by the board of directors, "there has never ^Memorandum; from John Elmendorf, Director of the Mexican-American Cultural Institute, to Edmund M.« Murphy, Assistant Cultural Attache, American Embassy., Mexico City, April 21, 1950,. 428 been anything but the most complete cooperation between the Board and the American Director.0*^ Political relationships.--In terms of international relations, the terms under which the director was employed required that there be no fundamental disagreement with the best interests of the United States as a sine qua non to cultural cooperation. Although there existed the possi bility of conflict over international political issues con nected with cultural relations, the divergence of views on such matters did not create issues of any great signifi cance for the institute. the director of the institute in 1952 recognized the political considerations involved in his responsibility to both the embassy and the board of directors; The Institute is legally autonomous, governed by its Board of Directors, to whom the Executive Director is responsible. His responsibility, however, is limited by the phrase "in so far as the decisions of the Board continue to be in the best interests of the United States," which appears in the official letter of award under which the Director operates. It may be noted here that no decisions of the Board of Directors of this Institute have ever been construed as being other than in the best interests of the United States,141 ^^Memorandum from Francis C* St. John, Director of the Binational Center, to the Public Affairs Officer, Ameri can Embassy, Mexico City, "Answer to Questionnaire on 'Evaluation of Binational Center Program— Attachment to In formation and Educational Exchange Circular 8 1 , April 20, 1953, ^^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 2,838 to the Department of State, Washington, June 1, 1952 (en closure, "Report on Mexican-North American Cultural Insti tute") * Similarly, the binational character of the board, composed, of five Mexicans and five Americans, might have been expected on occasion to produce some differences of opinion based on political considerations* In an interview in July, 1953, another director reported that in meetings of the board of directors, any expression of "chauvinistic nationalism" on either side was politely listened to and then ignored when recommendations for policy or action were made. While there were honest differences of opinion as individuals, such problems as arose in the board were not based on nationality. Most Mexican members of the board and of the scholarship committee had lived in the United States, and the American members had lived in Mexico for some time. They usually understood each others’ ways of thought and cooperated in their interest for better mutual understanding between the two countries. Cooperation also marked the relations of the board of directors with the public affairs officer and the cul tural attache of the embassy, both of whom attended meet ings of the board from time to time in an ex officio capacity. The executive director of the institute in 1953 reported that ^^Intervlew with Francis C* St. John, Director, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, July 13, 1953* .430 * * * relations between the Board and the American Mission have always been extremely cordial both per sonally and officially* These relations have prevailed throughout the term of the present director and his predecessors. . * * The members of the Board of Direc tors are wholeheartedly in sympathy with the aims of the Institute. The tenor of these reports was confirmed in an interview with the president of the board of directors* who had been associated with the institute for most of its history. He indicated that political considerations had seldom crossed the path of the institute and that the embassy had not tried to dictate policy in operating it. Furthermore, he doubted that any such attempt would be successful, since he believed that the board would con sider that the institute was now well enough established to work independently toward its objectives of mutual under standing through cultural relations even without the fi nancial support of the embassy if this should prove neces sary. His point of view was that cultural relations should not have a political orientation at all, Primary emphasis should be placed on cultural activities rather than on politics, ^Memorandum from Francis C. St, John to the Public Affairs Officer, April 20, 1953, « i / / Interview with Julio Jimenez Rueda, President of the Board of Directors, Mexican-American Cultural Insti tute, Mexico City, August 19, 1953 (in Spanish). Summary The Mexican'■American Institute of Cultural Rela tions was founded in February, 1942, by a small group of Mexican intellectuals and resident Americans interested in intellectual cooperation between the United States and Mexico. Established at first as a private organization, it received its first grant-in-aid from the Department of State in the summer of 1942 and undertook to administer the scholarship program in Mexico for the department and the Institute of International Education which had been begun by a clerk in the embassy in 1941. The scholarship program proved to be a source of dissatisfaction and dissension among the members because of delays in paying Mexicans in the United States on scholar ships and fellowships, the fear of lowered prestige for themselves and for the scholarship winners because of the increasing number of scholarships, and the unilateral ad ministration of the program by the American secretary. To correct the latter situation, the members reorganized the institute in 1943 with the advice and assistance of the embassy and the Department of State. The first charter of the institute, which developed as the result of the reorganization in 1943, concentrated control in the hands of Mexicans by providing that they should hold two-thirds of the positions on the board of 432 directors. Furthermore, they elected Mexicans to the first four offices, choosing an American only for the position of treasurer. Similarly, the scholarship committee during 1943 and 1944 was composed of Mexicans except for the American director of the English Language Institute. A fourth device for providing for Mexican participation was to appoint a Mexican as executive director of the insti tute, with an office in the Benjamin Franklin Library, to administer scholarships and other institute matters for the board, The sponsorship of English classes in the library in 1944 became the second major activity of the institute. Early in 1942, the library began offering courses in English* They were taken over in 1943 by the English Lan guage Institute of the University of Michigan with funds from the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs as a labora tory in which to develop teaching methods, train teachers, and prepare texts* When it was discovered by 1944 that wartime conditions made the teacher training program im practical, the cultural institute accepted the responsi bility for the sponsorship of the English classes except for their financial support. Efforts were also made in 1944 to expand the activities of the institute through assuming greater re sponsibility for such cultural events in the iibrary as lectures, exhibits and concerts jointly with the library* Attempts were made to bring about closer cooperation with the library, Mexican citizens, and the Mexican Government through the devices of increasing the number of Mexicans on the library board and having the Mexican Government provide building facilities nearer the center of the city. These attempts failed, however, and during 1945 and 1946, the building of the Benjamin Franklin Library continued to be the center of Mexican-'American cultural activities. These were unilaterally financed by the United States, were administered by the American director of the library, and provided for little participation by the cultural insti tute. When at the close of the year 1944 the cultural officer and the directors of the library, the English Lan guage Institute, and the cultural institute returned to their normal academic positions in the United States, the new director of the library was placed in charge of all four activities. This was done by the embassy partly to decrease the number of directors supervising activities in the library building, partly to reduce expenses in antici pation of smaller post-war appropriations, and partly to make an American responsible for the expenditure of Ameri can funds. The appointment of the director of the library to administer the affairs of the institute was made without 434 the sanction of either the Department of State or. the hoard of directors of the institute, both of which were in favor of a more cooperative approach to cultural relations. Nevertheless, the unilateral administration continued until the close of 1946. Because the affairs of the institute were being managed to a great extent by the administrative staff, contact with the Mexican board of directors of the cultural institute was largely lost during this period. This lack of equal participation in what was nomi nally a cooperative enterprise between equals caused some resentment on the part of Mexican members of the board, and they proposed a merger of the boards of directors of the library and the institute as a means of increasing their participation in cultural affairs. This move was opposed by both the embassy and the Department of State because of the different means of financing the activities of the library and the institute. Furthermore, the department was interested in a clear separation of the two because it was planning to provide more opportunity for participation by Mexicans in the cultural relations program through the institute. Accordingly, in late 1946 and early 1947, plans were made to dissolve the binational board of directors of the library by mid-1948 and have it financed and adminis tered entirely by the United States as part of the system of overseas libraries developed during the 'war# the insti tute was to be retained as a cooperative activity and re organized as a separate institution in its own building with a binational board of directors and an American exe cutive director* Under this new plan, the institute was to administer the scholarship program, English teaching, and the programs of lectures, art exhibits, concerts, and other public cultural activities. After its reorganization in 1947, the board of directors met regularly on a monthly basis to determine policies for the institute and approve appointments to the staff. For the next five years, the members of the board not only took an active interest as a corporate body in the institute, but they also performed many services for it as individuals, Despite the fact that the American executive director was responsible to both the embassy and the board and could be dismissed by either, the board, the director, and the public affairs officers in the embassy worked harmoniously together without significant differences arising from either administrative situations or political problems. CHAPTER VI THE ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION AND THE PERSONNEL OF THE CULTURAL INSTITUTE Introduction The administrative structure of the Mexican-American Cultural Institute developed from the patterns of conflict and cooperation that accompanied its growth and development. In a sense, the institute never ceased its process of evo lutionary development throughout the first decade of its history. Nevertheless, the basic structure was established within the first five years of its existence, and subse quent changes were but modifications of the pattern. These changes were made in order to adjust the institute to cir cumstances and to the purposes of the Department of State and of the board of directors. The Institute was incorporated as a non-profit, civil association under Mexican law. Its members numbered several hundred persons, chiefly Mexicans and Americans. By 1947, it had acquired its own building and was supported financially chiefly from tuition fees for its classes, local contributions* and contributions of the United States Government. It was governed by a binational board of di rectors which determined its policies. Under the board of directors, the administrative and teaching staffs were headed by American personnel provided by the Department of State. The greatest burden of teaching, however, fell on a sizeable staff of teachers who were locally recruited and trained. The quality of its instruction was a principal attraction for an ever-expanding body of students who were interested in learning English. Instruction in English was supplemented by cultural, social, and intellectual activi ties designed to interest both students and members in a program of binational association and cooperation. An examination of the organizational structure and the personnel of the institute is basic to further inquiry in later chapters into the nature of its courses and activities and a subsequent evaluation of its contribution to the United States Information Service in Mexico. The Members of the Institute The board of directors and officers.— As originally constituted in 1943, the board of directors of the insti tute was to be composed of six Mexicans, three Americans, and ex officio members representing the dependencies of the institute and independent organizations cooperating with it. The executive director of the institute was estab lished by the charter as an ex officio member of the board 1Institute Mexicano-Norteamericana de Relaciones Culturales, Estatutos (1943), Art. VIII,. Registro Publico de la Propiedad del Distrito Federal, Mexico, September 3* 1944, 43a with a voice but no vote in the proceedings.^ The cultural officer of the embassy at first was a regular member of the board as the result of the first election in November, 1943* After the institute was reorganized in 1947, the cultural officer in the embassy, one of his assistants, or the public affairs officer, attended the meetings of the board in an ex officio capacity.^' When the institute was reorganized in 1947, these provisions were changed so that, besides the ex officio members, the board was to be composed of five Mexicans, five Americans, and one student representative elected by the students themselves.^ In 1930, the general assembly removed the student representative from the board and em powered the board to admit representatives of any class of ^Ibid.. Art, XXV. ^Ibid., Transitory Clauses, ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 3,191 to the Department of State, Washington, March 28, 1947; Libro de Actas de Asambleas Generales y Sesiones del Comite Directive, Institute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales, Mexico City, Vols. X and II, April, 1947, to May, 1953; memorandum from Francis C. St, John, Executive Director of the Binational Center, to the Public Affairs Officer, American Embassy, Mexico City, "Answer to Ques tionnaire on ’Evaluation of Binational Center Program— Attachment to Information and Educational Exchange Circu lar 83, M* April 20, 1953, ^Institute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales, Estatutos (1947), Art* VIII,- Registro Publico de la Propiedad del Distrito Federal, Mexico, December 11, 1947 * members, including students* to the meetings of the board whenever they had official matters to present. The length of the terms of the elected members of the board of directors was at first to be determined by the general assembly of all the members, with the provision that the original board would hold office for at least a year and that there would be staggered terms to provide continuity* ? When the institute was reorganized in 1947, the term of office of the elected members of the board was regularized at two years. Continuity was permitted by the absence of any provision against re-election for additional terms,® In practice, elections were held in February of the odd-numbered years. According to the terms of the charter in 1943, the board of directors was composed of the five officers of the institute and four additional members. The officers of the association were the president, two vice presidents, the secretary, and the treasurer. They also served as officers of the board of directors. The five officers and the four members of the board were elected by the first general Q assembly of members on November 4, 1943. In 1947, the ®Estatutos (1950), Minutes of the General Assembly, June 9, 195Q, pp, 84-86. ?Estatutes (1943), Art. VIII. 8£statutos (1947), Art* VIII. ^Estatutos (1943), Art* VIII,, Transitory Clauses.) 440 number of vice presidents was reduced to one and, although the general assembly continued to elect the members of the board of directors, this body was now empowered to elect its own officers, and they became the officers of the association. The charter provided that the board of directors would meat once a month or whenever the president or three members of the board so requested in writing, giving their reasons. A quorum of five members and the vote of the majority of those present was necessary to conduct busi ness. The presiding officer was entitled to vote in case of a tie. ^ The board was empowered to execute the objectives of the institute, to administer its property and funds, perform through its president all legal acts necessary to fulfill the purposes of the institute, and to designate all 12 committees not otherwise provided for in the charter. Although the original charter of 1943 gave the president power to appoint the executive director and other employees of the institute, the first executive director, a Mexican educator, was appointed by the president with the ^Estatutos (1947), Art. VHX. • ^Estatutos (1943), Art* IX. I2Ibid,t Art, VXXI. 441 13 approval of the general assembly. The second, an Ameri can educator, was appointed by the embassy without con sulting either the Department of State or the board of directors.^ The revision of the charter in 1947 and again in 1950 brought no formal change in the procedure for making appointments. ^ Nevertheless, the accepted constitutional practice in this regard was established in 1947, when it was agreed that the Department of State would nominate the American executive director of the institute and the board of directors would formally elect him. ^ This same pro cedure was applied to the rest of the American staff. The language used by the Department of State in forwarding information about American personnel to the board indicated that it expected the board to exercise this function*^ That the board did so is substantiated by a record of refusing to accept a prospective American teacher in the •^Ibid., Art. X; American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No, 14,027 to the Department of State, Washington, November 6, 1943. ^Suora. p, 401, ^Estatutos (1947); Estatutos (1950). ■^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 3,191 to the Department of State, Washington, March 28, 1947. s*> Department of State, Telegram No. 401 to the American Embassy, Mexico City* April 25, 1947; idem. Airgram; No. A-67, August 1, 1952. Institute until sufficient information on his qualifies- 3 8 tions had been obtained. The powers of the officers of the institute were outlined in the original charter created in 1943. Except for reducing the number of vice presidents to one in 1947, no formal changes in the duties of the officers were made in later revisions of the charter. The president was empowered to call special meet- ings of the members of the institute and of the board of directors at his discretion, and he was to preside at the meetings of the general assemblies, of the board of direc tors, and at public ceremonies organized by the Institute. He was charged with executing the resolutions and instruc tions of the general assembly, the board of directors, and the committees not entrusted directly to these bodies, and he was to represent the institute legally as its official representative. In an emergency, he was also given 19 authority to assume the powers of the board of directors. The functions of the president were to be assumed by the first and second vice presidents, successively, in the temporary or permanent absence of the president, with •^Minutes of the Meeting of the Board of Directors, . Mex.ican-Atoe.rican Cultural Institute, Mexico City, dune 25* 1947 (typewritten, in Spanish). ^ Estatutos (1943), Art. X# 443 the full powers of the latter.2C* The secretary was charged with the usual duties of that office* He was to keep minutes of the meetings of the board of directors and of the general assembly, serve as a source of information in the meetings of these two bodies, handle the correspondence of the board according to its instructions, keep a list of members, preserve the records of the institute, sign notices of the meetings of the assembly, and perform such other duties as the board might direct. The treasurer was assigned the duties of super** vising the accounting and other actions appropriate to his office and to make a financial report at each meeting of the institute,22 The funds of the institute were to be kept in his care and were to be deposited in a banking institution mutually agreeable to him and the president. He was one of five officers, any two of whom could sign checks on the institute's accounts. The others were the president, the two vice presidents, and the executive 23 director. 20Ibid„. Art. XI, Art. XU. 22Ibid.. Art., XIII,, 23Ibid., Art., XV., 444 The charter also provided for committees* The general assembly was responsible for forming an auditing committee of three members to inspect the books and papers of the institute, to audit the financial status of the institute on an annual basis, and to inspect freely at any time the operations of the institute and report to the general assembly*24 In actual practice, a semi-annual audit was made by the Mexican branch of an established 25 American auditing company. In the 1943 charter, there was to be a scholarship selection committee composed of an odd number of from five to eleven members chosen by the board of directors to administer the scholarships assigned to the institute for distribution* It was empowered to invite as ad hoc members persons of special competence in certain fields of study where it was deemed necessary to ask for specialized assist ance, The members of the scholarship selection committee n £ were to serve indefinite terms of office# Except for these two committees, the board of di rectors was given authority to appoint all committees it 24Ibid** Art. XVI* ^Memorandum from John Elmendorf# Executive Direc tor, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, to Edmund R* Murphy, Assistant Cultural Attache, American Embassy-., Mexico City, April 21, 1950, p., 11, 2%statufcos (1943), Art., XVXI?, considered necessary to conduce the affairs of the insti- tute and to determine their duties.27 In addition to the scholarship committee, which was first established in 1942, the institute appointed a committee on lectures and pro grams in 1942 and a committee on exchange and cultural activities and one on translations in 1943, When the charter was 'revised in 1947, no reference was made to the scholarship committee as such, and the term of office of all committees appointed by the board was OQ limited to the two-year term of the board itself. 7 After the reorganization, the board of directors appointed scholarship, membership, financial, social, publicity, house, library and education committees. With but an occa sional exception, the chairman of these committees was a taember of the board of directors who was not elected to an office.30 27Ibid,, Art, XVII, ■^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 399 to the Department of State, Washington, March 18, 1942 (with enclosures); idem, Despatch No. 10,154, May 17, 1943; idem, Despatch No. 14,199, November 15, 1943; letter from Charles H, Stevens, Cultural Officer, American Embassy, Mexico City, to W. h. Schurz, Assistant Chief, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, October 15, 1943, 2^Estatutps (1947), Art. XVII, 3°American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 3,290 to the Department of State, Washington, April 14, 1947; Mexico City Herald, April 11, 1947; Excelsior (Mexico City), March 16, 1949. 446 The personnel of the board.--The hoard of directors was composed of some of the outstanding educators, busi- ness men, and professional people of both nationalities in Mexico City. They were not only leading citizens in their community, but they were in some cases known inter* * nationally as well. The people elected to the presidency of the insti tute indicate to some extent the caliber of its leading mem bers. All the presidents from 1942 to 1953 were educators. The first president in 1942 and 1943 was Dr, Samuel Ramos, Chief of the Mexican Commission of Intellectual Cooperation in the Ministry of Education. From 1943 to 1947, the president was Dr. Fablo Martinez del Rio, historian and professor at the National University, educated at Oxford University, England, and president of the board of direc tors of the Benjamin Franklin library. The third president was Dr* Jose Zozaya, biologist and Director of the Graduate School of the National University and former Director of the Institute of Public Health and Tropical Diseases of Mexico. In 1949, the institute elected as its president, lie, Julio Jimenez Rueda, writer and Professor of Spanish literature at the National University, who had served as the Director of the Faculty of Philosophy and Letters of the National University, of dramatics in the Department of Education, and of the National Archives. In 1950, he was 447 elected a member of the National Academy. He was still in office at the close of 1953.^ The Mexican members of the board of directors serv- ing the institute under these presidents were no less out- standing. They included Ing. Felix F. Palavicini, one of the framers of the Mexican Constitution of 1917, founder and publisher of the newspaper, El Universal, former Minister of Education and Mexican Ambassador to several countries; Dr. Manuel Sandoval Vallarta, an internationally known physicist, who had taught at the Massachusetts Insti- tute of Technology, served as Director of the Institute of Physics, of the National Polytechnic Institute and of the National Academy of Sciences, and as Mexico's senior repre sentative on the United Nations Atomic Energy Commission; Dra, Marfa de la Luz Grovas, chairman of the committee on cultural relations of the International Federation of Uni versity Women, Professor of English and American literature at the National University, and Director of the University Women's House. Other Mexican members of the board were Dr. Ignacio ^Report of the Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, December, 1942, p. 43 (mimeographed); letter from Stevens to Schurz, October 15, : 1943; American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 14,027 to : the Department of State, Washington, November 6, 1943; : idem, Despatch No. 3,191, March 28, 1947; idem. Despatch •No* 732, September 12, 1950 (enclosure, "Semi-Annual Evalu- ' ation Report of USIE Activities in Mexico"), 448 Gonzalez Guzman, one of Mexico* s leading doctors of medi cine; Lie. Eduardo Garcra Maynez, philosopher; Dr. Fernando Orozco,, Director of the Institute of Chemistry; Arq. Carlos Contreras., one of Mexico*s leading architects and repre sentative of the Guggenheim Foundation in Mexico; Ing. Ricardo Monges Lopez, professor at the National University and Director of the Geophysical Institute and of the Insti tute of Geology; Lie. Enrique Loaiza, lawyer and educator, head of the Department of Exchange and Cultural Relations and Director of the Summer Session of the National Univer sity; Ing. Manuel Leon Ortega, a prominent engineer. The American members of the board of directors from 1943 to 1953 were Charles E. Stevens, cultural rela tions officer, American Embassy; Harry Mazal, chairman, education committee, American Society of Mexico; Robert Gwynn, Manager of the National City Bank; W. C» Loegan, formerly executive secretary of the ^coordination committee'* for Mexico and a member of the board of directors of the Benjamin Franklin Library; Paul V. Murray, former Principal of the American High School and Director of Mexico City College; Thomas Saunders, former representative of General Motors, representative of an Insurance company, and member of the board of the American Society; W* E. Stone, senior entomologist of the Bureau of Entomology and Plant 449 Quarantine Laboratory* United States department of Agricul ture; Mrs* W* E. Stone; Mrs* M* L. Stafford, dean of the Graduate School of Mexico City College and wife of a former United States Consul General in Mexico City; Edgar Skidmore, President of the American Society and of the National Paper and Type Company; Dr* Nilbur downs, representative of the Rockefeller Foundation in Mexico; Dr. David Glusker, promi nent American physician and husband of Anita Brenner, American author on Mexican affairs; Dr. Isabel Kelly, representative of the Smithsonian Institution in Mexico; Mr* Edward Hidalgo, American lawyer and representative of American business firms in Mexico* * * The members and their functions.--The charter adopted at the meeting of the members on November 4, 1943, provided for regular, corresponding and honorary members* All three classes of members were to be elected by the 33 general assembly of all the current members. ^ The revision of the charter in 1947 added students between the ages of sixteen and twenty-five in a secondary, preparatory or professional school as a fourth class of members.^ This change was made at the suggestion of the ■^This list of members of the board of directors was taken from the same sources as for the presidents of the institute* -^Estatutos (1943), Art* VX. ^Estatutos (1947)> Art* VX* 450 cultural relations officer In order to provide for a pat tern similar to that of cultural institutes in other Latin American countries* the students were to have their own student organization within the framework of the institute. Their annual dues were to be considerably less than those of full members, but they were to be given the full privi leges of the institute except that they would have no vote *3 C in the annual meetings. When the charter was again re vised in 1950, the maximum age of student membership was raised to thirty,^ Four more classes of members were added to the charter in 1950, These were associate, advisory, contribut ing, and transient. Associate members were those who be longed to societies or institutions created by the insti tute or which cooperated with it. Advisory members were master writers* artists and others dedicated to an intel lectual activity who were in a position to aid and advise the cultural activities of the institute through lectures, concerts, publications, and other means. Contributing members were those who made donations in cash or property in addition to the regular dues. Transient members were those who, living outside the country, remained in Mexico •^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 3,191 to the Department of State, Washington, March 28, 1947, ^ Estatutos (1950), Art* VX* 451 37 no more than six months. After 1950, associate, student, and contributing members were qualified for membership automatically by affiliating themselves with the institute according to their respective classifications. The general assembly was authorised to admit as honorary members those who, through their academic merits or through their efforts to establish good relations between Mexico and the United States, deserved to be honored. Henceforth, membership in the case of regular, corresponding, advisory, and transient members oo was to be granted by the board of directors. The constituent power of the institute was vested in the general assembly, In the charter of 1943, this body was to be composed of all regular and honorary members. Meetings of the general assembly were required by the charter at least once a year, but special meetings might be called by the president, the board of directors, or by a third of the regular members,^ ^Ibid. Associate members at first paid no dues. This category was created for the purpose of encouraging the development of an organization of Mexicans who had previously held a scholarship or fellowship for study in the United States. Minutes of the Meeting of the Board of Directors, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, April 12, 1950, p. 2 (in Spanish); idem. May 10, 1950, p. 2; idem. July 12, 1950, p. 2. This organization, known as the Ex-Becarios. is discussed more fully In Chap ter XII of the present study* ■^^Estatutos (1950), Art* VI* ^ Estatutos (1943), Art* XVIII, 452 Besides the function of electing the board of di rectors and establishing a committee of auditors, the general assembly was given the sole power of amending the charter.41^ Furthermore, it had the responsibility of electing the various classes of members, and it was given general authority to alter the powers of the president. As the constituent power of the institute, it was the only body empowered to establish policies for the dissolution of / 1 the association if that became necessary. A quorum to conduct ordinary business was to be one half the regular members at the first meeting called for that purpose. If half the members failed to appear, a second meeting was to be called and regular business might be conducted regardless of the number of members present, A simple majority of those present was to be sufficient to make decisions except for the revision of the charter and the dissolution of the association, which required the vote of one half the regular members at meetings called for those purposes*42 The revised form of the charter after 1950 provided that only regular members would be considered members of the general assembly, and this body's power to elect 40Ibid.* Arts, VIII, XVI, and XVIII* 4IIbid,, Arts* VI* X, XVIII, and XIX, 42Ibid,, Art., XVIII. 453 members was restricted to honorary members only* It was provided that two-thirds of the regular members present at the general assembly might revise the charter or dissolve the association at meetings called for those purposes* Other provisions affecting the general assembly remained the same.^ Besides their right to a voice and a vote in the general assembly, regular members enjoyed the privileges of the institute. They received invitations to lectures and other cultural and social events sponsored by the insti tute, and they were permitted to participate in the activi ties of the social clubs and special study groups, to use the library and the collection of musical records, and to use the institute facilities for smaller meetings and club activities*^ Description of the membership.— It was the inten tion of the founders of the institute to keep membership on an exclusive basis, since the original plans were to Estatutos (1950), Art. XVIIX. The removal of the earlier provision that the charter could be amended only by a majority vote of all members was in conformity with the practice established in 1947, when, in violation of the charter, a general assembly of only twelve members amended it* Estatutos (1947)* Fro spec to del Institute Mexicano-itforteamericano de Relaciones Culturales, 1947-194S, " Mexico City, 1947, 6 pp.; memorandum from, Elmendorf to Murphy, April .2.1, 1950, p« 4« 454 organise only a small discussion group. This policy limited the group to less than thirty members during the first year of its existence* Only five of the members were Americans, and of these only two were private citizens of long residence in Mexico City. The other three were associated with the cultural relations activities of the embassy.^ At its first business meeting on March 6, 1942, the board of directors was of the unanimous opinion that no one should be excluded from the institute on account of sex, nationality, or other origin and that anybody who had permanent residence in Mexico and had identified himself with the life of the country ought to be considered as a Mexican for the purposes of the institute. On the other hand, members were expected to have a sincere interest in the principles of the institute, a desire and sufficient time to participate, and the necessary preparation to do so efficiently.^^ It was evident that the founders intended to build their membership from among the intellectuals in Mexico* A newspaper reporter described the existing and proposed ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 10,154 to the Department of State, Washington, May 17, 1943} Excelsior ^Mexico City), dune 22, 1942* ^American Embassy, Mexico City* Despatch No* 399- • to the Department of State? Washington, Kerch 18, 19 4-2, „ 455 membership list as a "real brain trust*After tasking a tour of inspection of cultural relations activities in Mexico City in the summer of 1942, Waldo G, Island, Direc tor of the American Council of Learned Societies and a member of the General Advisory Committee of the Division of Cultural Relations and of the Joint Committee on Cultural Relations, reported on the high caliber of its members: The present characteristics of the Institute are that it is a relatively small group of eminent Mexican intellectuals, with a few North Americans, desirous of promoting cultural and intellectual relations with the United States* Rather than to campaign for a large, open membership, Dr. Lei and favored restricting the institute to a small, select group of intellectuals who would prepare lectures, round-table discussions, and scholarly monographs on the 4ft progress of the major fields of study In Mexico. ^ A list of members published in June, 1942, in cluded the names of a number of scholars and educators well known in Mexico and in the United States, ^The Mexican mem bers listed were Alfonso Reyes, Luis Recasens, Eduardo Garcia Maynez, Jose Gaos, Samuel Ramos, Lucio Mendieta y Nuffez, Manuel Martinez Baez, Ignacio Gonzalez Guzman, Eduardo Villaseflor, Edmundo 0*Gorman, Enrique Diez Canedo, Alfredo Baftos, Julio Jimenez Rueda, Agustln G. Lopez, Pablo Martinez del r!q, and H, M. Sein, The list of Ameri can members included Edward G. Trueblood, Second Secretary, and Charles H, Stevens, Cultural Assistant in the American Embassy, Harry M, Lydenberg, Director of the Benjamin Franklin Library, and Paul V. Murray and James M* Zilboorg, Americans resident in Mexico City, Excelsior (Mexico City), June 22, 1942. ^8Waldo G. Leland, nLetter-Report to Mr. Charles A. Thomson, Chief, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, on Observations Respecting Cultural Relations Between; the, United .States and Mexico* Made during a, Brief ‘ Visit to Mexico City, June 2b-'July 3* 1942"' (mimeographed.) « , 456 It was suggested at the first meeting of the board of directors in 1942 that each member of the founding group submit a list of names of friends who might qualify as mem bers. Such a list was presented at the second meeting of the board on March 13, 1942.^ More than a year later, the membership remained the same as when the institute was founded, and the ambassador proposed that in the reorgan ization of the institute the membership be enlarged. The first efforts to do so came in 1943. When it became advisable to have a larger membership from which to choose officers in 1943, the cultural assistant and two of the members prepared a list of seventy-four outstanding Mexican and American intellectuals of Mexico City, both men and women, whom they considered eligible for membership. Their names were obtained through the assistance of two members of the institute who were the president and a prin cipal colleague of the Comision Impulsora v Coordinadora de la Investigacion Cientlfica (Committee for Furthering and Coordinating Scientific' Research). The list of names was approved by the general assembly on November 4, and plans were made to mail them invitations immediately*^ ^American Embassy, Despatch No* 399> March 18, 1942. ^Idenn Despatch No* 10,154, May 1?, 1943* 3^Letter from Stevens to Schurz, October 15, 1943; , American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 14,02.7 to the Department of .State;, Washington, November 6, 1943» 457 The results of the first membership drive were not reported* but during the summer of 1944* the executive director of the institute reported that there were 116 mem- bers on July 1. A year after the close of the Second World War, the institute reported 150 registered members. This was not an active membership, however, for only six members attended the preliminary meeting called in November, 1946, for the purpose of reorganizing the institute. And only twelve persons attended the meeting of the general assembly in March* 1947* for the purpose of revising the charter.5^ After the reorganization of the institute in 1947, it counted but 21 members by the end of July, The total reached 100 on January 31, 1948* and 217 by the end of that year. By September, 1949, however, a correction of the records indicated that there were 90 active regular members, 54 family memberships, 6 student members, 2 honorary members, and 1 transient member. The total ^2''Quarte, riy Statement from Cultural Institutes,” Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City# July 1, 1944 (typewritten). ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 1,887 to the Department of State, Washington, November 18, 1946. ■^Minutes of the Meeting of the General Assembly,, Mexiean-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, March 24, ,1947 (typewritten, in Spanish). 458 of 126 memberships indicated the active participation of 153 persons. Until 1950, applicants for regular membership had to have the signature of a founding member of the institute 56 and the approval of the general assembly. The prevailing attitude of the board of directors, furthermore, was that membership should be confined to Mexicans and Americans and to a small, select number of persons who would pay heavy membership fees*^ It was inevitable that the Department of State should observe during this period that ’'the present membership . . . is somewhat small for a cultural center of the size and importance of the one in Mexico City.”58 In 1950, under the stimulation of the department William F. Byess, Executive Director, "Quarterly Statement of the Institute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales,” Mexico City, July 31, 1947, p. 2 (typewritten); idem. January 1, 1948; American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 1,494 to the Department of State, Washington, November 29, 1949 (enclosure, ’’ Report on USIE Activities, September, 1949"); Francis C» St. John, Execu tive Director, "IMNRC Statistics, " Mexican-American Cul tural Institute, Mexico City, June, 1953. 5^Estatutes (1943), Art. VI; "Prospecto del Insti* tuto Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales, 1947-1948," Mexico City, 1947. -^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 1,305 to the Department of State, Washington, August 4, 1948. 58 U. S., Department of State, Instruction No* 455 to the American Embassy, Mexico City, October 5, 1948* 459 through the executive director of the institute* the board of directors provided for the revision of the charter to increase the number of categories of members* relaxed its previously exclusive membership policy, and authorized the 59 director to conduct a membership campaign. After 1950, applications for regular membership were at first to be signed by any two members of the board of directors and membership was then voted at the next meeting. By 1953, the endorsement of any member of the institute, including that of the executive director, was 61 permitted on the application for membership. An announcement of a campaign to increase the num ber of regular members was made at the meeting of the general assembly called in June, 1950, to revise the char ter. The plans for the campaign had been approved by the 50 American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 1,263 to the Department of State, Washington, April 28, 1950; memorandum, "Instituto Mexicano-Norteamericano de Rela ciones Culturales" [ca. mid-1950]; memorandum from John Elmendorf, Executive Director, Mexican-Ameriean Cultural Institute to the Public Affairs Officer, American Embassy, Mexico City, "Narrative Report to Accompany the Cultural Center Report Forms for the Period 1 January, 1950, to 31 March, 1950." 60 Memorandum from Elmendorf to Murphy, April 21, 1950, p. 4„ 61 Agenda for the Meeting of the Board of Directors, Mexican-Ameriean Cultural Institute, Mexico City, July 9, 1953* 460 62 board of directors in advance. A direct mail campaign to members of the American colony during the summer of 1950 brought an increase of more than one hundred new members. The next efforts in the membership campaign were directed to Mexicans from desirable groups who had not yet been approached by the institute, ^ As the result of new policies and a campaign for membership# the number of members increased rapidly during the next three and one-half years. By the end of 1950, there were 290 regular members. A year later, there were 303 members, and at the close of 1952 there were 417 regular members.^ By June 30, 1953, the new director was able to report to the Department of State that there was a total of 532 regular members belonging to the institute,^ In comparison with the original composition of the ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 443 to the Department of State, Washington, August 14, 1950* ^Idem. Despatch No, 1,075, October 24, 1950 (en closure, "Third Quarterly Report of Mexican-Ameriean cul tural Institute"). ^John Elmendorf, Executive Director, "Statistical Report for Academic Program," Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, March 31, 1951; idem, "Statistical Report on Cultural and Social Programs," December 31, 1951; idem, "Statistical Report for Cultural and Social Pro grams," December 31, 1952, ^Francis C. St. John, Executive Director, "Sta tistical Cultural and Social Report," Mexican-Ameriean Cultural Institute, Mexico City, June 30, 1953« 4 61 membership during the war years* the nature of the member* ship had changed considerably* In terras of nationality, there was a balance between the Mexican and American mem bers. Shortly after the membership campaign began in 1950. the American membership had been brought up to a point where 60 per cent of the members were Mexicans and 40 per cent were Americans. This ratio was ’'more in accord with the aims of the institute than it has been in the past,” reported the director.6^ By the middle of 1951, the two nationalities were about evenly divided. They remained roughly in that ratio during 1952 and 1953. There was also a limited number of members of other nationalities. Five Latin American countries other than Mexico and eight Euro pean countries were represented in the membership.^ Considered on the basis of vocational status, it is evident that the membership of the institute had changed from its exclusively intellectual nature during the war to one of a somewhat broader scope. Among the members were ^American Embassy, Despatch No. 1,075, October 24, 1950 (enclosure), ^Memorandum from John Elmendorf, Executive Direc tor, to Forney Rankin, Public Affairs Officer, American Embassy, Mexico City, "Fact Sheet on Cultural Institute," March 7, 1951; American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 272 to the Department of State, Washington, August 4, 1952 (enclosure, "Second Quarterly Report of the Mexican- North American Cultural Institute"); interview with Felipe Garcia Beraza, Assistant to the Director, Mexican-Ameriean Cultural Institute, Mexico City, August 7, 1953, 462 found persons of both nationalities prominent in profes sional, educational, governmental, and business circles. Some twenty employees of the American Embassy and other United States Government agencies in Mexico were members in the summer of 1953* At the same time, there was an equal number of officials or former officials of the Mexican Government, including cabinet members, and educational institutions. There were five bankers, more than a dozen lawyers, twenty doctors of medicine, twenty-five graduate engineers, and twenty-seven business executives* At the same time, the instituted membership included such middle- class occupations as clerks, technicians, secretaries, bookkeepers, telephone operators, and a tourist guide. Among the more prominent members of the institute were Dr. Jaime Torres Bodet, Director General of UNESCO and former Minister of Education and of Foreign Affairs; Dr. Alfonso Reyes, President of El Coleeio de Mexico: Lie* Jose Vasconcelos, author, former Minister of Education and Director of the National Library; Luis Montes de Oca, President of the Banco Intemacional and former Minister of Fine Arts; Lie* Eduardo Villasedor, ex-Director of the Banco de Mexico: Dr* Manuel Toussaint, Director of the Institute of Esthetic Research of the National University; ■ <! »l l i '-V l ' l ll M *V 6A Interview with Felipe Garcia Beraza, August 7* 1953. 463 Dr. Efren del Bozo, Secretary of the National University; Lie. Rodolfo Brito Foucher, former Rector of the National University; Dr. Nabor Carrillo Flores, Rector of the National University; Dr. Francisco Monterde, Director of the Simmer School of the National University; Arq* Carlos Lazo, Minister of Communications and Public Works; and George S. Messersmith, former Ambassador of the United States in Mexico.*^ The Administrative and Teaching Staffs It was not until after the reorganization of the cultural institute in 1947 that a stable administrative pattern was developed. Before that date, as a result of frequent changes in sponsorship, financial support, and supervision of activities, the administrative and teaching staffs were at first assembled from several sources. During the same time, the administrative structure was re adjusted several times until it finally evolved into its more permanent post-war form. After the institute was reorganized and moved into its own building in 1947, it operated under policies estab lished by its board of directors with some guidance from the embassy* Under the board, the chief administrative 69 ?The above list was taken from a dummy for a bro chure to be used in a fund-raising drive for a new building for the cultural institute, August, 1953> p. 5. 464 officer was the American executive director* He was assisted by a director of courses and several teachers sent to the institute by the Department of State. They, in turn, helped supervise the work of the locally employed teaching staff* The staff and its functions*— A principal ante cedent of the office of executive director of the institute as it developed after 1947 was the office of director of the English Language Institute. The man who held the posi tion, Dr. Albert H. Marckwardt, was sent as an exchange professor to the National University of Mexico, but he never taught a class there and he served for nearly two years during 1943 and 1944 as the director of the English Language Institute. He worked closely with the director of the English Language Institute at the University of Michigan, where he was regularly a professor of English*^ His duties consisted of providing training for the English teachers sent by the University of Michigan, super vising the preparation of text material, administering the funds of the English Language Institute, organising classes and class schedules, teaching advanced courses in English and in American literature, and leading seminars on English ■^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 16,950 to the Department of State, Washington, April 12, 1944; interview with Albert H. Marckwardt, Professor of English, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, October 11, 1952, 465 teaching for Mexican teachers of English* Since his post'* tion existed before the cultural institute*s first charter was written and was not originally considered as part of the cultural institute, reference to such duties is not found in the charter. The executive director of the cultural institute was appointed in late 1943 under the provisions of the charter and he held office until the end of 1944.^ His principal functions were to manage the office of the insti tute in the library building, keep the accounts, sign checks together with any other officer of the institute except the secretary, carry on correspondence, administer the scholarship program, cooperate with the library in pre senting public cultural activities, and publish information about the activities of the institute. Since he held another official position as director of the School of Anthropology, his work with the institute was on a part time basis, and his pay was established at 500 pesos (about $103) per month.^ In theory, he was senior to the resident director of the English Language Institute and closer to the board of the directors of the cultural insti tute in the chain of command as an ex officio member of ■ m u n i., ft »■ ■ ti n i i h n ^ w h h ih ' i i ^Supra, pp. 380-83, 401. ^A m erican Embassy, Mexico C ity , Despatch No., 14,027 to the Department o f S ta te , Washington, November 6, 1943^ E s tatu to s (1943)* A rts . X IV and XV. 466 the hoard* In practice, the two institutes at first oper ated independently and both directors attended meetings of the board* The second director of the cultural institute held the office through 1945 and 1946* Originally appointed only as director of the Benjamin Franklin Library, he was also made director of the cultural institute, the director of the English Language Institute, and cultural attache by the embassy in order to centralize the administration of all cultural activities and reduce expenses. Since the principal operations of the three cultural institutions tinder his direction were conducted by assistants appointed to work under his supervision, much of his work was fiscal and administrative in nature. Furthermore, his principal duties were to the library, and his contribution to the work of the cultural institute and to English teaching was necessarily conducted on a part time basis* The approxi mate percentage of his time devoted to the institute is indicated in the fact that he was paid a salary of $6,000 as director of the library and $2,000 as director of the cultural institute and for conducting the work of cultural attache.^ ^American Embassy,, Mexico City, Despatch No. 26,680 to the Department of State, Washington, October 8, 1945; U. S., Department of State, Telegram No. 795 to the Ameri can Embassy, Mexico City, July 26, 1946; idem. Instruction No. 8,426, February 27, 1.946* Other expenses for the joint 467 Upon the reorganization of the institute in 1947* the executive director of the cultural institute became a full time employee for the first time. In many respects, his duties were combinations of those of his three prede cessors* including the administrative and supervisory aspects. They were determined by the charter of the insti tute* by the terms of his appointment by the Department of State, by the board of directors, and by the public affairs officer and the cultural attache in the embassy. During the last year of the war, the Department of State began the practice of giving the members of the American staff it nominated for appointment in Mexico City a letter of award in lieu of a contract. They were offi cially considered private American citizens who were given a grant of money through the letter of award to work in the institute. Because of this grant, they were termed "grantees.” They were not members of the Foreign Service of the United States nor members of the civil service. They might be transferred at any time by the Department of State to another cultural center, but they were required to remain abroad for two years as a grantee in order to administration of the institute and the library were like wise prorated* This was applied to the cost of paying for an accountant, a telephone operator, and for rent, heat, light, and insurance. Other assistants charged to the accounts of the institute were a secretary, clerical assist ant, porter, and messenger. 468 receive return transportation. After 1947, the letters of award made them responsible to both the public affairs; officer of the embassy and the board of directors of the institute, either one Df which could terminate their services if they were unsatisfactory. The letters of award also defined their duties.^ According to the terms of his letter of award, the executive director of the institute was Mto be responsible for the development and administration of the Center, and for the preparation and return of such reports as may be required, He was expected to supervise the staff of other grantee and locally employed personnel, direct the program of academic, cultural, and social activities, ad minister the budgeting and fiscal operations, and to estab lish good public relations with leading Mexican and Ameri can residents*^ The director was also expected to teach ^Letter from Carl A. Sauer, Division of Cultural Cooperation, Department of State, to Estelle Griffiths, Mexican-Ameriean Cultural Institute, Mexico City, Septem ber 26, 1945; letter from Clarence A. Canary, Acting Chief, Institutes Branch, Division of Libraries and Institutes, Department of State, to Mr. John Elmendorf, Mexican- Ameriean Cultural Institute, Mexico City, November 15, 1950. ^Letter from Canary to Elmendorf, November 15, 1950. ^"Opportunities for Employment in Binational Centers Abroad," Division of Overseas Information Centers, Department of State, Washington, January 9, 1952 (pro cessed). 469 not more than, six hours per week when the situation demanded it or when special courses beyond the capacity of other teachers were offered.^ In short, he was to combine in one person a broad background, administrative ability, skill in foreign language as well as in English, an ability to teach, and a talent for public relations. In 1950, his pay and allowances amounted to $5,350 per year.^® In September, 1951, they were raised to $6,250 per y e a r .^9 in addition, the board of directors in 1952 granted him an annual expense account of $290 (2,500 pesos) per year to cover the costs of entertainment and incidental expenses resulting from his position. He also received a mileage allowance from the board of directors of fifteen 80 centavos per kilometer for his automobile. u Immediately under the executive director in the 7^Memorandum from William F. Byess, Executive Di rector, to Dorsey Fisher, Public Affairs Officer, American Embassy, Mexico City, "Budget for the Institute Mexicano- Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales, 1948," April 7, 1948, p. 2; letter from Lionel Landry, Acting Chief, Institutes Branch, Division of Libraries and Institutes, Department of State, to John Elmendorf, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, September 15, 1949. 78 Letter from Canary to Elmendorf, November 15, 1950. 79u. S., Department of State, Airgram No. A-712 to the American Embassy, Mexico City, March 20, 1952. ^Minutes of the Meeting of the Board of Directors, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, May 14, 1952 (typewritten, in Spanish), 4-70 hierarchy q£ the instituted staff and responsible to him was the director of courses* The first one was appointed by the Department of State on March 1, 1944* to assist the director of the English Language Institute, During 1945 and 1946# his title was temporarily changed to supervisor of English courses in order to avoid having too many ’’ directors'* in the institute under the director of the Benjamin Franklin Library, to whom he was responsible*^ The director of courses was charged with admissions to the classes of the English Language Institute* organiza tion and supervision of classes, observation and critique of the trainee teachers sent by the University of Michigan or the Department of State, and instruction of special classes or seminars in English arranged by the cultural institute. In 1945, he, in addition, was expected to supervise the production of text materials. The following year, the second person to hold the position was charged with some of the responsibility for the general cultural and social program, particularly the activities connected go with students or former students. ^Letter from G. Howland Shaw, Assistant Secretary of State, to Waldo G. Leland, Director, American Council of Learned Societies, Washington, March 14, 1944; American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 21,951 to the Department of State, Washington, December 12, 1944. ^Letter from Albert H. Marckwardt, Resident Direc tor, English Language Institute, Mexico City, to Carl A. Sauer, Division of Cultural Cooperation, Department of State, Washington, September 4, 1944; letter from 471 In 1950* the duties of the director of courses were to supervise the development and modification of the cur riculum, to hire local teachers, to organize the staff, to prepare class schedules and examinations, to direct the course work, to promote the use of audio-visual aids, and to prepare such reports as might be required. In addition, he was expected to direct the in-service training of the locally employed teachers, to organize seminars for the national teachers of English In the Mexican school system, and to teach a minimum of twelve hours per week.®^ The salary and allowances of the supervisor of English courses in 1945 was $3,810 annually. In 1946 it was established at $4,700 and in 1948 the director of courses was receiving $5,825. In 1950, $5,670 was budgeted for an unassigned Carl A. Sauer to Howard Tessen, English Language Institute, Mexico City, November 20, 1944; Clifford Prator, "Plan, to be Revised in Mexico, for the Establishment of a Teacher- Training and Materials-Producing Division of the ELIM,t r Inter-American Educational Foundation, Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs, Washington, 1945, p. 10; American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 1,199 to the Department of State, Washington, September 17, 1946 (Enclosure No. 2), ^Letter from Clarence A, Canary* Department of State, Washington, to Kenneth Croft, Mexican-American Cul tural Institute, Mexico City, March 13, 1950; ’ ’ Opportuni ties for Employment in Binational Centers Abroad, Division of Overseas Information Centers, Department of State, Washington, January 9, 1952 (processed). 472 84 person.OH^ In third rank in. the organization of the institute staff were the grantee teachers* During 1943, the Depart ment of State began assisting the Office of the Coordinator in providing a teaching staff for the English Language Institute through short-term grants-in*aid for a teacher and for a textbook writer. Another teacher was provided from October 1, 1943, to June 30, 1944, and on July 1, 1944, the department began providing salaries for four teachers on the staff of the institute on a regular basis. All of these people had been trained at the English lan guage Institute at the University of Michigan.^ Although there were temporarily as many as eight grantee teachers in the spring of 1946, the normal number between the spring of 1945 and the fall of 1952 was five or six., counting the executive director and the director of courses.^ In the ^^Letter from Sauer to Tessen, November 20* 1944; U. S., Department of State, Instruction No. 8,426 to the American Embassy, Mexico City, February 27, 1946; idem. Instruction No. 37, January 23, 1948; idem. Instruction No, 578, December 29, 1949. ^Letter from Charles C. Fries, Director of the English Language Institute, University of Michigan, to Charles A* Thomson, Chief, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, January 5, 1944; letter ftom Marckwardt to Sauer, September 4, 1944; letter from Sauer to Marckwardt, June 3Q, 1944* S., Department of State, Instruction No* 7,104- to the American Embassy, Mexico City, March 6, 1945; idem. , Instruction No* 8,426, February 27, 1946; letter from, Carl A* Sauer, Department of State, Washington, to 473 spring of 1953, the normal number of grantee personnel on the staff was considered to be four.^ The pay and allow* ances of the grantee teachers not assigned as directors or directors of courses ranged from $3,670 to $4,275 in 1946* By 1950, this had been raised so that they ranged between $4,023 and $5,537.88 The grantee teachers taught eighteen hours per week from 1945 to 1948. In 1948, it became necessary for pur* poses of balancing the budget to raise their teaching loads to twenty*one hours per week in addition to one major ad- 89 ministrative or supervisory duty. Francis E. Townsend, Acting Supervisor of Courses, Mexican* American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, December 4, 1946; Francis E. Townsend, ’’ English Language Institute in Mexico Bulletin, " Mexico City, August 21, 1946, p. 6 (mimeo graphed); letter from Sauer to Townsend, December 4, 1946; William F. Byess, Executive Director, "Monthly Statement of the Institute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Cultu- rales," Mexico City, July 31, 1948; idem. February 28, 1949; John Elmendorf, Executive Director, "Quarterly Report of the Mexican-American Cultural Institute," Mexico City, April 17, 1951; idem. April 22, 1952. ^Francis c. St. John, Executive Director, "Second Quarterly Report of 1953," Mexican-American Institute, Mexico City, June 30, 1953. S., Department of State, Instruction No. 8,426 to the American Embassy, Mexico City, February 27, 1946; idem. Instruction No. 578, December 29, 1949. ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 22,151 to the Department of State, Washington, December 27, 1944; idem. Despatch No* 21,951, December 12, 1944; memorandum from William F« Byess, Executive Director, to Dorsey Fisher, Public Affairs Officer, American Embassy, Mexico City, "Budget for the Instituto Mexicano-Norteamericano de Rela-* Clones, Culturales., 1948," April, 7, 1948, p. 2* 474 Grantee teachers were early accustomed to taking the lead in preparing course materials and examinations, in teaching special classes, in the registration and counsel” ing of students, and in occasional student social activi ties,^ By 1950, the grantee teachers were formally assigned duties as supervisors: The regular and corrective courses are divided among the grantees for the purpose of coordination and supervision; each grantee is in charge of two or more courses. The grantee responsible for a given course schedules the material to be presented and examina tions, The teachers of the various sections of the course are required to follow the schedule as closely as the individual sections permit* , . , The grantee in charge of the course and the director of courses visit each section from time to time to assist teachers in problems of classroom procedure and to plan adjust ments in the scheduling for the following semester.91 In the fall of 1950, in order to comply with in structions from the Department of State to increase the cultural and social activities of the institute, the grantee teachers were given more administrative assignments in addition to the supervision of classes, and their teach ing load was reduced to fifteen hours per week. These duties included assistance to the Mexican teachers of English in the public school system, the presentation of 90prancis E. Townsend, Acting Supervisor, ’'Report* ing of Activities of the English Language Institute in Mexico for July-December Semester, 19461 ! C Mexico CiCy* January* 1947, pp* 1-2 (mimeographed)* 9^Memorandum from. Elmendorf, to Murphy,: April 2.1, 1.950* pu 1.4, • 475 such cultural programs as moving pictures* lectures* and exhibits* the sponsorship of social activities* and the o? stimulation of club activities. * By the spring of 1953, the supervision of course work had passed to the more ex perienced local teachers because of the reduced number of grantees, and the latter were teaching only nine hours per week*^ The locally employed staff of the institute was assembled at first from a variety of sources* The English classes under the administration of the Benjamin Franklin Library in 1942 were taught by one locally employed teacher and a number of volunteers, both Americans and Mexicans*^ When the English Language Institute took over the English classes in 1943, the budget for the spring semester provided only for a single teacher and the resident di rector, The remainder of the staff was composed of unpaid 9 ^Memorandum from John Elmendorf, Executive Di rector, Mexican-American Cultural ^Institute, to Edmund R. Murphy, Assistant Cultural Attache, American Embassy, Mexico City, "Grantee Personnel in the Institute," Octo ber 25, 1950* ^Francis c. St. John, Executive Director, "Nar rative and Statistical Academic Reports, Second Quarter, 1953," Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, July, 1953* M* Lydanberg, "Report of the Director- Librarian for June, 1942,," Biblioteca Benjamin Franklin,, . Mexico City, July 3, 1942,. p.. 5 (mimeographed)' idem, "Director's Report for August, 1942,"’ p* 8; idem, . "Direc tor's: Report for September,. 1942,." pp.* 2„ 6., 476 volunteers, Xu June, 1943, the director reported that 60 per cent of the students were being taught by five tin- paid volunteer teachers* all of whom held A. B. or M. A* degrees* These teachers were either interested in better inter-American relations or were interested in improving their teaching methods and knowledge of Spanish* All but one were experienced foreign language teachers. ^ In the summer of 1943, a Mexican teacher of English was loaned to the English Language Institute by the Mexican Ministry of Education, which paid her salary for a full year in exchange for services rendered by the institute elsewhere*^6 Some of the sixteen trainees sent by the Uni versity of Michigan on the Coordinators contract were used to teach a number of classes, and in the middle of 1944 several of them became regular members of the teaching staff.^ Three local teachers were also employed on a part time basis in 1945.^ In that year, the Department of ^Albert H. Marckwardt, Resident Director, "Present, Assured Future, and Contemplated Activities of the English Language Institute in Mexico at the Biblioteca Benjamin Franklin," Mexico City, June, 1943, pp. 4-5 (typewritten). ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No, 16,950 to the Department of State, Washington, April 12, 1944* 9?Letter from Marckwardt to Sauer, September 4, 1944. S., Department of State, Instruction No, 7,104 to the American Embassy, Mexico City, March 6, 1945; office memorandum from. Carl A, Sauer, Division of Cultural Cooper ation, Department of State, to Dr.. Hovde, Dr, Zwemer (IDG), Mr. Lockwood (ARA), Mr, Carrigan (MA), "Teachers for the English. Language Institute, Mexico. City,! l ' February 19,. 1945, 477 State began encouraging the institute to establish more substantial tuition fees in order to raise funds with which to supplement its grantee staff, as was the practice in cultural institutes in other countries* By the fall of 1946, thirteen teachers were employed locally out of funds so received*95 By the time that the institute moved into its own building in July, 1947, the staff of six grantees was supplemented by seventeen teachers hired locally,Three years later, there were twenty-seven locally hired teachers, of whom six were employed full time twenty hours a week and twenty-one part time averaging eleven hours per week. As the enrollment increased, the institute employed more local teachers, so that by June, 1953, there were forty-one on the staff, Ten of them were employed full time and thirty- one part time* The local teachers taught 168 of the 172 classes, The locally employed teachers were the lowest paid 99u. S,, Department of State, Instruction No, 6,622 to the American Embassy, Mexico City, November 28, 1944; Townsend, ’ ’ English Language Institute in Mexico Bulletin," p* 6. 3-OOByess, "'Monthly Statement of the Institute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales," July 31* 1947 * 10lpranc^s John, Executive Director, "’Statis** tical Report for Academic Program for the Second Quarter of 1953,” Mexican-American Cultural Institute,, Mexico City* June 30, 1953* 478 members of the teaching staff. From July, 1947, to July, 1949, they received approximately $2.00 per hour of in struction. At the rate of 125 pesos for each three-hour class, with the maximum of seven classes, local teachers could earn a maximum salary of about $180 per month, or about $2,200 per year if they were employed on a twelve month basis* With the devaluation of the peso from 4*85 to 6.90 per dollar in late 1948, the local teachers were receiving the equivalent of $1.16 per hour in the spring of 1949, which was less than the salary paid to secondary teachers in Mexico City. This, combined with the rising cost of living and the differential in salary between their own and that of the grantee teachers, who were paid in dollars for similar professional and social demands on their time and income, produced conditions that were intolerable for the 103 local teachers by the summer of 1949. They threatened ^Letter from William F. Byess, Executive Director, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, to the Division of Libraries and Institutes, Department of State, Washington, February 12, 1948; U. S., Department of State, Instruction No. 157 to the American Embassy, Mexico City, April 21, 1948; Francis E. Townsend, "The Cultural Center in Mexico City, ” Department of State, Washington, November, 1948, p. 6 (typewritten). ^•^American Embassy, Mexico City, Telegram No* 919 to the Department of State, Washington, July 19, 1949; Alicia Garcia, secretary, ’’ Breves Apuntes sobre el Insti tute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales," n* d.« (typewritten). 479 to strike at the opening of classes for the second semester unless they received an 80 per cent increase in salary# which would; restore their pay to the equivalent of $2*00 per hour*^^ Unable to balance its budget with an Increase of this size# the board of directors secured from the Department of State an emergency cash grant of $2#500 which provided a 38 per cent increase and established a new pay level at 170 pesos per class per month, which was a fee similar to that of the university faculty at that time.^-* Another devaluation of the peso to 8*65 per dollar in the fall of 1949 reduced the monthly income per class to less than $20*00 by the spring of 1950. This meant that the monthly income of full time teachers with seven classes was approximately $138 per month.A bonus at the end of 1951 alleviated the situation temporarily. Beginning in 1952# all salaries were raised about 10 per cent and placed on a sliding scale according to their experience at the institute# so that a full time teacher with two years or ■^^Minutes of the Meeting of the Board of Directors# Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, July 13, 1949, pp. 7-8 (typewritten, in Spanish). S., Department of State, Telegram No. 710 to the American Embassy# Mexico City, July 29, 1949; Minutes of the Meeting of the Board of Directors, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, July 27, 1949, pp* 1-2 (typewritten# in Spanish)* ^Memorandum from Elmendorf to Murphy,v April 21, 1950, p. 5, 480 more of experience received, a monthly salary equivalent to about $150. The sliding scale provided for a range from 155 to 192*50 pesos per month for each three-hour class, with a maximum of seven classes for a full time teacher in the summer of 1953. local teachers assigned to duties as supervisors were given 250 pesos per month in addition for each course they supervised. This consisted of preparing two mid-term examinations of one-half hour each and a final examination of one hour, observation of teachers, and indi vidual conferences,^^ The qualifications of the staff«--Since English teaching was a new activity of the United States Government in Mexico and the rest of Latin America, there were at first no prescribed standards for the selection of the teaching staff, Such standards as existed were based on the judgment and the experience of the people in the field. The experience of the program by the close of the war indi cated that certain basic qualifications were indicated. As 10?Minutes of the Meeting of the Board of Directors, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, Novem ber 14, 1951, p. 2 (typewritten, in Spanish)j American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 2,498 to the Department of State/ Washington, April 22, 1952 (enclosure, ’ ’ First Quarterly Report of 1952 of the Instituto Mexicano- Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales")* •^^Interview with Audrey Wright, Director of Courses, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, July 27, 1953.. 481 time vent on, the requirements became more specific. In the wartime period, the staff at the English Language Institute in Mexico was recruited largely from the English Language Institute at the University of Michigan, The teacher candidates selected for training in Mexico in 1943 were drawn chiefly from two groups in the United States. These were English teachers with some knowledge of Spanish and teachers of the Romance languages, particularly Spanish. By December, 1943, it was realized that both types of teachers needed a comparative knowledge of two languages, an understanding of the difficulties of the English language as viewed by the Spanish speaking student, and a comparative knowledge of the two cultures where the two languages were spoken. The American Embassy in Mexico City reported to the Department of State as follows: Naturally, therefore, the most successful teacher candidates are those who have a certain amount of in tellectual flexibility and those who can be interested in the problem of education in a field where nothing, or very little, at present is definitely known. The teacher must be capable of being interested in the circumstance that he or she is to participate in what is probably the largest language learning laboratory yet attempted. More than this, the teacher must have the. interest of national and racial cultures, a sensi tivity to the differences between peoples, and mores, customs, and psychologies. It is believed that the need is for intellectually mature and culturally sensi- tive teacher candidates, who will, naturally have suf ficient good taste to conduct themselves according, to •^^American, Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No, 14,655 to- the Department of, State, Washington, December 7, 1943 *. 482 the conventions of the country to which they go. By all means, only candidates should be accepted who are ready to make this a profession or for whom it will constitute a serious part of their teaching career, Although throughout the entire first decade of the history of the cultural institute there was always someone on the staff who had had training at the University of Michigan, the number of such people was gradually reduced with changing personnel policies in the Department of State, By 1947, the department was recruiting English teachers for cultural institutes in Latin America primarily from the ranks of Spanish and Portuguese teachers in the United States*It was believed that American teachers of Spanish chosen to teach English in Spanish America would be more familiar with the problems of teaching a foreign lan guage, would be better prepared linguistically to communi cate with Latin Americans, and would almost instinctively bring elements of American culture into their language 112 classes without being instructed to do so* ^ 110Ibid* ^•^Edmund R. Murphy, "Cooperation with Cultural Centers in the Other American Republics,* * The Program of the Interdepartmental Committee on Scientific and Cultural Cooperation* Department of State Publication No* 2,994 (Washington? U, S. Government Printing Office, 1947), p, 30« ^^Interview with Carl A. Sauer, Glendale, Arizona, September 21, 1952* Mr. Sauer participated in establishing employment, policies for grantee teachers in the Department .of State from 1943. to 1949. Mrs. Margaret Moye del Barrio, who. went to- the English Language Institute as; a grantee 483 The Department of State began maintaining a panel of acceptable and capable candidates from which appoint” ments were made to the grantee staff as early as 1945* For that purpose, it maintained contacts with the various regional modem language associations and with the teacher placement bureaus of most of the colleges and universities of the United States* Candidates were "scrutinized from many points of view in addition to their proficiency in the matter of teaching English as a foreign language* In 1946, an announcement of the Division of Libra ries and Institutes of the Department of State described the qualifications desired In applicants. Professionally, they were to have had teaching experience, preferably in language teaching, the ability to teach English as a for eign language, sufficient speaking knowledge of the Latin American languages to make classroom explanations, a teacher in 1945, reported that, as an English teacher in Mexico City, she made efforts to explain the American way of life to Mexican students in much the same way that she attempted to interpret Latin America to American students in her Spanish classes in the United States. She had no recollection of being told to do this. Interview with Mrs. del Barrio, Detroit, Michigan, October 20, 1952, ff^Letter from Carl A. Sauer, Division of Cultural Cooperation, Department of State, Washington, to Harold W* Bentley, Director-Librarian, Benjamin Franklin Library, Mexico City, March 5, 1945; "Narrative Report Covering Operations from July 1 to December 31, 1948s Assistance to the Cultural Centers Program," Institutes Branch, Division of. Libraries; and Institutes, Department of, State9 .April 14, 1949 (processed) 484 pronunciation of English that was free of pronounced regionalisras, and an ability to interpret the cultural heritage of the United States, Personally, they were ex pected to have well-adjusted personalities in order to cooperate with other people and meet new situations without difficulty, good health, exemption from military service, a ’‘ missionary impulse to make a personal contribution” to ’Hemispheric ideals, ” and preferably some talent or accom plishment beyond classroom teaching in order to be able to contribute to the social and cultural program. A similar personnel policy prevailed in the Depart ment of State in 1952, although it had now become somewhat more specific. Grantees sent to Mexico were required to know Spanish fluently and to have had at least one year of successful experience beyond "practice teaching” teaching either English or Spanish as a foreign language. Experi ence teaching English grammar, composition, and literature to English-speaking students by itself was not acceptable. Previous travel in and a knowledge of Mexico was desira ble,'^ ^^-•'Qualifications for Positions in American Cul tural Centers,” Department of State, Washington, March 28, 1946, Interviews with Isabel Kremer, Chief of Program Staffing and Training Section, Information Center Service, Department Off State, Washington, November 21 and 28, 1952; "Opportunities for Employment in Binational Centers Abroad,” Information Center Service, Department of State, Washington, September, 1952, p. 3, 485 In 1952, considerable emphasis was placed on selecting individuals with broad interests and special talents in art, music, literature and recreation so that they would be equipped to draw Mexicans with similar inter ests into the activities of the cultural institute. This was one of the primary interests of the department- To do this, the grantee was expected to be personable, enthusias tic, energetic, cheerful, adaptable, endowed with some individual initiative, and to have the ability to command attention and attract others. It was these characteristics of personality that were counted on to make friends for the United States. It was considered that Mexicans would judge Ameri cans by the Americans they knew. Applicants with provincial speech, dress, or manners were avoided except occasionally in. the larger centers, such as Mexico City. Efforts were made to select individuals who had traveled widely in the United States, knew the American way of life, believed in it, and were articulate in explaining it, In order to be reasonably assured that the grantees would have an American cultural background, applicants must not only be American citizens for at least fen years, but they also must have spent their early formative years in the United States, jig Interviews with Isabel Kremer, November 21 and 28, 1952, 436 acquired a substantial part of their education in American institutions, have lived in the United States for a major part of the previous ten years, and be married to an Ameri can citizen who was not a native of the country to which the grantee was sent* Despite specific requirements and prohibitions in selecting the grantee teachers, they were interpreted broadly in order to avoid sending out a stand- 117 ardized type of American* If applicants met the basic requirements and, in addition, had had training in the field of the social studies, the Department of State was particularly eager to award them a grant to teach in the cultural institutes. On the other hand, no effort was made to seek out applicants in the field of government for the purpose of teaching courses in comparative democratic and communist theory and practice in government. Nor was there any effort to select applicants for their training in propaganda analysis and techniques. This was not considered either desirable or passible because of the need for the approval of each grantee by the board of directors of each institute.H** Besides these general qualifications for all grantees, there were specific requirements for the position 117idemi ’ ’ Opportunities for Employment in Bi national Centers Abroad,1 1 pp. 2,-3, H^Interview with Isabel Kremer,. November 21, 1952.* of executive director* the director of courses, and the grantee teachers. The executive directors were expected to be between the ages of thirty and fifty-five and to have had “successful administrative experience with a high degree of responsibility.” They were expected to have the ability to handle the finances of the institute, to organ ize and direct the institute’s program and staff, and to 119 establish good relations with the community. The cul tural attaches in Mexico recommended to the Department of State that it select a “man of experience, enthusiasm and attractive personality” and at the same time a man with prestige and ”a deep knowledge of Latin Americans and their culture." One experienced cultural attache reported the position of executive director required a man who was strong on “the representational and idea side. It needs a top-notch man--a diplomat, a man of intellectual attain ments, an able mixer. “^20 The directors of courses were to be between the ages of twenty-five to forty-five and to have had three •^9^Opportunities for Employment in Binational Centers Abroad," p. 3. ■^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 2,910 to the Department of State, Washington, March 18, 1947; letter from Philip Raine, Cultural Attache, American Embassy, Mexico City, to Carl A. Sauer, Chief, Division of Libraries and Institutes, Department of State, Washington, July 13, 1948; letter from Philip. Raine to Edmund R„ Murphy, Division of Libraries and Institutes,. Department of State, Washington, November 1.7, 1948,. 488 years of successful classroom teaching experience in the foreign language field. Xn keeping with the work they were to do, they were also required to have the ability to plan, organise, and prepare courses, schedules and teaching materials and to supervise teachers and office personnel. The grantee teachers were to be between the ages of twenty*- three to forty and be able to teach English as a foreign language. Description of the staff.— The Department of State selected and the board of directors approved three execu tive directors between 1947 and 1953. All three were between the ages of thirty and forty, had had previous ad ministrative experience, and had traveled abroad, either in Latin America or in Europe. All three held the M. A. degree and two of them had the Ph. D. degree.. The third was in the process of preparing his doctoral dissertation when he was appointed. All three had had previous experi ence teaching Spanish as a foreign language and spoke the language fluently. Part of their teaching experience was on the college level. Their major interests and orienta tion were clearly in the direction of teaching and studying Spanish and French. During the war, all three had had experience as intelligence officers In the United States ^^'•Opportunities for Employment in Binational Centers; Abroad. , , n p* 3* 489 Army, two of them in Europe after the war, but this was the extent of their experience io. government* They were pri- 122 marily professional teachers and administrators* During the period from 1947 to 1953f there were four directors of courses selected and paid by the Depart ment of State. Three of them held the M. A. degree and one an. A. B. 'Three of them held their degrees in the Romance languages and one in the field of linguistics. All had had previous experience teaching Spanish, three of them on the college level, and all had had previous experience teaching English in the cultural institute in Mexico or elsewhere in Latin America before receiving the appointment* One had written texts for teaching English to Latin Americans, Another had served as head of the Romance language depart ment in a small university in the northwestern part of the United States and had served as honorary vice consul for the Dominican Republic. There is no information to indi cate that any of them had had any other contact with politics and government either academically or through per~ sonal experience, All \rere professional language students •^^Tman (student newspaper of the cultural insti tute, Mexico City), September, 1948; U. S., Department of State Airgram No, A-644 to the American Embassy, Mexico City, August 31, .1949; idem, . N o . . . A-712, March 20, .1952* 490 123 and teachers* The grantee teachers at the Institute in general had had training and experience similar to that of the di rectors and the directors of courses. A cross-section of five of them will serve as an illustration. One of these served at the institute from 1945 to 1947, three were there In 1950, and one of them arrived in 1951. Of the five, all held the A* B* and M. A. degrees, three of them in Hispanic* American studies. All had had previous experience in teaching foreign languages. Four of them had had previous practical experience in working with Spanish or French speaking people. The one selected in 1951 had had several years experience as an instructor and director of recre ation activities in the United States and in France before going to Mexico City. In 1950, the director of the institute reported that “unusually competent local teachers are available In Mexico": s., Department of State, Instruction No* A-421 to the American Embassy, Mexico City, February 28, 1945; The Record, I (April-May, 1945), 8; memorandum from the Executive Director, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, to the Public Affairs Officer, American Embassy, Mexico City, n* d, tea. 1950]; U. S., Department of State, Airgram No. A-122 to the American Embassy, Mexico City, September 6, 1950* 124ihe Record, I (April-May, 1945), 8; memorandum front the Executive Director, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, to the Public Affairs Officer, American, Embassy,, Mexico City, n.. d* [ca. mid-1950];. U'* S., Department; of State-.,, Telegram. No., 342 to the American Embassy* Mexico City,, September 1.9* 1951* i 491 For example, the Institute has on its locally hired staff seven teachers who have their M. A, degrees, fourteen who have an A. B. degree, and six others whose training has been either professional or technical, including such miscellaneous backgrounds as normal school, language experience in journalistic work and in professional experience in voice training and theatre. 1^5 In June, 1953, of the forty-one local teachers at the institute, fourteen had the master’s degree in addition to the A, B., and fifteen held the bachelor’s degree. Of these twenty-nine, six were still studying for higher degrees in Mexico. Of the other twelve, six had had some college education* and only two had had no education beyond secondary school. 'Twenty-six of therm had had training or experience in language teaching before joining the insti tute, ten in English, eight in Spanish, and eight in both languages. Of the others, one had had previous training or teaching experience in home economics, two in art, four in business, and two in social studies without previous ex perience teaching languages. Of six, no information was available on their previous teaching experience or train ing. On the entire staff, there were only five who had taught or studied in the field of the social studies, and only one in the field of government. The average age for the whole group was thirty-seven. Only eleven were men. 125 ’ Memorandum from, Elmendorf to Murphy, October 25 X95G« Thirty of the teachers were horn, in the United States, three were daughters of American parents bom in Mexico and five were Mexicans bora in Mexico. Three were naturalised citizens of the United States, one having been born in Mexico, one in Germany, and one in Hungary. At least nine had married Mexicans. All but three had traveled, studied, or worked in the United States for a year or more. Ten had traveled or lived in Europe, Asia, and other parts of Latin America. Thirty-five had lived in Mexico for varying lengths of time before they joined the staff of the institute. The average length of time on the staff for twenty-nine who had been there for one year or longer was 3.75 years. Twelve had joined the staff in 1953, but nine of them had been in Mexico for some time before then.-^6 As a group, they were fairly well educated. Only about one fourth of them probably could not have qualified to teach in the public schools of California without fur ther academic training* Nearly three fourths might have qualified in terms of academic degrees to teach on the high school level in California, and more than one third might ^Memorandum from Elmendorf to Murphy, April 21, .1950; "List of the Faculty at the Institute Mexicana-* Norteamericana de Relaciones Culturales, Second Terra,H Mexico City, May, 1953, 4 pp, (typewritten); John Elmendorf : and Francis C« St* John,. Executive Directors, "Quarterly Reports of the Mexican-American Cultural Institute,n Mexico City, 19 5 O'*19 53* 493 have qualified by the same standards to teach in California junior colleges. As a group, they were bilingual, had binational interests, and were even cosmopolitan in some cases, Professionally, they were primarily language teachers. The Orientation of the Staff Instruction by the University of Michigan.— During the summer of 1942, the English Language Institute at the University of Michigan offered a twelve-week training program for prospective teachers of English in the cul tural institutes in Latin America* As a result of his experience in this summer session, the director of the in stitute reached several conclusions about the needs of such teachers♦ They obviously needed a descriptive knowledge of English to be able to teach it effectively and some pro ficiency in the language of the country to which they were being sent: Most of those who have specialized in Spanish or Portuguese so that they can now use it (or teach it) have had practically no work in English devoted to the kind of descriptive analysis of the language that is necessary to teach it effectively. Most native speakers of a language find it impossible without spe cial training to analyze their own language any way that would be useful to a foreigner,**^7 ^^Letter from Charles C* Fries, Director of the English Language Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, to Dr* Kenneth Holland, Director, Division of Science and Education, .Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs, Washington, January Id, 1941. 494 He also concluded that they needed to understand the cultural background of the Latin country and have an ’'understanding of our own Institutions, cultural ideals, and mores": The most important general deficiency that charac terized practically all of those we dealt with last summer was a very naive view of our own institutions and culture* In fact as the work went on during the summer, this lack impressed us to such an extent that we took time from our course in the problems of teach ing English as a foreign language in order to give more attention to developing an understanding of our own social and cultural life,123 The course in 1942 was thus altered to include some survey work in American literature, music, and domestic politics and government. No instructions in purely politi cal views, international relations or propaganda techniques to be used in Latin America were given* In order to meet the needs of the teachers at the cultural institutes in Latin America, the English Language Institute at the University of Michigan offered intensive course work in the summer of 1943 in the English language and in American culture and institutions. Training in the Spanish language and in Latin American culture and institu tions was to be offered prospective English teachers in *28Ibid: , ^■^Interview with Margaret Moye del Earria, Octo ber 20,. 1945 k, 495 Latin America in the English Language Institute in Mexico City.*30 Orientation policies, 1943*1948.--The orientation of English teachers sent to Mexico by Washington during the war and the immediate post-war period was informal when it occurred at all. The Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs sent grantees to Mexico without in doctrination.*3* The resident director of the English Language Institute arrived in Mexico City without precise instructions as to his obligations to the Office of the Coordinator, which was financing the institute, and to the Department of State, which had sent him as an exchange professor to the National University of Mexico. The cul tural relations officer, who maintained liaison with both agencies in Washington, and the director of the Benjamin Franklin Library, where the English Language Institute was to be established, likewise were uninformed in advance of *3oLetter from Fries to Holland, January 18, 1943. The first group of seven teachers from the 1943 class arrived in Mexico City in October, 1943* Supra, p. 388. *3*Memorandum from Edmund R. Murphy to William C. Johnstone, Jr., Department of State, Washington, "Notes on the Mexican*"American Instituted Operations Submitted on the Occasion of Your Departure to the Forthcoming Con ference of Public Affairs Officers, to be Held in Mexico in January, 1949 ,, r January 10,. 1949* 496 the -details of the new institute's p r o g r a m , At least one grantee teacher went to Mexico City in 1945 without even going through Washington, 0. C. Further more, he had no opportunity to talk to even one officer of the Department of State until after he had been made super- 133 visor of courses some eighteen months later. Without funds to bring grantees to Washington, the department was in no position to give them political in doctrination. Indeed, none was intended. Wo routine of techniques to instill a friendly attitude toward the United States had been established. No efforts were made to relate the cultural program of the Institute to inter national politics; If there was any purely political orientation in the instructions given the men in the field, it was to the effect that their political usefulness would be greater the farther they stayed away from the reality ■^^Letter fr0m Charles H, Stevens, Cultural Rela tions Officer, American Embassy, Mexico City, to Harry H. Pierson, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, March 18, 1943; interview with Albert H. Marckwardt, Ann Arbor, Michigan, October II, 1952. ■^Letter from Francis E, Townsend, English Lan guage Institute, Mexico City, to Richard H, Heindel, Chief, Division of Libraries and Institutes, Department of State, Washington, September 14, 1946. Irregularities occurred in more than one case in the matter of orientation in ordinary operational procedure during the war* Charles N* Staubach reported in an interview in Ann Arbor, Michigan, on Octo ber 15, 1952, that he had been sent as an "exchange pro fessor" to Colombia in 1945 not only without going through Washington but also without specific instructions as to which university he was to offer his services.* or even appearance of being politically interested* The cultural people were there to acquaint others with the realities and achievements of American culture and not to influence directly day-to-day political develop ments* 1^4 At the close of the war, some orientation of grantee teachers became more regular practice: Ordinarily such a candidate selected for a position in one of the cultural centers [was] sent to the field from his home via Washington, D. C., f°fo£ period of orientation of approximately two w e e k s * 13b This consisted of allowing those grantees who went through Washington to read the files on the post and to gain some information on its primary functions, special difficulties, and the problems of life abroad. ^ A grantee teacher who missed the regular orienta tion course established in 1949 had a similar experience. She reported that she spent about six weeks in the Depart ment of State before going to Mexico in that year: Much of this time was spent reading reports and talking with people in our own and other divisions of the Department who were concerned with the work of the center in Mexico. The Department did not point out 1-^Letter from Carl A, Sauer, Glendale, Arizona, to the writer, October 15, 1952; interview with Mr, Sauer, Glendale, Arizona, September 21, 1952. Department of State, Instruction No. 1,293 to the American Embassy, Mexico City, June 24, 1947, ^3^interview with Paul Hadley, Los Angeles, California, August 13, 1952* Dr* Hadley was employed in the Division of Cultural Cooperation in the Department of State in 1945* 498 difficulties I might meet in dealing with Mexican students nor was there any attempt to give me certain concepts of the United States,1- 1 ’' The Foreign Service Institute. 1949-1951,— Although the Department of State had early been aware of the needs of grantee teachers to be able to interpret for foreigners the linguistic characteristics of American English and the cultural, social, and political characteristics of the American community, it was not until 1949 that it provided any training designed to meet these needs. In January of that year, the department offered for the first time an orientation course of four weeks to its grantee teachers. The course was given by the Foreign Service Institute not only to grantee teachers in the cultural institutes but also to others going abroad in other government services,1^ The Foreign Service Institute subsequently length ened the course to six weeks, A grantee who took the course in 1950 reported that approximately three fourths of the course was in the field of general linguistics and ^^Letter from Doris Havener, Hartselle, Alabama, to the writer, April 5, 1953. Miss Havener was a grantee teacher in the cultural Institute in Mexico City in 1949 and 1950, Department of State, Circular Instruction to Certain American Diplomatic and Consular Officers in the Other American Republics, "Transmitting English-Teaching Materials to Cultural Center Teaching Staffs," n- d„; interview with Virginia Grant Williams., former grantee teacher at the cultural institute, Mexico City, August 11, X953« 499 one fourth in cultural anthropology* The course included about fifty hours of intensive work in linguistic science for the purpose of teaching the grantee to view his own language and that of the country to which he was being sent in an objective manner. The structure of the English lan- guage was examined, existing language teaching techniques were discussed, and new concepts of language study were formulated. The classes in cultural anthropology were de signed to help the grantee understand the culture of his own country in relation to that of the host countries for the purpose of assisting him to interpret his own culture effectively to foreigners. The instruction was given in general terms with the apparent objective of broadening the grantee teacher*s perceptions of a foreign environment so that he might make his own comparisons and contrasts of his native and foreign languages and cultures with a view to solving his own prob lems in the field* The course was not aimed at salving such problems specifically in Mexico or even in Latin America as a whole. 139..Breaking the Language Barrier,' * The Record. VII (May-June, 1951), 17-25;; interview with Stella Louise Ferreira, Washington, April 18, 1953* Miss Ferreira served as a grantee teacher in Mexico City during 1950 and 1951. ^°Interview with Stella Louise Ferreira, April 18, . 1953. 500 The grantees who were given training in the depart ment of State during this period were aware of the depart ment’s purposes of combatting anti-American attitudes in Mexico and of making friends for the United States among younger persons before they reached a position of influence. They were not given specific lines of reasoning, however, on how to do it, nor did they meet the officers on the political desks of the department* The brief conversations with the officers concerned with cultural relations were not politically oriented. In short, the orientation period did not include indoctrination in either United States for eign policy in general or policies toward Mexico. The absence of detailed instructions on how to discuss issues involving the United States and Mexico was reported by several of the grantees who were given an orientation course during this period* No instructions or guidance were given either factually or in terms of a method of approach on how to answer questions in the class room involving controversial social or political questions. Nor were any instructions given later in this regard by the ^•^Interview with Doris Havener, Washington, April 26, 1953; interview with Stella Louise Ferreira, April 18, 1953; interview with Virginia Grant Williams, August 11, 1953; interview with John Elmendorf, Mexico City, August 3, 1953. Dr. Elmendorf was. the executive director of the institute from 1950 through 1952. 501 public affairs officer or his staff in the e m b a s s y * grantee teacher stated that if controversial questions in volving the United States had come up in her classes, she would have followed the ’’ Department *s instructions when I entered the program to tell the truth about the United States and discuss it with as much objectivity and intel ligence as possible. One grantee, a former director of courses, believed that some orientation on how to handle controversial ques tions about the United States might be useful provided the teaching staff were instructed to await student interest in such matters and a favorable occasion before bringing them up.^^ Two other grantees believed that some political orientation might have been helpful in the fields of domes tic politics and political parties and Mexican-American political relations.Specific background in the culture of the United States in general was not given, and one grantee believed that more information on the culture of ^^Interview with Stella Louise Ferreira, April 18, 1953; interviews with Audrey Wright, former Director of Courses in the cultural institute, Mexico City, July 15 and 27, 1953. k^Letter from Doris Havener to the writer, April 5, 1953, Interview with Audrey Wright, July 15, 1953, Interview with John Elmendorf, August 3, 1953; interview with Virginia Grant Williams, August 11, 1953* so a Mexico would have been of value before beginning to teach Mexicans* The executive director who served from 1950 to the end of 1952 not only received administrative instructions pertaining to his office but also instructions to increase the cultural activities of the institute outside the class* room, The Department of State was interested in Kin- creasing the prestige of the local binational center and establishing a balance between academic and cultural pro grams, The director was also to take steps to have his teaching staff increase the American cultural content of the English courses, The orientation of a director in 1952,--After the creation of the semi*autonomous International Information Administration within the Department of State.* the orienta tion of grantees became more specific. The practice of sending grantees to the Foreign Service Institute was dis continued. Henceforth, an orientation course was to be given by the Information Center Service* the successor to ^^Interview with Stella Louise Ferreira, April 18* 1953; interview with Virginia Grant Williams, August 11* 1953* Memorandum from Elmendorf to Murphy* October 25, 1950, ■^American Embassy*. Despatch No. 2,268. to the Department of State, Washington, March 26, 1952. •^interview with John Elmendorf* August 3, 1953, 503 150 the Division of Libraries and Institutes* A summary of the orientation given a new executive director of the cultural institute in Mexico City in 1952 illustrates the increased tendency to give a more specific type of training. Much of the orientation involved a presentation of the organization and operations of cultural institutes and information libraries in terms of adminis- trative procedure. The course consisted of a series of lectures and conferences which discussed such factors as the composition and functions of the board of directors, financial support, relationships with the embassy, methods of evaluation, reporting to the Department of State, and administrative instructions. The course also included a description of the English teaching program and the cul tural and social activities. Among the latter were men tioned lectures, round tables, exhibits, musical programs, use of the radio, dramatics, receptions, dances, the com memoration of holidays, and activities for children. Some insight into the operation of related programs, such as libraries, the translation of American books, and the ex- 151 change of students, was also given. l^Interview with Richard Meyer, Chief, English Teaching Section, Information Center Service, Department of State, Washington, November 28, 1952. l^The substantive material of this and the fallow ing paragraphs was taken from "Notes on Orientation in the Department of State, July, 1952," which were made by Francis C. St. John, Executive Director, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, 28 pp. (MS) 504 Xu keeping. with the intensified activities in other media, emphasis was now placed an fitting the cultural institute wherever possible into the objectives of the International Information Administration. Emphasis was to be placed on supplying information and education with a purpose— that of influencing the nationals of the country to think and act favorably toward the United States. The course included a general description of the various types of propaganda, classified as to their source and use. The cultural relations program was discussed in its relation ship to the country plan and to specific targets to be reached. Among the latter were not only students of English at the cultural institute but also national teachers of English, who would supposedly influence their own stu dents. Other targets were intellectuals, labor groups, and prominent business, government, and other community leaders* Specific techniques for securing and maintaining interest among these groups in the cultural institute were suggested. Among these were seeking contacts with English teachers at their own meetings, offering seminars in the English language, loaning them illustrative materials for their classes throughout the school year, and offering English classes in the headquarters of labor unions* Other techniques were to involve people in work on committees, invitations to persons with special talents to offer their 505 services, the use of existing interests to draw individuals into additional activities, and the addition of illustra tions to lectures to make them more interesting. The prestige of the institute was to he increased not only for its value to the United States but also to the cultural institute in its effort to wield greater influence in the foreign community* This was to be done by improving the quality of the academic and cultural programs, by getting community leaders to serve on the board, by render™ ing special services to individuals whose good will was being sought, and by insisting on the equality of American English with the British version* English classes were to be considered as a medium for conveying information about the cultural life of the United States* Both grantee and locally hired teachers were to inject a greater amount of American cultural con tent into their language classes and students were to be encouraged to ask questions about the United States in the classroom* Classes in the Spanish language far American residents were not only to teach the language but also to serve as a place where Americans could be taught to be good ambassadors, and the institute was to serve as a place where nationals of the country could meet Americans* Efforts were to be made to transfer interests in local activities and events to interest in the United States 506 by relating special exhibits# musical programs and the study of literature in as many ways as possible to the United States, The institute was also to be considered a means to opening up avenues of approach to other media and to informational materials available in the embassy. The grantees were advised to be aware of local cus toms and sensitivities* to avoid conflicts in scheduling events that would compete with outside activities# to be on the alert for non-compatible groups whose presence might disrupt the instituted operations# and to avoid becoming involved with any group that would discourage the attend ance of others. Directors were to indoctrinate their staffs in these matters. The orientation course also raised some questions that were not easily answered because of the binational and educational nature of the cultural institute. The funda mental nature of the institute was not to be changed. Its binational character and its educational program were not to be destroyed* At the same time# these served as factors limiting its operations as an instrument of propaganda in the interests of the United States. Instruction in the English language was to continue to be a fundamental raison dretre. Although the American content of classes and cul tural events was to be increased# these were to be kept so related to local events and interests that the product 507 could only be binational. And there was to be no overt propaganda for the United States. Although as an educa- tional institution the cultural institute was considered one of the slow propaganda media, short term results were expected nevertheless. These problems were not eased by the admittedly dual responsibility of the executive director to his board of directors and to the embassy. Instructions to the di rector did not solve this problem. When his policies were opposed by the board, he was to accede to its wishes; yet if he found himself in conflict with it, he was to consult the public affairs officer of the embassy. The United States Government wanted the board to establish policies for the institute; yet the institute was to be operated according to the wishes of the United States Government. This situation was based on the belief that the board would take only a nominal interest in the institute; neverthe less, the course contained suggestions for increasing the interest of the board as well as others. Furthermore, it was readily admitted by the instructors of the course that it was impossible to say just what a binational center should be. The institute was intended to serve the inter ests of United States foreign policy, it was asserted, but nowhere is there evidence of specific instruction to the grantee regarding the nature of such foreign policy* The 5 OS position of the Russians as archrivals in the cultural pro gram, however, was made clear* It was pointed out that the financial support of the Department of State was to be limited# But the pas sible loss of even limited financial support was threatened if the objectives of foreign policy, of the International Information Administration, and of Congress were not met. The director was to supply evidence in his evaluation reports to the department of the effectiveness of the insti tute in meeting these objectives, although the difficulty of producing valid evidence of thought and action favorable to the United States was admitted. The training of the local staff.— Although one of the primary purposes of the English Language Institute was to train both American and Mexican teachers of English for service in the cultural institutes of Latin America and in the Mexican school system* special courses for the training of the institute’s own teaching staff were not established until 1947, Teachers trained at the institute for other purposes, however, were employed from time to time. Four of the trainees sent to the institute by the English Language Institute at the University of Michigan were retained as members of the Institute's grantee staff on July 1, 1944, when the Coordinator's training program. 509 was terminated, Beginning in 1943, the institute offered courses in methodology to teachers of English in the Mexican public school system. When additional members of the local staff were needed in the spring of 1947* the institute employed on a part time and probationary basis two Mexican teachers in the government schools who had taken the teachers1 course the previous year.^"^ When increased enrollment made the regular employ ment of local teachers necessary, the institute established a course for them. Before the opening of the academic year in February, 1947, the grantee teachers on the staff gave a two-week orientation course to all locally employed teachers, both old and new* The course included instruc tion in policy, rules, regulations, class preparation and procedure, methodology and theory, preparatory classes, and phonetics* The emphasis of the course was technical rather than cultural, By 1950, it became regular practice to require prospective teachers in the institute to take a special orientation course for a full semester. Only the most • ^ - ^Supra, pp. 385-90, 472. ■^■^Francis g, Townsend, Acting Supervisor of Courses, "Reporting of Statistics and General Activities of the English Language Institute in Mexico from January 15th to March 1st, 1947,” Mexico Gity (mimeographed). •^^Ibid. 510 promising student teachers were selected to fill vacancies on the staff and then only on a part time basis under close supervision at first* The course consisted of lectures and demonstrations on methods and materials, observation of regular classes and reports, and some practice teaching at the end of the semester under the supervision of the direc tor of courses* For the first time, the course included some statement of the cultural objectives of the insti tute* ^ In the spring of 1950, there were ten members of the regular staff taking the course and ten others. Some of the latter were prospective teachers at the institute and some were teachers of English employed elsewhere who had heard of the course and wished to participate. ^56 open to outsiders, emphasizing technical aspects, and taught by the director of courses, who was trained in linguistic science, it is unlikely that the course had any direct political orientation. The course was continued intermittently, depending on enrollment and the needs of the institute for new ^Memorandum from Elmendorf to Murphy, April 21, 1950* •^^Memorandum from John Elmendorf, Executive Direc tor, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, to the Public Affairs Officer, American Embassy, Mexico City, '"Narrative Report to Accompany the Cultural Center Report Forms for • the Period 1 April 1950 to 3Q June .19.50*n 511 teachers, until 1953*^^ As offered in 1953* the course focused attention primarily on the problems of teaching English as a foreign language. The director of the insti- tute described the course as follows; The course, given by the Director of Courses, com bines theory and practice. In the two class periods a week, after a survey of the courses at the Institute and the philosophy of the general program, a study of phonetics and a careful analysis of the materials used in Course I and II are treated; this is supplemented by discussions based on the Fries text, Teaching and Learning English as a Foreign Language. The second phase of the course is the more practical one of visit ing classes. During the term, the students are ex pected to observe for three different two-week periods in three distinct classes; in addition to writing a report on the classroom techniques, they do some prac tice teaching at the end of the visit; the regular teachers in these classes also report to the Director of Courses on the effectiveness of these practice teachers.158 Some effort was made to increase the amount of American cultural content in the English courses after 1950. The director during the period of 1950 to 1952 reported American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 437 to the Department of State, Washington, August 16, 1951 (enclosure, "Second Quarterly Narrative and Statistical Report"); idem, Despatch No. 1,010, November 6, 1952 (en closure, "1952 Third Quarterly Report of the Mexican-North American Cultural Institute"); idem. Despatch No* 272, August 4, 1952 (enclosure, "Second Quarterly Report of the Mexican-Northamerican Cultural Institute, April 1-June 30, 1952"); Francis C, St. John, Executive Director, "Second Quarterly Report, 1953; Narrative Report to Accompany Statistical Academic Report," Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, July, 1953. ■^^Francis C. St. John, Executive Director, "Aca demic Report for the First Quarter, 1953," Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, April, 1953. 512 that he examined the courses for American content and talked to his staff suggesting that the amount of such con tent be increased,The director who succeeded him re ported to the Department of State that* in the in-service training program for local teachers, the importance of emphasizing the American content of the courses was con stantly stressed. He indicated, however, that there was 1 C A room for improvement in this regard. Evidence of efforts to indoctrinate the local teaching staff of the Institute politically is lacking. A local teacher who had taught at the institute for four years, under two executive directors, stated that, as for political or controversial topics, the local teachers were 161 uninstructed. The Students The increase in enrollment, ,1942-1953.--The modest program of English teaching in the Benjamin Franklin Library met with unanticipated success almost iiranediafceXy. From a beginning of 12 students in March, 1942, the enrollment rose to 165 students a year later, with 642 on the waiting •^^Interview with John Elmendorf, August 3, 1953, ^^^Memorandum, from St, John to the Public Affairs Officer, April 20, 1953. Interview with Sidney Hamolsky, Mexico City, August 5, 1953. By November, 1944, the director of the English Lata** guage Institute reported a peak enrollment for the fall semester of 893 students with 1,096 new applications al ready on hand for admission in 1945. Of these, only 265 could he admitted because of limited facilities.En rollment in January, 1945, was limited to 1,000 students, screened by aptitude tests, but there were 2,000 applicants. The classes were offered from 9:QQ a. m. until 9:00 p. m. under the instruction of ten teachers, eight of them gradu ates of the University of Michigan.The acquisition of additional classroom space enabled more than 850 students to register in the fall of 1945, so that the total enroll ment reached 1,959, not counting some 200 students in two special radio classes, Registration for January, 1947, ended with 1,034 students in regular classes, 1,106 in the informal prepara tory classes, 30 in courses for teachers, and 30 in the •^^Supra, pp. 383-84. •^^Albert H. Marckwardt, Resident Director, "Sum mary of Present Situation in Respect to Enrollment, Appli cations and Teaching Needs at the English Language Institute in Mexico," Mexico City, November, 1944 (typewritten), 164{jitj - mas Noticias (Mexico City), January 16, 1945. ^^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 27,045 to the Department of State, Washington, October 29, 1945 (Enclosure No. 4), 514 English Club, making a total registration of 2,2Q0 students In eighty-eight classes*Xhis was the last semester that the institute was housed principally in the Benjamin Franklin Library, With the installation of the institute in a new building of its own in July, 1947, enrollment in the English classes rose from 2,100 to 2,600 despite an increase in tuition fees by more than 60 per cent and a less favorable location away from the center of the city. Five hundred applicants were turned away for lack of teach- ing space in the new building. With the opening of an additional building in Janu- 168 ary, 1949, enrollment reached nearly 3,100 students. Enrollment in September, 1951, was 3,274. From that date, it rose steadily until it reached a figure of 3,865 stu dents, including 220 studying under a private institute which was being operated by a former locally employed teacher of the institute. By mutual agreement, it was being temporarily assisted and supervised by the cultural ■^•^^Townsend, "Reporting of Statistics and General Activities of the English Language Institute in Mexico from January 15th to March 1st, 1947," •^^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 4,582 to the Department of State, Washington, September 18, 1947 (enclosure, "US1S-0IE Report for July, 1947"), 16BXdem, Despatch No. 422, March 23, 1949 (en closure, "Monthly Statement of the Institute Mexicano- Norteamericanq de Relaciones Cuiturales, February, 1949"), 515 institute as a branch center* By the first quarter in 1953, enrollment reached 4*120 students, with hundreds being turned away for lack of space. By June* 1953, it was 4,209*169 The motivation to study English.--The steady growth of the number of students in English classes from 12 in March of 1942 to more than 4*200 in 1953 was regularly limited by the lack of facilities to accommodate more. Pressure for admission was so great that many came with letters of recommendation to the institute from the embassy, the consulate, and reputable business houses in the hopes of being given special preference,The eagerness of students to register for classes in English is illustrated by one report at registration time: In January 1947, when the classes of the English Language Institute at Mexico City, with accommodations for about 2,000 students, announced that they would accept registration to fill 300 vacancies existing at that time, nearly 2,500 aspirants struggled for en trance on January 28* Applicants started forming a line at four o'clock in the morning and, as the day advanced, the queue extended farther and farther down the street and around the comer. Crowds were finally waiting on three different streets* Meanwhile, a few youths climbed over roofs and through a skylight of the 169Francis C. St* John, Executive Director, "Aca demic Report for the First Quarter,1 1 Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City* March 31, 1953 J idem. "Statistical Report for Academic Program," June 30, 1953. ■^^Townsend, "Reporting of Statistics and General Activities of the English Language Institute in Mexico from January 15th to March 1st, 1947," 516 Biblioteca Benjamin Franklin to get at. the registration desk ahead of the line. A woman fainted. The police who were called to maintain order somehow managed to., get themselves registered for the English classes, ■ L'i' One of the reasons for the increase in the number of students was the reputation of the institute, which was established early in its career* The cultural officer in the embassy, a language teacher himself, reported a year after the English Language Institute had been founded that there was a * , , constant demand for the superior instruction in American English which the English Language Institute has acquired the reputation of giving due to a full time technically trained staff and the effectiveness of th|^teaching materials which are being designed. This reputation for excellence in English teaching was reported regularly by the grantee staff of the insti tute in the post war yearsAn informal questionnaire ^Edmund R. Murphy, "Cooperation with Cultural Centers in the Other American Republics," The Program of the Interdepartmental Committee on Scientific and Cultural Cooperation, Department of State Publication No, 2,994 (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1947), p. 27, i^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No, 16,950 to the Department of State, Washington, April 12, 1944 (enclosure, "Basic Report on the English Language Institute in Mexico," p. 4), ^^Letter from William F* Byess, Executive Direc tor, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, to Carl A* Sauer, Division of Libraries and Institutes, Department of State, Washington, June 19, 1947; Townsend, "The Cultural Center in Mexico City," p. 10; interview with Doris, Havener, Washington, April 26, 1953; interview with 517 sent to students in 1953 to ascertain what had brought them to the cultural institute instead of to some other English teaching institution revealed that 95 per cent of the stu dents had heard from their friends that it was the best place to study English. The rapid growth of the institute and the eagerness of students to register for classes raises questions of who they were and why they wanted to leam English. Reports between 1946 and 1951 indicate consistently that the three largest occupational groups were students# white collar workers# and professional men and women. In that five-year period# there appeared to be a decline in the percentage of university students and an increase in white collar workers* In 1946# it was reported that the » * , largest occupational group representation is that of students in professional schools--law, medicine, engineering, commerce* . * . Next come clerks, steno graphers, and other employees in stores and offices* Many government employees also attend the classes-- there has even been an Under-Secretary of National Helen Aschbacher, Acting Director of Courses, Mexican- American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, July 15, 1953. The permanence of the institute's reputation once it was established may be noted by the fact that in 1950 and even in 1953 the cultural institute was often popularly known as the Benjamin Franklin Institute, after the library where its reputation had been, built. ■''^Interview with Francis C. St* John, Executive Director, Mexican-American Cultural Institute* Mexico City, July 9t 1953. 5X8 Economy enrolled* In third, place come the professional men*"‘ doctors, lawyers, teachers, ^75 A picturesque description of their occupations a year later by a newspaper columnist indicated an increased percentage of white-collar workers; Major portion of the lucky group which passed through the iron gateway on that July registration day morning is made up of clerks, stenographers, sales girls and members of the lower middle class. In addi tion to these, however, the attendance sheet lists doctors, lawyers, engineers and other professionals. ♦ , • Sitting beside them, equally intent, are the reboso-ed Indian women and street hawkers in their ever-present sombreros*1''3 ' A computation of the occupational groups repre sented at registration time In 1949 showed the student body was composed of 36,4 per cent white collar workers, 20,0 per cent students at the university or technical schools, 12.8 per cent professionals and specialists, 8.7 per cent teachers, 4.2 per cent business men, 1*2 per cent tech nicians, and 16.7 per cent miscellaneous (housewives, 177 servants and others). Another study of the occupational groups in 1951 reflected that the students were 32 per cent white-collar ■^Charles Poore, "Everybody's Leamin* English," American Society Bulletin (Mexico City), July, 1946, pp. 9*10, ■^^Ruth Mulvey, "Cultural Relations School Here Draws Large Crowds," Daily News (Mexico City), December 31, .1947. 1 ^"Cultural Centers; Newsnotes" The Record, . V (August-September, 1949), 33, 519 workers, 16 per cent university students, 11 per cent pro-* fessional people (mostly doctors and lawyers), 8 per cent housewives, 4 per cent business men, 3 per cent specialists and technicians, 3 per cent employees of unions, 1 per cent army and police personnel, and 22 per cent miscellaneous# In 1952, the director of the institute reported that the combined membership, all but some 400 of whom were students in English classes, included 154 doctors of medi cine, 185 teachers or professors, more than 100 architects, engineers and professional people, 28 military personnel, 1 deputy in the National Congress, and 1 justice of the Supreme Court. In addition, there were "numerous taxi drivers, policemen, waiters, and others," Including stu dents, white-collar workers, and housewives: The total picture is one of a complete cross- section of all social and economic classes, with the possible exception of the very lowest-paid workers. It is interesting to note in this connection that no effort was made to form groups along social or economic lines. This has meant that doctors and lawyers sit in the same class and compete for class records with cab drivers and servants, a democratic situation which has, interestingly enough, produced no problems in this Institute, in spite of the fact that social equali- tarianism is at best a recent development in Mexico. 11“ ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 903 to the Department of State, Washington, October 9, 1951 (enclosure, "Semi-Annual Evaluation Report of USIE Activi ties in Mexico, December 1, 1950 to May 31, 1951") ■ * •^^Idem, Despatch No. 2,838, June 1, 1952 (enclo sure, "Report on Mexican-N* American Cultural Institute")* sa o Throughout the decade under consideration, the reasons for studying English had both cultural and economic foundations. In early 1943, within a month after assuming his position in the library, one teacher thought that cul- tural reasons were primary: The pupils1 main objective in studying English is to be able to read American books and magazines; second, to be able to understand American movies; and third, they all hope to go to the United States some day. Some need English for their business, it is true, but it seems to me that the majority want to learn English for reasons of culture.1°^ Cultural motives were reported by others as one of the reasons for studying English. Women, particularly, were found in this category. They desired to know English to read women's magazines, fashion plates, recipes, and movie magazines, and they wanted to be able to understand the dialogue in American and English motion pictures. Early in the program, however, it was the view of William L* Schurz, Assistant Chief of the Division of Cul** tural Relations, that most of the enthusiasm of young Letter from Kenneth Croft, Benjamin Franklin Library, Mexico City, to Mrs. Caroline B* de Escalante, English Language Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, February 22, 1943* ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 14,282 to the Department of State, Washington, November 18, 1943; interview with Albert Marckwardt, Ann Arbor, Michigan, August 10, 1952; Minutes of Meeting Concerning English Teaching, Division of Cultural Relations, Depart ment of State, Washington, January 10, 1944, p., 4 (type written) , ' 521 people for learning English lay in the fact that they 182 thought it would open business opportunities for them. This view was substantiated by other observers in Mexico as one of the primary reasons for studying English: Command of English has become almost imperative in Mexico because of the peculiar bi-national financial structure of the country. The language of the 'gringo* is as familiar as Spanish in the trade marts of this intensely patriotic country. Small wonder* then* that the portals of the English-teaching Institute were stormed and that its waiting list stretches in finitely. *-83 Economic advantage operates to a high degree throughout the capital, and possibly in many of the other large cities* This affects principally the pro fessional, business and clerical groups, although even such groups as taxi drivers, beauty shop employees, and messengers find a knowledge of English to their advantage.184 Clerical workers could reportedly double or triple their incomes by becoming bilingual, Taxi drivers, garage mechanics, guides, waiters and even janitors who had con tact with American tourists found it advantageous to know English. A questionnaire distributed to about 4,000 students 182Minutes of Meeting Concerning English Teaching, January 10, 1944, p. 4, ^^Mulvey, loc. cit* ^^'American Embassy* Mexico City* Despatch No. 14* 282 to the Department of State, November 18, 1943 (en.B closure# "Report on Teaching of English")* ■^^Mulvey* Ioc«. cit.; interview with Albert H*. Marckwardt, October 11, 1952; interview with Stella, Louise Ferreira# Washington* April 18, 1953..* 522 in 1953 reflected that "between 80 per cent and 90 per cent of the students registered originally at the institute with economic or professional reasons for learning English*-^6 A desire to render more effective service to Americans motivated some of the students. Even taxi drivers occa sionally felt a ’'professional'T motivation to improve their service to American tourists. This was particularly true of professional men, such as doctors of medicine, who found English to their advantage in serving their American clients. Students in professional and technical fields, such as medicine, chemistry and engineering, as well as graduate professional people in these fields, had strong motives for knowing English in order to study published material in English in their fields to advance professionally* They also regarded English as essential professional training in preparation for study or advanced work In the United States either on scholarships or at their own expense* Stu** dents who wished to use the scientific and technical ■^^Interview with Francis C* St. John, Executive Director, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City* July 22, 1953* •^7Idem: interview with Albert R* Marckwardt, 0ctow ■ ber 11, 1952* ^■^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 14,282 to the Department of State, Washington, November 18, ; 1943;. interview with Albert H„ Marckwardt, October 11, 1952* 523 publications in English in the Benjamin Franklin Library found English to their advantage also* The Buildings of the Institute The Beniamin Franklin Library.*-*The enrollment in English classes at the English Language Institute was from the beginning limited by the space available for class- rooms. Even by December, 1943, the director of the library reported that all available space was being used. The English Language Institute was assigned four classrooms and two rooms for staff offices on the second and third floors.Seating capacity in the four classrooms accom modated only twenty students each, ventilation was poor, and both ordinary office furniture and special facilities for language instruction were largely lacking. In August, 1945, permission was obtained to use four of the larger classrooms in the American School in Mexico City, and additional space for classes was obtained by adjustments in the schedule of classes and by starting ■^Harold W. Bentley, "Monthly Report of the Biblioteca Benjamin. Franklin, * * Mexico City, September, 1946, pp. 5-6 (mimeographed), ^(^Harvey ^ Basham, "Annual Report of the Treslw dent," Biblioteca Benjamin Franklin, Mexico City, Decem ber. 31, 1943 (mimeographed),, ^ -^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch Ncu 16,950 to the Department of State, Washington, April 12, 1944 (enclosure, "Basic Report on the: English; Language Institute in Mexico") • > 524 192 the school day at 8:00 a. m. instead of 9:00 a* m. When, after two terms, space was no longer available in the American School in July, 1946, two rooms in the building occupied by the economic section of the embassy were parti tioned and used for classrooms between 4:00 p. m. and lq! 9:00 p. m. These were unsatisfactory measures at best* however, for the additional space proved entirely inade quate to accommodate all applicants. The additional space relieved none of the pressure on the library building itself, for the additional space simply permitted an in creased enrollment: While this has been gratifying from a point of view of people served by the Institute, it has caused em barrassment because of the lack of rooms. More stu dents have, therefore, been placed in both the regular and preparatory groups than is consistent with our policy of individual attention. But no effort has been spared to see to it that no student suffers thereby, The difficulty of securing teachers and the limited facilities at our disposal have caused a problem, X94 The problem was one of considerable proportions, and it was of concern to the library as well as to the ■^^Letter from Harold Bentley, Director of the Benjamin Franklin Library, Mexico City, to Mr. Herschel Brickell, Assistant Chief, Division of Cultural Cooper ation, Department of State, Washington, August 3, 1945. ^ A m e r i c a n Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No-« 1,199 to the Department of State, Washington, September 17, 1946* , ■ X^Franeis Townsend, Acting Supervisor of .Courses, "English Language Institute, in Mexico*, 1946/” • Mexico; City., February, 1947 (typewritten)., ■ 525 institute. The small library building, a former private residence built on the Faseo de la Reforma In the days of Forfirio 'Diaz, was now housing the combined staffs of the library, a union catalogue project of the Coordinator, the cultural institute and the English Language Institute. The students of the latter disturbed readers in the library when they assembled for or left their classes* Further more, the success of the cultural institute as a separate entity depended to a great extent on physical as well as administrative separation from the library. The acquisition of separate buildings.--Flans for a building for the institute were among the first matters to be discussed during the reorganization of the institute in 1946 and 1947* The new building was to have, in addi tion to classrooms, a small auditorium for the exhibition of moving pictures, art exhibits, lectures and other cul tural affairs. On the premise that the institute was an Intellectual organization, strong preference existed for locating it near the National University, where close contact could be maintained with both students and profes sors, This location was also near the commercial center of ^ ^Basham, loc. cit. , ' r 06. Supra, pp« 409-11* 526 the city* 7 A "building in the desired area, however, could not be found, and in June, 1947, a five-year lease was signed for a building located at Yucatan 63 in a new commercial area to the southwest of the older business center. It was located one block from Xnsurgentes Avenue, the main boule vard on which this new business area had developed, and only two blocks away from a new Sears Roebuck store. It was easily accessible by public transportation to the 1 QQ center of the city and established residential areas. y The new building was occupied at the beginning of July, in time for the second semester classes,^ The two-story building provided space for seven classrooms, six on the ground floor and one on the second floor. Each room was equipped much in the same manner as a standard university classroom in the United States, with ^^Letter from Morrill Cody, Cultural Attache, American Embassy, Mexico City, to Carl A. Sauer, Assistant Chief, Division of libraries and Institutes, Department of State, Washington, December 11, 1946; Minutes of the Meet ing of the Board of Directors, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, February 24, 1947 (typewritten, in Spanish) * ^^Letter from William F, Byess, Executive Direc tor, Mexican*American Cultural Institute, to Carl A* Sauer, Division of Libraries and Institutes, Department of State., Washington, June 16, 1947. ^^William F. Byess, Executive Director, "Monthly Statement of the Instituto Mexicano-No-rteamericano de Re lac lone, s Gulturales? n Mexico City* July 31., 1947, a blackboard, teacher*s desk, and university-type seats for twenty-five students* Haps and other information about the United States were placed on the bulletin boards and walls* A mimeograph and storage room were also located on the ground floor. Exhibits of photographs sent by the Depart” ment of State were hung in the corridor of the ground floor. On the second floor were located a large reception room# offices for the administrative officers# a staff room# a committee room for board meetings and special classes# a tea room# a library# and a music room.^00 The new building was inaugurated on October 27# 1947# in the presence of about one hundred persons# in- eluding the American Ambassador# the Mexican Minister of Foreign Affairs# the members of the board of directors# officials of the American Embassy# many of the founding members# cultural leaders and members of the press. The Mexican Minister of Foreign Affairs# Jaime Torres Bodet# until recently Minister of Education# accepted the position as honorary president of the institute. Both he and the ambassador delivered addresses on their desire to promote cultural relations between the United States and Mexico. ^O^Townsend# "The Cultural Center in Mexico City," pp. 1*3. ^American Embassy, Mexico City# Despatch No. 4,942 to the Department of State, Washington# November 7# 1947, The first honorary president of the institute was Alfonso Reyes, noted author, lecturer# literary critic and 528 The physical plant was completed when the American Society in Mexico City donated $4,000 for the construction of a small auditorium.2 The auditorium had a small stage, a dressing room, and a projection room, making it suitable for dramatic productions, moving pictures, and lectures, Lighting was by skylights, rather than windows, 203 so that the walls were left free for art exhibits. The auditorium was inaugurated and dedicated to the American Society on April 23, 1 9 4 8 * It was located at the rear of the building and provided a maximum seating space for 140 persons *20' * While the new quarters were much more suitable for the operation of the cultural institute than the library, they were still not large enough. It was necessary to retain one classroom in the library and two in the economic section of the embassy nearby until the end of 1948. president of the Colegio de Mexico, American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 10,154 to the Department of State, Washington* May 17, 1943 (Enclosure No. 2, "Basic Data on Instituto"). 2®2Letter from Byess to Sauer, June 16, 1947. 2^William F* Byess, Executive Director, ‘ Tionthly Statement of the Instituto Mexicano-Norteamericano de Rela- ciones Culturaies, M Mexico City, October 31, 1947. 2^Idem, April 30, 1948. Townsend* "The Cultural Center in Mexico City, ’ * p. 1. 2Q6Ibid,, p. 3. To accommodate students asking for admission, the institute, with the approval of the embassy, the Department of State, and the board of directors, rented an additional building nearer the business center of the city in January, 1949. With seven additional classrooms available in the new building and an estimated capacity of 3,500 students, the classrooms in the embassy and in the library were abandoned* When this annex had to be vacated in late 1952, another building with more space was rented to replace it.^'O^ This new building provided space for nine class rooms; it was also equipped with a recreation room in the basement, which was decorated and furnished through the 209 volunteer efforts of teachers and students. The acquisition of a second building, however, failed to solve the problems of space far the institute, Memorandum from William F. Byess, Executive Director, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, to Dorsey Fisher, Public Affairs Officer, American Embassy, Mexico City, "Activities of the Cultural Institute, January 9-15," January 18, 1949. ^^Memorandum from Francis C, St* John, Executive Director, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, to the Public Affairs Officer, American Embassy, Mexico City, "Report of Activities of the Institute from December 8, 1952, to January 25, 1953," February 21, 1953. ^^Francis c* St. John, Executive Director, "Aca demic Report for the First Quarter, 1953,, f Mexican-American ; Cultural Institute, Mexico City, March 31, 1953; El Univer- : sal (Mexico City), March 3, 1953.* 530 for although there was an, enrollment of 4*120 students in January of 1953, hundreds of potential students were turned away for lack of available space to accommodate them.^^ In the summer of 1953, the institute was still actively looking for adequate space in which to house its activi- ties. Summary The board of directors of the institute served as its governing body* Composed at first of six Mexicans and three Americans, it was reconstituted in 1947 on an equal basis of five Mexicans and five Americans* From 1947 to 1950, a student representative, who was elected by the stu- dents to head a student organization within the institute, was also a member* The executive director of the institute and the cultural attache or another representative of the public affairs section of the embassy were ex officio mem bers* Indefinite terms of office for officers and members of the board in the original charter of 1943 were altered in 1947 to two-year terms expiring in February of the odd numbered years# with re-election permitted. After 1947# the board of directors met once a month* '^St. John., "Academic Report for the First Quarter, 1953," 2**%linutes of the Meeting of the Board of Direc tors, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, July 9, 1953 (typewritten., in Spanish), 331 As the governing body of a, non-profit civil associ ation, the board of directors was empowered to administer the property and funds of the institute, to perform legal acts through its president, to appoint committees, and to appoint the members of the American staff nominated by the Department of State* The officers of the institute were also the officers of the board* They were the president, a vice president (two until 1947), a secretary, and a treas urer, all of whom had the customary duties of those offices* The members of the board who were not officers usually headed the committees of the institute* These were the scholarship, membership, financial, social, publicity, house, library and educational committees* Until 1947, the scholarship committee was appointed for an indefinite term. After that date, all committees were appointed only for the two-year term of the board of directors which appointed them. The members of the board were among the leading members of the institute* It was composed of well known Mexican and American educators, scientists, engineers, lawyers, doctors, bankers, business men and government officers in Mexico City. Some were known internationally. From 1943 to 1947, the membership of the institute was composed of regular, corresponding and honorary mem bers* In the latter year, secondary and university 53.2 students attending the institute were admitted to member-* ship, and in 1950 associate, advisory* contributing and transient members were admitted* The general assembly of all regular members was the constituent power of the institute. It was given the sole power of amending the charter, dissolving the organization, and altering the powers of the president. Until 1950, it was empowered to elect members. After that date, it re* tained power to elect only the honorary members, and the board of directors was given power to elect the others. All members enjoyed the privileges of using the facilities of the institute and attending its classes and cultural and social events. Limited to a small group of intellectuals inter ested in scholarly pursuits in 1942, the list of members grew to 150 by the end of the war* After new classes of members were created in 1950, the previously exclusive mem bership policy was relaxed, and a membership campaign was begun. The number of members grew to more than 500 by 1953, and a relatively even balance was achieved between Americans and Mexicans# Besides prominent Mexicans and Americans, its roster now included not only members of the professions but also representatives of the middle classes. Until 1947, the office of the executive director of the institute was a part-time position. The first person, who- held the office from late 1943 until the end of 1944.* worked closely with the board of directors of the cultural institute# but he exercised no fiscal or administrative authority over the internal affairs of the English Language institute, which had its own resident director, The second executive director# who held office during 1945 and 1946# had little contact with the board of directors# but he exercised fiscal and administrative authority over the supervisor of courses in the English Language Institute, After 1947# the executive director of the cultural insti- tute was a full-time employee. He was responsible to the Department of State and to the board of directors for the administration and supervision of the financial affairs, the academic program# the cultural and social activities, the public relations of the institute and up to six hours of teaching. Assisting the executive director in the academic program was the director of courses# who was responsible for the organization and scheduling of classes and examin ations, preparation of course material# employment and training of locally employed teachers# organization of seminars for teachers of English in the Mexican school system, and for teaching both regular and special classes amounting to twelve hours per week* From two to four addi tional teachers sent by the Department of State helped 534 supervise the course work* train local teachers, register and counsel students, and conduct the cultural and social programs of the institute. They taught from eighteen to twenty-one hours per week until 1950, As the institute grew in sise and the number of grantee teachers was reduced, the number of hours they taught was first reduced to fifteen in 1950 and then to nine in 1953, and their supervisory functions were increased. Early in the war, the paid teaching staff was assisted by a number of volunteer teachers who served for patriotic motives and the experience. At the close of the war, the institute began employing teachers locally, paying them from tuition fees charged the students, With the growth of the institute, the responsibility of the local teachers for teaching the regular classes was increased, so that by June, 1953, forty-one local teachers taught 168 of the 172 classes. By that date, the more experienced local teachers were also assisting with the supervision of classes. The director, the director of courses, and the grantee teachers were given a grant of money through a letter of award by the Department of State. This letter served as a contract and the personnel to whom it was given were called grantees* During the war years, the personnel selected far these positions were either teachers of 535 English or of the Romance languages in. the United States* After the war* the Department of State required such grantees to be experienced foreign language teachers* fluent in the language of the country to which they were sent* to have a standard pronunciation of American English, and to have an ability to teach it and the cultural herit age of the United States. Emphasis was now placed on se lecting individuals with attractive and well adjusted per sonalities who possessed not only broad interests but also special educational and cultural qualifications in order to attract Mexicans to the institute. Citizenship and resi dence requirements were established to insure that grantees had an adequate American cultural background. In general* the executive directors and the direc tors of courses were required to have had greater adminis trative, supervisory, and teaching experience and abilities than the grantee teachers. In Mexico* the executive direc tors had either completed or nearly completed the require ments for the Ph. D» degree and had had college teaching experience. Three of the directors of courses also had taught on the college level. Many of the grantees held M. A. degrees and had had practical experience with native speakers of Spanish through travel, teaching and other work. The local teachers varied most widely in their 536 preparation and experience. Of forty-one in June* 1953* fourteen had the master*a degree and fifteen a bachelor's degree* while six had had some college education and two had had no education beyond the secondary level. Three“ fifths of them were experienced foreign language teachers* and three-fourths were bom in the United States. All but three had traveled* studied or worked in the United States* and ten had traveled in other parts of the world. Most had lived in Mexico for some time. Although the English Language Institute in Michigan provided teachers sent from the United States during the war with some training in the fundamentals of comparative linguistics and American culture* until 1949 little orientation of any kind was given the grantee teachers in Washington. During the war, even administrative instruc tions were often omitted. Between the end of the war and 1949, the orientation of the grantees was In general limited to reading the files of the post to which they were being sent with some explanation of the purposes of the institute and the problems they might face* Between 1949 and 1951, the Foreign Service Institute gave the grantees courses in general linguistics and cultural anthropology concerning the United States* in order to broaden their point of view and provide a frame of reference for com paring the two languages and cultures.., During this period* 537 the training was not specifically oriented to foreign policy,, policies toward Mexico, specific issues with Mexico, or controversial questions that might arise in the class room* The director during this period and the new director in 1953 were both instructed to increase the cultural con tent of the courses and the cultural activities of the institute in general, but they were given considerable freedom in terms of specific details* In 1952, the Information Center Service of the International Information Administration began giving its own orientation course* Much of it was concerned with administrative procedures and the operations of the insti tute, but greater emphasis was now placed on influencing the nationals of the country favorably toward the United States. The course included specific techniques for exer cising such influence with specific groups of nationals as well as with resident Americans, for involving them in greater numbers in the activities of the institute, and for introducing them to the other media of the United States Information Service* The course also raised but did not solve questions arising from the binational and educational nature of the cultural institute in regard to its service to the policies of the information service or of the De partment of State* Until 1947,, the institute had no orientation course 538 far its local teachers# Hie two-week course that was given them in that year and expanded subsequently to a full term was concerned primarily with administrative routines and teaching methods* In 1950 and afterwards, some emphasis was placed on the cultural objectives of the institute, but the primary emphasis of the training course continued to be on teaching methods. Evidence of political indoctrination was lacking. Enrollment at the institute rose from twelve stu dents in March, 1942, to more than 4,200 by June, 1953. After the first year, there were regularly more applicants for admission than the facilities of the institute could accommodate. After 1943, the institute enjoyed the reputa tion of being the best place to study English in Mexico City. Approximately one-third of the students were white- collar workers of the middle class, and nearly another third was composed of university students and graduate pro fessionals in such fields as medicine, law, architecture, engineering, chemistry, and teaching, They came to the institute to learn English for cultural, professional and economic reasons. To satisfy the demand for instruction in English, the institute increased its hours of instruction at the library and secured extra rooms in the American School and in the embassy until 194?„ In that year, it acquired a 539 larger building of its own in a new business district and equipped it with a small auditorium. It continued to use rooms in the library and the embassy, however, until the end of 1948, when it rented an additional building* A second and larger annex was rented early in 1953* Addi tional space was still needed, however, and the institute was again looking for larger quarters in the summer of 1953* The institute had demonstrated that it had the capacity to interest outstanding professional and cultural leaders of Mexico in becoming members and serving on its board of directors, to support a professional administra tive and teaching staff, and to attract students from the upper and middle classes to its classrooms* A study of the courses of instruction and of the cultural and social activities offered them affords some opportunity to formu late an estimate of the cultural and political factors in the operation of the institute* To that problem the pres ent study now turns. CHAPTER VII THE COURSES OF INSTRUCTION: REGULAR COURSES Introduction The preceding chapter pointed out that the Mexican- American Cultural Institute had the capacity to attract as many students to its classes as its building facilities could accommodate. In the decade between 1944 and 1953, as the number of classrooms was Increased, the enrollment of the institute rose steadily from nearly 900 students to more than 4,200* Most of these students were enrolled in the regular curriculum of courses in English which led to the granting of a certificate* The students were for the most part professional, technical and business people, students at institutions of higher education, and white-collar workers in stores and offices, but other occupational groups were not excluded* Viewed as a whole, the student body of the cultural insti tute was a representative cross-section of most of the social and economic classes in Mexico City except for the very lowest. Only a small percentage of these students came to the institute because they were interested in the United States, Nevertheless, even the 80 per cent to 90 per cent who came for the purpose of learning English to improve their professional or economic status were already 541 oriented at least to this extent toward the United States* It was a desirable group and a favorable situation for cultural relations* Xt can be speculated that the English classes presented an opportunity for American edu cators to cooperate with Mexicans in a genuine educational activity which met their needs and interests. Here was an opportunity for mutual understanding and friendship between the American teacher and the Mexican student to develop gradually but surely in the unhurried and non-political atmosphere of a binational educational institution. They could become better acquainted with each others * history and culture through objective study* classroom discussions and informal contacts between classes. On the other hand* the political or cultural propa gandist might see in the English classes a unique oppor tunity for a unilateral information program for the United States. Face-to-face contacts with an interested and representative sample of the population for three hours per week over an extended period of time provided a favorable situation for the use of some of the techniques of propa ganda. A skillful teacher might be able to win the respect and friendship of the students and build an atmosphere of confidence and trust that would- permit him to be most effective* He would then be in an excellent position to counter foreign propaganda and correct native misinformation 542 about the United States, create respect far American cul tural achievements, supply appropriate information about the American way of life, and even occasionally discuss historical or current issues between Mexico and the United States from the American point of view. Such information need not be untruthful, and from the propagandist's point of view the final product could well be favorable attitudes toward the United States. The extent to which the courses in the cultural institute met the objectives of the cultural relations and informational programs without, deviating from accepted educational principles depended on several factors. Among these were the curriculum which was established, the methods of instruction, the textbooks adopted, the content of the co^^rses, and the length of time the students remained enrolled at the institute. The regular English courses will be examined for these and related factors in the present chapter. In the two subsequent chapters, special classes and services to Mexican educators will be reviewed with similar objectives in mind. Courses and Teaching Methods, 1943-1949 The curriculum. 1943-1944,~~During its first year of operations in 1943, the English Language Institute in Mexico established a curriculum of regular courses covering . 543 a three-year period of time, Year courses on the ele mentary, intermediate, and advanced levels beginning once a year were offered, A calendar was established which divided the school year from March to November into two semesters of about twenty weeks each. The two winter vacation months were to be used for the preparation of materials and for Intensive short courses,^ During the first year, not all courses began at a fixed date; however, when the second year of instruction began in February, 1944, all sections were begun at the same time. In 1943, all courses began but once a year, but in February, 1944, both the first and second semesters of the elementary classes were offered, and in the second semester, which began in July, the courses for the first four semesters were offered. For the time being, the ad vanced courses remained on the yearly system*2 The need for academic standards.— By the end of 1944, a review of the first two years of work of the English Language Institute indicated the existence of several prob lems which interfered with desired standards of academic ■'"Albert H, Marckwardt, Resident Director, "Present, Assured Future, and Contemplated Activities of the English Language Institute in Mexico at the Biblioteca Benjamin Franklin, * * Mexico City* June, 1943, p« 4 (typewritten) , 2Idem, "Report of the English Language Institute in Mexico," Mexico City, March, 1944 (processed); idem. August, 1944. 544 achievement* A review of these problems by the retiring resident director resulted in several changes in policy in 1945. It was discovered that successful language instruc tion was hampered in part by the type of persons attending the classes and by their numerous outside activities. It was found that secondary and university students were study ing from eleven to thirteen subjects at a time. Clerical employees and professional people were the best students at the institute. But adults* especially professional people, were in many cases taking several courses in the National University besides working full time and attending the classes at the institute. The interest of housewives and girls living at home was often of a dilettante nature and their progress was easily and frequently interrupted by other activities. The common laborer not only suffered from after-work fatigue but was usually uninformed about Spanish grammar, which made him a slow student. The conse quences of teaching busy people after regular working or school hours were that preparation was often poor and attendance was irregular. Moreover, the lack of uniformity in their aptitude for language study made instruction dif ficult,^ ^Albert H* Marckwardt, Resident Director, ' ‘ A Criti cal Examination of the Purposes, Sphere, and Possible Extent of Government Sponsored English Teaching Activities in Mexico,1 1 1 Mexico City, October, 1944, pp.. 4-5 (typewritten). 545 It was considered essential to make certain changes in the curriculum and to establish certain academic stand'* ards in order to overcome some of these difficulties and to impart "the most effective instruction possible"; This latter is particularly important, because in comparison . • * with other agencies of English in struction, the ELIM has, justly or not, acquired a reputation for good if not excellent teaching, and in an activity of this type, the respect of the student body and of the public is an asset which should be maintained at all costs.4 It was felt that, because of the numerous places where English teaching was attempted, most of which ranged from the mediocre to the very poor, the English Language Institute would merely add to the number of the same type if its standards were lowered; By maintaining a high standard of instruction it has set itself apart from the others and in a way really justified its existence* Indeed it has become known not only as an English teaching institution but the only acceptable place in Mexico City for teachers of English to attend.5 Moreover, the standards of the institute should be on a par with those of the Benjamin Franklin Library, in which the classes were taught, and worthy of the prestige of the members of the board of directors of the cultural institute. These board members were referred to as the 4Ibid« ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 22,151 to the Department of State, Washington, December 27, 1944. 546 "leading figures in the Mexican educational world.> r Fur thermore, they had approved the instructional policy of the English Language Institute. Since the facilities of the library were limited, and since they were aware of the com petition from other institutions, the question of whether to compete with quantity or quality was resolved in favor of the latter: Quantity thus being out of the question, our deci sion was to keep the quality of our instruction at such a point that we would gain the respect of the Mexican public on that basis. That we have succeeded in doing so has become clearly evident during the past year.° The effort to achieve academic excellence is thus related to a desire for academic prestige, Both these factors were to play a principal part in influencing the institute's policies until 1950. In order to attain higher standards of achievement, the institute made changes in its curriculum, developed a highly regulated system of in struction, established attendance regulations and minimum standards for passing its courses, and awarded prizes and certificates as incentives* The curriculum, 1945-1949,--One of the principal changes made was in the curriculum* Over the next five years, changes continued to be made so that it became some what elaborate for the purposes of the institute* The first changes were made on the basis of recommendations of 6Ib id . 547 the resident director of the English Language Institute at the close of 1944: First, we have discovered that an overall three year course is not sufficient to impart the knowledge of the language that we consider desirable, and that we had better plan on a four year, that is an eight semester, course. This decision is in line with the experience of other adult language teaching centers, the British In- stitute in Colombia to mention only one, and is not surprising when it is remembered how little productive command of the language our own colleges and universi ties manage to impart in a similar period of time. Second, if we are to maintain a sufficient number of levels of instruction so that candidates for what would otherwise be special courses are to be placed in a group which closely corresponds to their own level of attainment, we must have all eight semesters available at any one time.' In line with these suggestions, the English Language Institute established in 1945 a series of eight courses normally requiring four years of study. Upon completing them successfully, the student was granted a certificate of completion.^ Under the plan adopted in 1945, the academic year was divided into two semesters of about seventeen weeks each between February and November in order to coincide with the regular academic year in the public schools of ^Marckwardt, "A Critical Examination of the Pur poses, Sphere, and Possible Extent of Government Sponsored English Teaching Activities in Mexico," pp. 6-7* ^Memorandum from Howard W» Tessen, Supervisor of Courses, to Harold W* Bentley, Director of the Cultural Institute, "Classes at ELIM Second Semester up to Octo ber 27, 1945, and Report on Informal Groups," English Language Institute, Mexico City, October .27,.1945* 548 Mexico City* During the winter vacation months of December and January* the institute continued to offer intensive* or rapid* courses on the elementary and intermediate levels, A limited number of students might reduce the time required to complete the regular curriculum by taking these courses. 9 Faced with more applicants for instruction in English than the facilities of the library could accommo date* the director at the close of 1944 recommended that those not admitted to the regular courses be assigned to an expanded program of courses by radio* These courses would provide for regular homework and examinations. They would also provide a pool from which students could be trans ferred to the regular classes as places developed for them. ^ There is no indication that the radio classes were ever used as a pool on which to draw for filling vacancies in the regular courses; however, the suggestion for such a pool was implemented in another way. In the spring of 1945, the institute created several large* informal pre paratory classes in order to be able to offer instruction ^Francis E. Townsend,. "The Cultural Center in Mexico City," Department of State, Washington, November, 1948.* p« 4 (typewritten), ■^Marckwardt, "A Critical Examination of the Pur poses, Sphere, and Possible Extent of Government Sponsored . English Teaching Activities in Mexico,n p« ?« A descrip- tion of the courses taught by radio is given in Chapter VIII. to as many students as possible. Under new direction, the institute used them, however, as a screening device and as an incentive for faithful attendance and scholarly atti tudes in the regular elementary courses. The poorer stu dents in the regular courses were demoted to the preparatory classes and the better students in the latter were promoted to the former. This served both to maintain the number and to improve the caliber of students in the regular classes as the poorer students dropped out. Course content and academic training in the preparatory courses were kept at levels permitting transfers during the course of the semes ter for the better students. Those who completed the pre paratory course satisfactorily were given priority over other new students in registering for the regular courses the following semester.^ By 1948, the preparatory courses had become an established part of the curriculum. They were divided into three levels according to the ability of the students, and all new students were required to enroll in one of them. Placement examinations, given after two weeks and at the end of the semester, determined whether students were to be assigned to Course X, XI, or III or 12 remain in a preparatory course, ^ J. — ■■■-«■ .'. M il* - XI Memorandum from Tessen to Bentleys October 27,, 1945* ■^Townsend* op. cit,, pp* 4*5* 550 Other changes were made in, 1949* The preparatory class was now limited to one level of ability and Course X was offered either as the regular course in one semester or as Course I“X and Course I~Y in two semesters. There were also three levels of remedial courses for students in regular Courses II to VII, inclusive, whose knowledge of English grammar was considered deficient as indicated by a failing grade. In addition, three levels of corrective conversation courses were established in 1949 for students in Courses III to VIII who were passing but whose conversa tional ability was deficient. Such students were required to take these courses before proceeding to their next regular course.^ Methods of instruction.— A disciplined approach to the course material and its manner of presentation was a logical concomitant of the desire to raise the academic standards. As a result, the instruction became highly systematized and standardized. The primary aim of the courses was to develop ability to speak and understand English. A teacher at the institute stated; Memorandum from John Elmendorf, Executive Direc tor, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, to Edmund R. Murphy,. Assistant Cultural Attache, American Embassy, Mexico City, April 2.1, 1950* p, 15* 551 Our program attempts fundamentally to impart speaking and understanding skills by means of constant student participation in the classes and the use of English by the teacher as much as possible in all the courses* Teachers often used English at normal conversa tional speed in making classroom explanations for this purpose. To encourage thinking in English, direct transla tion was avoided as much as possible and new vocabulary was explained in English. ^ As an aid in developing the ability to converse, the staff in 1945 began the practice of dictating to the students dialogues containing common and idiomatic expres sions on such topics as the weather# time# meals, invita tions, introductions, and classroom expressions. The students, who were required to learn the International Phonetic Alphabet, were then asked to make phonetic tran scriptions of these dialogues* They were also asked to memorize them, practice them with other students, and to recite them in class. Attention was paid to stress, ^Hazel Mitchell, "The English Language Institute in Mexico," Mexico City, December, 1945, p. 5 (processed)* Miss Mitchell, who had been a teacher in the institute since 1944, was given a grant to make a thorough study of the teaching methods of the institute as part of an in vestigation of second language learning conducted by the University of Chicago. This investigation was financed by the Rockefeller Foundation. American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 27,425 to the Department of State, Washington, December 4, 1945* ■^Mitchell, on> cit„ pp« 5-9, 3 3 . . , 552 rhythmical groupings, and intonation. By the use of class’ * room drill and constant repetition, the students eventually learned to approximate the native American speaker's pro nunciation of those expressions,"^ Grammatical explanations were made in the first four courses, although technical terminology was reduced to a minimum. Much of the material in all courses was pre sented through speech patterns rather than through formal grammar, and the third year courses relied largely on prac tice of these patterns. Grammar and structure patterns were considered to be cumulative for the whole curriculum, and students were required to know at the end of eight semesters all that they had learned in earlier courses.^ In terms of objectives, the ability to read and write English were considered purely incidental to the oral-aural skills, "If the students attain any ability in silent reading, it is incidental to our fundamental objec tives, for we give little stress to this phase of language learning," reported one of the teachers* Reading was done aloud in class with the emphasis on pronunciation, stress, word grouping, and intonation. When reading was occa sionally assigned for homework, it was chiefly for the pur pose of developing vocabulary and pronunciation, although • ^Ibid. „ pp, 15-16* •^Ibid. . „ p., 33.,, 553 1 R the students were also expected to know the content* Since the ability to write English was considered incidental to speaking ability, written work was assigned only to assist in attaining this goal.* Since all the homework is written and then cor rected by the teacher, there is some instruction in writing. But the structures used in the written home work are the same as those used in oral constructions in the class period, and our greatest interest is that they learn to use these constructions in speech. Although speaking ability was the ultimate goal of the instruction, it was found that the students devoted more time to the preparation of written homework because it was obvious evidence of their efforts and was the type of work that was most easily checked by the teacher. In actual practice, therefore, the principal stress was given to written work. Moreover, a certain amount of shyness and lack of self-confidence in using the new language appeared to be a factor inhibiting oral activity.^ The instruction was highly technical, carefully controlled, and given under strict academic discipline. Strict control was maintained over vocabulary and speech patterns which students were permitted to use in the first four courses, particularly* nWe relentlessly and diligently • ^Ibid., pp. 5-9, • ^Ibid-» p* 5« 20Ibid*pp„ 5-9* 33.* 554 control the structures which the students use, and we re*" quire that they stay strictly within the word order pat terns taught,1 1 it was reported*Not until the student was enrolled in the fourth year courses was he allowed to be comparatively free to use whatever knowledge of English he might possess in addition to that presented in courses.22 Even in written work, students were not allowed until the fourth year to write free compositions or free summaries of articles that had been read to them in c l a s s . Until then, their use of the language was strictly controlled: Our students must be constantly guided and must be made to adhere closely to the sentence models being presented. We insist upon the use of structures exactly as we teach them, and leave little room for ingenuity or imagination on the part of the student, except in the case of vocabulary. The student must learn a few frequently-used structures well rather than half-way leam an unlimited number, in the first two courses they usually stay within the vocabulary that is found in the materials, but after that they are allowed to bring in new words if they stay within the sentence patterns. The procedure followed in Courses 5 and 6 is the oral reading of material, the discussion of it, and the answering of questions about it* Then the students must make other questions and answers that exactly follow the models of the sentences in the read ing. Once the student has learned to use the struc tures included in our courses# he can branch out and leam more unusual constructions. But we feel that as long as he uses these structures correctly, then, to gether with the expansion of vocabulary* he will lack very little in being able to express all his ideas in English.24 ^Ibid,, p. 7* 22Ibid„, p, 33* 2^Ibid..* p. 9* 2^T b id .t« p p . , 31-32* 555 On close analysis of the teaching methods, one Is inclined to see a perfectionist attitude on the part of the teachers toward the primary objective of learning English* Indeed, this is confirmed by one of the teachers: We aim at near perfection both in pronunciation and in structure, so that the students* confidence is boosted when they find that they are using intelligible English both in and out of class*25 This discipline also extended to the staff in order to achieve uniformity of instruction. The use of phonetics as the basis for teaching English pronunciation was intro duced in 1945 by the new supervisor of courses, who had used this system in teaching Spanish at Tale University. It was reported that . . . he assumed the burden of transcribing all the dialogs into phonetics and of seeing to it that the teachers adhered strictly to his transcriptions. He also took his class auditing quite seriously. However, he was always very cooperative in helping the teachers with any problems concerning the class material.26 Until 1950, the grantees in charge of courses made lesson plans for all sections, standardized the course con tent, and determined methods of instruction. The work of all sections on a given level was closely coordinated, and all classes were supervised by the grantee teachers in 2^Ibid*, pp. 32-33* 26FranQ£S Townsend, Supervisor of Courses, "The Historical Antecedents of the English Language Institute in Mexico,"- Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, May 1, 1947 (photostat)., charge of courses and the director of courses*^ Academic regulations and standards,--Other changes in the institute's policies were recommended by the resi dent director in 1944 in order to establish higher academic standards. Among these it was suggested that an aptitude test be used to establish admission standards for the pur pose of selecting from the surplus of applicants those most likely to succeed. The resident director reported: Such an establishment of policy would, I am cer tain, make for greater effectiveness of instruction and save us from certain of the sad cases of students who have been in the institute since its inception and who have not advanced beyond the first year's work. Coupled with a firm policy of dismissal for non- attendance and one of dropping students who fail the final examinations, we could attain an index of accom plishment surpassing our present one.28 Accordingly, the Institute developed an aptitude test; The students who choose to take the beginning course, as indicated on their application, must first take an aptitude test. This test is designed to deter mine their knowledge of Spanish grammar, for we find that we have greater success in teaching those who do have a considerable understanding of their own grammar, and a great deal of difficulty with those who do not.29 In order to enter the regular classes, the student 2^Memorandum from Elmendorf to Murphy, April 21, 1950. ^Marckwardt, "A Critical Examination of the Pur poses, Sphere, and Possible Extent of Government Sponsored. English Teaching Activities in Mexico,, r p. 6. ^Mitchell, op. cit. . p.. 2* was required to pass the test with a score of 80 per cent or better. Those who failed were placed in the informal preparatory classes, from which they usually passed to SO Course X the following semester. Once admitted to the instituted classes, the stu dent found that he was subjected to a well-regulated and highly disciplined academic regimen. To stimulate academic efforts, the English Language Institute early in its career adopted the customary academic practice of rewarding the faithful and disciplining the poorer students* Regular attendance and preparation of homework were difficult to achieve with new students: When students first come, they have to be reminded continually to attend classes regularly, to arrive on time, to study their lessons, to do their homework. Gradually, we impress these things on them. 31 Attendance regulations were established as a cor rective. In 1948, a student was dropped from the institute if he had three unjustified a b s e n c e s , ^ gy 1950, the num ber of unexcused absences permitted was raised to six and the total of all absences permitted, excused and unexcused, depended on the student*s grade* He was allowed a total of six absences if his final average was 80 per cent, nine if 3Qibid*, p. 3* ^Ibid*, p„ 37, 3%iman (student newspaper of the cultural insti tute, Mexico City), July, 1948* 55 8 it was 85 per cent, twelve if it was 90 per cent, and £if- 33 teen if if was 95 per cent. It was for the purpose of encouraging seriousness of purpose that the English Language Institute began the practice in November, 1944, of awarding book prizes to the best students in each class and certificates of proficiency to successful graduates of the advanced courses*^ Sixteen book prizes, twenty**six certificates and some seventy letters expressing pleasure at the progress of students in the intermediate and elementary courses were awarded at a public ceremony* On the other hand, of a student body of more than seven hundred, the institute expelled seventy- five who failed the final examinations, asked a like number to repeat their courses the following year, and demoted 35 about twenty. Statistically, this meant that about 16 per cent were selected for some type of academic dis tinction and about 24 per cent for failure or near-failure. The standards for passing or failing in 1944 were not found in the archives available. In early 1950, ^ ’ 'Reglamentos Generales de las Clases de Ingles, M Institute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales, Mexico, B. F*, 1950* ■^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 21,407 to the Department of State, Washington, November 14, 1944, 35Letter from Albert H, Marckwardt, Resident Direc tor, English Language Institute, Mexico City, to K« M. Lydenberg, International Relations Office, American Library Association, Washington, December 6, 1944* 559 however* they were published in the instituted regulations* A passing grade was established at 75 per cent* A student with a grade of 75 per cent but less than 80 per cent was required to take the corrective conversation courses on the recommendation of the instructor and that of the director of courses. Xf he received a grade of less than 75 per cent but more than 50 per cent, he was to take a remedial course and then repeat the course that he had previously failed, Xf he failed the second time or if he received a grade of less than 50 per cent the first time in any course, he was dismissed from the institute, A student was also dismissed if he failed Course VIII on taking it the first time. He could not repeat it. The student thus had only one opportunity in the course which was required for the certificate.^ An estimate, in general terms, of the high academic standards set by the institute was made by the Department of State in 1944: It is rather obvious that the program of instruc tion in English in the institute is being regarded in Mexico as a problem of securing results comparable to those achieved on the university level of instruction under conditions which are to be made to conform as closely as possible to those obtaining in United States universities«3* 3 “Reglamentos Uenerales de las Clases de Ingles, Institute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales, Mexico, D. 1950. 3%, S., Department of State, Instruction No, 6,717 to the American Embassy, Mexico City, December 15, 1944, 560 While it is difficult to prove that the institute actually achieved results comparable to those of an Ameri“ can university, it is passible to indicate a comparison with other English classes in Mexico* Xn 1947, an American high school teacher visited in Mexico City an adult private school, three public secondary schools (including the Preparatory School of the National University), the Ameri can High School, and the cultural institute. Her observa tion of the latter1s methods indicated their superiority when compared to those of the other schools she visited; This method was the most effective observed in Mexico, The conversation and pronunciation abilities of beginning classes taught by this scientifically organised system far excelled those of the advanced classes taught by the grammar-translation system of the public schools,38 The high academic standards and the comparative success of the cultural institute's methods proved to be an attraction for those who wanted to leam English; Academic standards were always high with the result that the English classes of the Benjamin Franklin Li brary became very popular and long waiting lists were developed because so many more students wished to register than the facilities would provide for,39 3^Mary Louise Gow, "Teaching English in Mexico City," Hispania, XXXIX (August, 1949), 338, 3^Memorandum from Edmund R. Murphy to William C. Johnstone, Jr*, Department of State, Washington, "Notes on the MexicanrAmerican Institute's Operations Submitted on the Occasion of Your Departure to the Forthcoming Confer ence of Public Affairs Officers, to Be Held in Mexico in January., 1949," January 10,. 1949* 561 Despite the instituted academic reputation and popularity, however, there was some question about the value of high academic standards and a highly disciplined approach to English teaching in the name of international cultural relations. Courses and Teaching Methods, 1950*1953 In general, the period from 1950 to 1953 was marked by a trend away from the high standards and disciplined approach established earlier in the instituted history* Many of the procedures were retained, but they were made somewhat less rigorous by certain modifications. Changes were made in the organization of the academic year, the structure of the courses, and in the methods of instruc tion, but perhaps the most significant changes occurred in the instituted approach to students* Problems of content and method*— On his arrival at the institute in early 1950, a new director observed some dissatisfaction on the part of the students with the teach ing methods* In the first place, considerable time was being spent on the study of grammar* He reported that * . . the students object considerably to the long, detailed explanations of certain grammatical points; their most ardent complaint is that too much time is spent driving home patterns and rules to the, ex< of all but a little conversational practice.™ ^Memorandum from Elmendorf to Murphy, April 11, 1950* 562 The new director of courses in 1951 also noted a need for a change of methods of instruction: In the Director of Courses* opinion, numerous changes in materials and testing techniques are neces sary at the earliest possible date In order to allevi ate the general atmosphere of tension among both students and staff.41 A grantee teacher observed that much of the tension among the students as well as the staff was partly due to the effort to get students to leam the phonetic system of teaching pronunciation which was introduced in 1945. It was observed that conversational ability In the inter mediate courses was generally negligible in 1950. It was believed that excessive attention to grammar, speech pat terns, and phonetics as aims In themselves probably was responsible for some of this Inability to speak English.^ To ascertain more precisely what student opinion and preferences were in regard to linguistic content and methods of instruction, the institute conducted a poll of the students in the spring of 1951 shortly after the mid term examinations. The sample was composed of 537 stu dents. This was about 24 per cent of the total classes and ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 2, 613 to the Department of State, Washington, April 17, 1951 (enclosure, "Quarterly Report of the Mexican-North American. Institute”)♦ ^Interview with Stella Louise Ferreira, Washing ton, April 18, 1953, Miss Ferreira was a grantee teacher at the institute from September, 195G* to December, 1951. 563 students in attendance« It was evenly balanced between day and evening classes, and the sample was selected according to the proportion of students in elementary, intermediate, and advanced classes.^ On the subject of conversational practice, the poll clearly reflected a desire for more conversation. Asked whether they were more interested in the spoken or written language, 184 students answered “spoken," 11 answered "written,1 ' and 272 said "both." There were 70 who failed to answer. To the question, "Do you have enough conversa tion practice in your classes?" 205 answered "yes," 310 answered "no," and there was no answer from 22 students. Dissatisfaction with the amount of conversation was greater among the intermediate and advanced students* Offered an opportunity for free responses and suggestions, 116 stu dents suggested that they be given an opportunity for more conversation* This was by far the most frequent free response comment. The third most frequent suggestion, con sisting of 42 responses, was that arrangements be made for conversational practice with Americans who wanted to learn Spanish* ^ ^John Elmendorf, Executive Director, "Tabulation of Results of Poll of a Segment of the Student Body of the Institute, April, 1951," Mexicau-American Cultural Insti tute, Mexico City, May 29, 1951 {typewritten)* 4^Ibid* 564 On the subject of phonetics, the answers indicated more satisfaction than dissatisfaction* The question asked was, "What is your opinion of the use of phonetics in the classes?” Of the 537 students, 388 replied that they were satisfied, 86 answered that more time should be given to it, and 48 replied that less time should be given to it. Fifteen failed to answer. The free responses on the sub ject were evenly divided. The pollsters, nevertheless, were disinclined to accept the results on the grounds that the question had been poorly worded, that few students had had experience with any other system, and that those who wanted more time for phonetics did so because they were unable to master the subject in the time given to them.4- * On. the question of whether they had enough time to prepare the homework assigned by the institute, about 37 per cent responded in the negative and 61 per cent in the affirmative. The percentage of negative responses rose to nearly 50 per cent, however, in two courses* The question brought forth no comments in the free response section*4^ There were a number of other comments in the free response section on the subjects of grammar, drill, and examinations, but they were numerically insignificant. There were forty-seven students, however, who observed that i — i* i» i i ■ I I ■! H*«H«f<llK.'llW ,T» 45Ibid< 46Ibid, 565 / * 7 there was too much material in the courses. This was the first time that the students had been approached In this way on questions of policy in the aca demic program, and it was reported that they seemed favor ably impressed. Indeed, one of the purposes of the poll was "to make the students more aware of the fact that the institute exists for them and that whenever possible, their wishes will be complied with."^ The fact that student opinion was requested was indicative of a changing approach to students within the institute. The curriculum. 1950-1953.— As the first step in a systematic reorganisation of the curriculum, the institute abandoned the semester system in 1950* The academic year was divided into three equal parts called trimesters. This not only permitted the students to earn a certificate in three years instead of four, but it also provided for in creased income for the institute by the collection of tuition fees for a full student body three times a year instead of twice a year,^ tJnder the trimester system, the 47lhid, ^Memorandum from John Elmendorf, Executive Birec tor, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, to the Public Affairs Officer, American Embassy-, Mexico City, August 6, 1951* ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No, 1,263 to the Department of State, Washington, April 28, 1950; John Elmendorf, Executive Director, "Narrative Report to Accompany the Cultural Center Report Forms for the Period 1 April 195Q to 30 June 1950," Mexican-American Cultural Institute.,, Mexico City> July* 1950../ 566 school year was lengthened to eleven months covering the period from mid-January to mid-December. New trimesters were started in January* Hay, and September. Although the new system increased the number of regular courses to nine, it somewhat shortened the time allotted for each course, so that the change required a rearrangement of course materi als.”*^ It had been discovered that students who had ad vanced too rapidly from the preparatory course to Courses IX and III tinder the farmer system were the ones who later were being placed in remedial courses. The first step, therefore, in the three-year process of reorganizing the courses x?as the elimination of the preparatory course and the remedial courses. By 1953, all new students with some knowledge of English were placed In Rapid Course I, which included the content of Course I and IX combined. The latter two courses were taught in two trimesters and covered the same material for students without a conversa- 51 tional knowledge of English* ^Letter from Kenneth Craft, Director of Courses, Mexican*American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, to Vera G. Mitchell, Director, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Guadalajara, Mexico', June 21, 1950. ■^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 1,075 to the Department of State, Washington, October 24, 1950 (enclosure, ’’ Third Quarterly Report of Mexican-American Cultural Institute”); idem. Despatch No* 2,613* April 17, 1951 (enclosure, "Quarterly Report of the Mexican,-North. 567 The area where student wishes were heeded the most was in a conversational approach to the study of English. Although this had always been one of the stated objectives of the institute, greater emphasis was now placed on efforts to reach the objective* All courses were revised extensively. In several courses, old materials were dis carded and new texts were adopted. The technical aids to conversation and the grammatical content of the courses were reduced, and the time devoted to conversational prac tice was increased. Two courses formerly listed as cor rective conversational courses outside the regular sequence were now revised and placed in the regular curriculum in the second and third years of instruction. They were now devoted almost entirely to conversational practice of 52 constructions previously studied* The efforts to increase the conversational content were accompanied by a corresponding effort to reduce the American Institute14); Francis C, St. John, Executive Direc tor, "Academic Report for the First Quarter, 1953 (Narra tive)," Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, April, 1953* ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 437 to the Department of State, Washington, August 16, 1951 (enclosure, "Second Quarterly Narrative and Statistical Report," Mexican-American Cultural Institute)j idem. Despatch No, 2,136, March 12, 1952 (enclosure, "Fourth Quarterly Report of 1951 of the Institute Mexicano- Norteamericano de Relaciones Gulturales")j idem. Despatch No. 2,498, April 22, 1952 (enclosure, "First Quarterly* Report of 1952 of the Institute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales.") $ St., .John, locv cit> 568 amount of: time a student was required to spend on written homework. Furthermore, such written work as was assigned was based on new concepts. Instead of teaching students to write a series of "unrelated sentences illustrating a given structure point," the institute now encouraged them to use the language as a medium of expression. There was a re duction of time devoted to examinations, and simpler tech niques for testing with much less nomenclature were adopted. Phonetic transcriptions were eliminated from tests and henceforth were to be used only as a tool for learning, especially in Course The efforts to continue the revision of courses and the curriculum in the direction of greater emphasis on con versation continued into 1953. They were accompanied by a constant re-evaluation of materials and classroom tech niques. The director reported to the Department of State in 1953.: There is much more conversation at all levels now than there was in 1950 and 1951, due partly to the materials; but there is still a great deal of room for more oral class participation in order to help the,stu dents develop greater ability in oral expression. 5 Memorandum from Elmendorf to Public Affairs Officer, August 6, 1951; American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 2,613 to the. Department of State, Washington, April 17, 1951 (enclosure, "Quarterly Report of the Mexican,-North American Institute"); St* John, loc. cit* ,^^St* .John, loc, cit„ 569 Although the students might now complete the nine courses leading to a certificate of completion in three years# it was discovered that most graduates still needed training in English vocabulary and idiomatic expression to be able to converse fluently* To meet this need, post graduate reading and conversation courses were created. The first course was designed for those whose speaking ability in English was still limited. It was offered to students immediately after Course IX.^ An advanced conversation course followed this* It was limited to those students who spoke fluently and quite correctly and who were capable of free conversation on 56 selected topics without the use of a specific text. After creating two levels of graduate conversation courses by 1952, it was an easy and logical step to create a third* By the summer of 1953, the institute's three-year curriculum leading to the certificate was supplemented by a series of three conversation courses for fourth-year stu dents. The courses included assigned readings and the study of English idiomatic expressions* This material was used for oral reports and written compositions*^ ^5Ibid, 56Ibid, •^Francis C* St* John, Executive Director, "Second Quarterly Report, 1953: Narrative Report to Accompany Statistical Academic Report," Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, July, 1953* 570 The recognition of the need to continue the stu dents * work through the fourth year in order to develop a fluent conversational ability was an unintended acknowledge ment of the observation made by the resident director of the English Language Institute in 1944 that a three-year r r > curriculum was inadequate* ° Academic regulations and standards,— The use of the aptitude test to screen applicants for admission was no longer reported to the Department of State during this period. The placement examination, accompanied by an in terview. was continued, however, at the time of registra tion in order to place new students in the course best suited for their needs. This was followed by a second check during the first week of classes with a more thorough examination to verify the estimate of the students* ability and previous training*^ Such positive incentives to learning English as the granting of prizes to the best students in each class and the granting of graduation certificates upon completion of the regular curriculum were continued, These recognitions of achievement were made at public ceremonies as they had 5“Supra* p, 547* ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 1,010 to the Department of State, Washington, November 6, 1952 (enclosure, "1952 Third Quarterly Report of the Mexican- North American Cultural Institute"), 571 been previously. The high premium that had been placed on the graduation certificates made it advisable to continue them.^ Despite the administrative difficulties of select ing and assembling the best students in each of the classes for the awarding of prises, it was not only a tradition in the institute but also in the Mexican public school system. Furthermore, since the prizes were American books, the tradition provided an opportunity for achieving one of the objectives of the United States Information Service.^ While a portion of the negative incentives toward satisfactory preparation for classes was continued, the number of regulations was reduced to a minimum. The mini mum passing grade of 75 per cent was retained, but the regulations no longer threatened dismissal for those who failed the courses. Furthermore, students who failed the last course in the curriculum, might now repeat it. No men tion was made in the regulations regarding the number of absences permitted, and the previous practice of a few teachers of refusing admission to classes to those who ^Idem, Despatch No. 2,136, March 12, 1952 (en closure, "Fourth Quarterly Report of 1951 of the Institute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales"); idem, Despatch No. 1,476, January 12, 1953 (enclosure, "Fourth Quarterly Report of the Mexican-American Cultural Insti tute, October 1-December 31, 1952")* Interview with Audrey Wright, Director of Courses, Mexican-American Cultural Institute,. Mexico City, July 27, 1953. 572 r * t arrived late was discontinued* c Reorientation of the staff.--The reorganization of the course material necessitated the reorientation of the staff in regard to teaching methods and attitudes* Some control in this direction was established through the system of having the supervisors of the various courses make out examinations for all sections of the course given to them for supervision. The visiting of classes by the supervisors and the director of courses was intensified and this was followed by individual conferences with teachers. Other in-service training took place in regular staff meet ings, where methods and approach were a principal topic for discussion. Some change in the orientation of the staff was also effected through the required course in teaching methods for prospective teachers and the employment of new t e a c h e r s . After 1950, there was some relaxation of detailed centralized planning of the instruction. While the course ^Interview with Audrey Wright, July/15* 1953; "Reglamentos Generales de las Clases de Ingles y Espafiol,1 1 Institute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales, Mexico, D„ F*, 1953. ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 237 to the Department of State,, Washington, July 20, 1951 (en closure, "In-Service Training for Locally Appointed Teachers of English in Cultural Center")* Of forty-*one local teachers on the staff in June, 1953, twenty-nine had begun their employment in 1950 or later. content remained standardized, procedures were only sug- gested and lesson plans were abandoned. More details of the presentation o£ material and drill in the classroom, were left to the discretion of the individual teachers. Greater allowance than formerly was made for individual differences among both students and teachers,^ While the increased emphasis on conversation seemed to meet with the approval of the directors, the newer teachers and the students, it was reported that there was some resistance to change: The students seem to like [the new system], as far as can be ascertained; but some of the teachers who are still proponents of the old system at heart cannot seem to seize the necessary spirit and enthusiasm for the new. 65 The principal resistance to a change in methods came from the more senior members of the staff, who knew "no other system than the highly technical and academic one in use" in previous years.^ Even by the summer of 1953, there were still two or three members of the staff who had 6‘ Siemorandum from Elmendorf to Murphy, April 21, 1950. ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 2,498 to the Department of State, Washington, April 22, 1952 (enclosure, "First Quarterly Report of 1952 on the Insti- tuto Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales'*)* 66idem, Despatch No. 2,613, April 17, 1951 (en closure, "Quarterly Report of the Mexican-North American Institute"). 574 been trained analytically and ware still more concerned with the presentation of English grammar than with offering the students opportunities for conversation* In some cases, therefore* changes in the method of instruction were being made but slowly*^ The Publication of Textbooks The need for texts*”-When English instruction began in the Benjamin Franklin Library in 1942, it was discovered that satisfactory textbooks were not available for the English classes* The texts in general use lacked a con trolled vocabulary, organization, attractiveness of format, and interesting reading. In many cases, they were not only poorly edited and printed, but they at times contained in correct or unidiomatic English* Moreover, in a year’s time little material was covered. From those available, how ever, the Mexican Ministry of Education selected as the official text one or two of the books for use in public schools, Private schools and language academies had access to no better material. Even after the war, one independent American observer reported, ’'Satisfactory English textbooks and materials are rare.n^ When the English Language Institute began its work Interview with Audrey Wright, July 15, 1955* loc. cit. i p* 33,6* 575 in Mexico* it made a survey of the English texts available* Early in 1943 » * * the director and the staff dis covered that the kind of textbook they wanted and needed was not available to them, if indeed it existed at all. What they wanted in particular was a text which placed the primary emphasis upon acquiring an oral command of the English language* and one which was specifically designed for adult learners with a Spanish language background. Since nothing like this seemed to exist* the only apparent way to meet the situation was to write such a book.69 The preparation of text materials,--To meet this need for textbooks* the contract signed by the English language Institute at the University of Michigan with the Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs in 1943 provided for research in this field, Ihe first objective of the English Language Institute in Mexico was to be "the testing and development of methods and materials for teach ing English to Spanish-speaking Americans* under field conditions * Special importance [was] attached to this activity because the Co-ordinator*s office * * . indicated that it [wanted] to have these materials available for use in the English classes of the libraries and cultural institutes of other Latin American countries. '1 ^Institute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales* A Textbook of American English, Book I (Mexico, D. F«: Editorial Intercontinental,1949)* p.'vii* 70th S., Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs, Division of Science and Education* "Project Authorisation: English Language Institute in, Mexico," Washington, March 2, 1943 (processed)• 7iMarckwardt, "Present, Assured Future, and Con templated Activities of the English Language Institute in Mexico at the Biblioteca Benjamin Franklin,1' p* 7, 576 The English classes were to he considered a labora tory where the text materials could be tested under actual classroom conditions, Careful and detailed short-term and long-term plans for writing and testing the efficacy of the texts were made. In working, out these plans, the writers were concerned principally with the sequence of presenta tion of vocabulary and grammar, the extent of absorption by the students, pronunciation, and spelling.^ The basic materials used In preparing the texts had been developed earlier by the English Language Institute at the University of Michigan. They were designed for use in an English speaking environment by adults of professional or university caliber with some previous instruction in English. The task in Mexico was to adapt them to the spe cific speech patterns and habits of Spanish-speaking per sons who had no previous knowledge of English and wished to 7 ^ learn it in a Spanish-speaking environment. Despite the importance attached to the preparation of suitable texts, the Coordinator's budget in the contract with the English Language Institute at the University of Michigan made no provision for regular teachers and for 7^1bid« 73lbid, The four volumes entitled An Intensive Course in English for Latin American Students, which were prepared by the English Language Institute at the Univer sity of Michigan, were used as a guide for all courses except the first and the two advanced courses. .Mitchell, op. cit. textbook writers*^ In order to meet the need for texts as well as the terms of the contract, the trainee teachers assigned to the institute by the English Language Institute in Michigan were asked to assist with writing the texts* Although they were trained in linguistic science by the English Language Institute in Michigan, they were inexperi* enced in inditing texts and they were busy with teaching assignments. Consequently, their work progressed slowly and it needed constant supervision and correction by the 7 ^ director. Faced with the pressure of providing materials for the first four semesters of work at the same time, the institute was able to do so only in skeleton, or outline, form* These outlines included grammar, vocabulary, reading and exercises, and they were graded to fit the level of progress of the students. By the end of 1944, the material was still considered incomplete* Although it had been prepared for two years* work on the elementary and inter1 " mediate levels, the institute now felt it should be revised ^Marckwardt, "Present, Assured Future, and Con" templated Activities of the English Language Institute in Mexico at the Biblioteca Benjamin Franklin,, f p* 6* ^Letter from Albert H* Marckwardt, Resident Direc-* tor, English Language Institute in Mexico, Mexico City, to Carl. A. Sauer, Division of Cultural Cooperation, Department of State, Washington, September -4, 1944* Some assistance was given to the work by two trained textbook writers from the English Language Institute in Michigan, who were sent to Mexico for several months in the summer of 1944 with University of Michigan funds*. 5 7 - 8 to fit a three-year period of time to correspond to the lengthening of the whole curriculum from three to four years*^ The care with which the materials were being writ" ten and their plans for revision were noted by the cultural relations officer in Mexico City in 1944* He wrote to an officer of the Department of State that the preparation of teaching materials was progressing too slowly because of what he thought was a perfectionist attitude. It was felt that this tended to put the teaching materials in a , r class of scholarly product suitable for the twenty-first cen tury. H The elementary material was expected to be ready by the end of the year, but the advanced material was far from 77 being ready Mif one takes a scholarly view of it.t r Somo.th.ixig of the care with which the materials were prepared is reflected in the introduction to the first volume% This series of texts is a collaborative project in the highest degree. It is the product of hours of careful preparation on the part of the many instructors who have served their government at the English Lan guage Institute* now the Mexican-North American ^Letter from Albert H. Marckwardt, University of Michigan* Ann Arbor, to Clifford Prator, Division, of Educa tion, Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs* Washington, March 7* 1945* letter from Charles H« Stevens, American Embassy, Mexico City, to Carl A.« Sauer, Division of Cultural Co operation . Department of State, Washington, September 5, 1944. Institute o£ Cultural Relations, and. who selflessly gave of their time and effort in an attempt to serve the Mexican, people in their English classes. These materials, first designed in 1943, have had the benefit of years of experimental use. Their effectiveness has been objectively tested, and revisions have been made in the light of the test findings,78 A linguist of the Smithsonian Institution who used the materials in order to improve English instruction at the National School of Anthropology and History in Mexico City recommended them highly; Of the material available for teaching English to speakers of Spanish, the course of the English Language Institute is the best that I have seen: it is one of the few courses that unambiguously emphasizes the teaching of spoken English, the lessons are carefully graded, and the organization throughout is based upon sound linguistic and pedagogical principles. The first volume was not published, however, until 1949* Xrt the meantime, the institute operated with mimeo graphed materials in its elementary and intermediate classes.^ By April, 1950, Book IV of the series was in use, and the following year Book II was used in printed ^Instituto Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales, A Textbook of American English, Book 1 (Mexico, B. F«: Editorial Intercontinental, 1949), pp. ix-x* Some fifteen members of the staff of the institute participated in preparing, and revising the text between 1943 and 1949, when the first volume was finally printed, ^Letter from Stanley S, Newman, Mexico City, to Carl A, Sauer, Division of Libraries and Institutes, Department of State, Washington, October 19, 1946. ^Townsend, "The Cultural Canter in Mexico City,11 p* 3* 580 form for the first time,-1 * Termination, of the publications, program. "‘ -The other books were not printed,, The publications program was inter rupted for several reasons. One of the principal reasons was that the time spent in writing, editing, revising and typing texts and in turning the mimeograph machine for the language courses kept institute personnel from developing such activities as lectures, art exhibits, concerts, re ceptions and dramatic productions. A more extensive pro gram of general cultural interest was desired in order to increase the interest of the Mexican public in the institute,^ Furthermore, the prospects of completing the pub lications program at an early date seemed remote* The embassy reported to the Department of State at the close of 1949 as follows: There is so little agreement among the teaching staff concerning the suitability and value of the materials in process of preparation, that it would not be too pessimistic to expect that two or three years at least will be required to organise Gourses II, III, V, and VI into publishable shape* ^Memorandum from Elmendorf to Murphy, April 21, 1950; American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 437 to the Department of State, Washington, August 16, 1951 (en closure, "Second Quarterly Narrative and Statistical Re port, Mexican-American Cultural Institute")* ^Memorandum from Murphy to Johnstone, January 10, .1949* ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No.. 1,556 to the Department of State, Washington*, December . 9, 1949» 531 After Books X and XV had been printed, the task of revising the texts was removed from the committee of teachers working on the preparation of the texts for publi~ cation and assigned to a grantee teacher trained at the University of Michigan and to a local teacher* So little time was now being allotted to the publications program# however# that the embassy questioned the wisdom of com* pleting the project: It appears to the Embassy that either sufficient time should be allotted to this project to bring it to a speedy conclusion# or alternatively# the project should be abandoned in favor of using textual materials currently available. * . In reply# the Department of State urged that after the text for Course II# which was in preparation# had been completed, the publications program be abandoned. The department suggested that another intermediate text# such as Audrey Wrightls Practique Su Ingles, which had been developed in the cultural center in Bogota, Colombia, be used in the intermediate courses.^ During the process of reorganizing the curriculum# this text was adopted for four intermediate courses* By 1953, only Book I of the insti* o tute*s own published materials was still in use* s4Ibid* ^-*U« S», Department of State# Instruction No* 2 to the American Embassy# Mexico City# January 3# 1950* 66St* John# "Academic. Report for the First Quarter# 1953- (Narrative). 562 The Informational Content of the Courses Rationale in regard to the content*--Despite a tendency to perfectionism in both the teaching methods and in the preparation of instructional materials before 1950, the pressure on the institute from students to expand its enrollment over the years indicates general approval of the quality of instruction. Judged from the Mexican point of view, the courses appeared to be meeting Mexican needs and interests.^ Although the achievement of facility in English in itself may be considered one standard for measuring the success of the institute as part of the cultural relations program, officers in the Department of State were inclined to hold that language is merely a tool for understanding. "If everyone in the world spoke English* the universal panacea would not necessarily have been found*, f wrote an no officer of the Division of Cultural Cooperation in 1945.00 Something more than instruction in English seemed to be essential if the institute was to make a significant con" tribution to the cultural relations program: Mutual understanding* like everything else* has to be worked at. In the case of the Americas, it must be constantly fostered by the interchange of ideas, by the 07 Supra, p, 560. ^Harry M. Pierson, "English Is Also a Foreign Language, " Department of State Bulletin. XIX (March. 18, 1945)t 458, 583 free flow of cultural relations, by the constant inter pretation of nation to nation through the written and spoken word, Although a unilateral approach to cultural rela tions was developed after the war, understanding was con sidered no less essential in establishing channels for the free flow of information; An understanding of our motives and our institu tions can come only from a knowledge of the political principles which our history and traditions have n evolved, and of daily life in the United States*^ Those immediately in charge of directing the oper ations of the cultural relations program from the United States were concerned from the beginning with the informa tional content of the English courses. During the war, the English Language Institute at the University of Michigan noted that English teachers needed to be familiar with the culture of both the United States and Mexico.^1 gy £he close of the war, the Department of State was selecting grantee teachers who were qualified to discuss with their students various aspects of American culture in connection with instruction in English. By 1949, it was reinforcing ^Adolf A. Berle, Jr., "Cooperative Peace in the Western Hemisphere," Department of State Bulletin, X (December 9, 1939), 662. 90geoi :ga C* Marshall, "Action Urged on Information and Educational Exchange Act,r t Department of State, Bui-1 let in, XVII, (July 13, 194 7 )* .104* 9 ^ - Supra a pp* 493;-93«- 384 its selection policy with some orientation of grantee teachers in cultural anthropology in order to broaden their interests and ability to understand other peoples.92 After 1950, the directors of the institute were encouraged by the Department of State to instruct their teaching staffs to increase the amount of information about the United States in their classes »93 Something of this thinking found its way into the texts printed in 1949,* It is the serious conviction of the authors that an English language textbook may constitute a powerful weapon in the struggle to attain a better understand ing among the peoples of the Americas, We have worked toward this end by setting forth in the reading what seems to us to be a clear and honest portrait of the United States and of its people, their modes of be havior, their customs, their heroes, and their holi days . 94 For the most part, however, those in actual service on the teaching staff of the institute placed greater em phasis on teaching the language than on explaining the American way of life. Xn the view of the personnel at the institute at the close of the war, the principal aim of the 9^Supra, pp. 482, 498-99* 93supra, pp. 502, 505 £ interview with John Elmendorf, Mexico City, August 3, 1953. Dr, Elmendorf was the director of the cultural institute from 195G to 1952* 9^Instituto. Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales, A Textbook of American English, Book I (Mexico,, ,D. F.: Editorial Intercontinental,. 1949), p« viii.. The content of the texts, is discussed in the next section of the present chapter* 585 English classes was to develop linguistic skills: Our program attempts fundamentally to impart speak* ing and understanding skills by means of constant student participation in the classes and the use of English by the teacher as much as possible in all the courses,9* * The teaching staff was aware, nevertheless, of the objective of improving the students* understanding of the United States. The resident director of the English Lan guage Institute during the war. in commenting on the demand for instruction in English in Mexico, held that * » . this desire for English instruction furnishes the English Language Institute an opportunity to provide a medium of understanding of the people and the culture of the United States,9* The objective of emphasizing Instruction in lan guage per se, however, continued to be justified in 1953 on the grounds that "one of the. major obstacles which exist for understanding between nations Is the lack of knowledge 9 7 of their respective languages,*'3 This rationale did not ignore the objective of making friends for the United States, It was believed, however, that such friendship could best be achieved ^Mitchell, op, cit,, p* 5* ^Marckwardt, "Present, Assured future, and Con templated Activities of the English Language Institute in Mexico at the Biblioteca Benjamin Franklin*** 97"Regiamentos Generales de las Clases de. Ingles y Espanol,,1 6 Instituto Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones • Culturales* > Mexico,, D., F„,, 1953« 586 through indirection, that is, by meeting first the linguis tic interests and needs of the students as a service to them. To da this, it was felt that it was necessary to keep attention focused on the language rather than on in formation about the United States* Accordingly, it was held that any such material that was included in either the assignments or in the classroom discussions should be nan- controversial in nature and approached in an objective manner," The secondary emphasis placed on information about the United States was made apparent in a research paper on the aims, methods, and content of the courses in English at the institute in 1945* In a four-page discussion of the aims of the institute, only one paragraph was devoted to such material, and this was placed last, Reading for con tent was not a primary aim. Prior attention was given to such factors as pronunciation, phonetics, testing, grammar, written work, and oral practice, "We aim at a mastery of a limited, practical knowledge of English," read the re port*" Q ft Interview with Aileen Traver Kitchin, Columbia University, New York, April 15, 1953. Mrs. Kitchin had been sent by the English Language Institute at the Univer sity of Michigan in May of 1943 to plan the construction of text materials. She returned for about five months in 1944 with an assistant, Virginia French Allen, to serve as a consultant in writing the texts* "Mitchell, on* cit. ■ < pp. 5*8* 5S7 The effort to achieve this objective in the time available limited the amount of American content despite some student interest in it: Many of the students are very much interested in knowing more about life in the United States. However, there is not enough time to include very much extra material along with the excessive oral drill which is emphasized, because that is the skill that the majority of the students are most interested in learning,TOO Furthermore, the amount of time given to prepara'" tion by the students was reported to be not more than thirty minutes per lesson. Under these circumstances, the effort to provide intensive instruction in the language it self forced information about the American way of life into a distinctly secondary category: From the standpoint of the student who wants only a general knowledge of English, the people who speak it, and the countries where it is spoken, it would be interesting, and, in many cases, useful, to use more realia and more maps in the classroom. But since most of them are mainly interested in learning to speak and understand, and since the time at our disposal for teaching is limited, we concentrate on the more import ant aspects of language learning, and leave these extra things to the English Club and to the students* own initiative, The view that there was a lack of time in the classroom to discuss life in the United States extensively was not confined to the early history of the institute. Even though the high academic standards for linguistic 100Ibid. , , pp« 13.-14 10 llbid „ f , p* 14 « 538 achievement had been somewhat relaxed by 1953, it was still held by the director of courses that primary attention, had to be given to meeting the demand for instruction in the English language. Information about the United States was necessarily* therefore* kept in a secondary focus in the revised curriculum* More emphasis was placed on working out of the texts and on the linguistic material than on 102 discussions about the United States. Cultural material* therefore* was presented in a somewhat incidental and casual manner* This is not to say that it was ignored as an objective* It was not. The institute acknowledged an obligation to include some read ing on United States history, biographical anecdotes of historical characters, geography, the American way of life, and current events* It placed some value also on the dis cussions in class which followed these readings and on 103 student contact with American teachers. To supplement the reading material, maps were sometimes used as illustrative material. Books were occa sionally brought from the library to supply additional historical or geographical information, Students who were especially interested in some topic were referred to the library for additional reading in newspapers, books, and ^02Interview with Audrey bright, July 27, 1953* -■^Mitchell, on. cit*, p, 8. 589 magazines in English# but in general little attention was paid to these materials in class. Although to increase the student's knowledge about the United States was not the primary objective of the regular courses, the fact that some attention was paid to it indicates that it may have made a contribution to the objective of understanding the United States and the Ameri can way of life. Any estimate of this contribution re quires a survey of the informational content of the courses, including the texts and the classroom discussions. Hatters of interest are the nature of such material and its loca tion in the curriculum. The content of the texts.--The text for Course I, used in mimeographed form from 1944 to 1949 and from then until 1953 in book form, made brief references to United States dollars, the cities of Chicago and New York, and a few American proper names. Otherwise, information about the United States is noticeable by its absence. Further more, the presentation of related ideas, cultural or other wise, was a virtual impossibility, for the reading material and exercises were largely disconnected sentences. The content of these sentences might be applicable to any country of Western culture except for the three references ■ lO^lbid, , pp, 13-14, 590 3 05 mentioned above* The amount of information, about the United States in Book XX of the same series was increased* Two of the twelve chapters were devoted to review exercises of the language. Of the other ten chapters, five were devoted to American holidays, and five briefly described outstanding figures in American history. The chapters on holidays dis cussed American customs at Christmas, Easter, the Fourth of July, Halloween, and Thanksgiving. The other five chapters gave short biographies of Benjamin Franklin, George Wash ington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and Franklin B. Roosevelt* The political and social contributions of these men were discussed briefly in elementary language and con cepts. ^*6 Xn an earlier form, Course II had included short biographies of such persons in American history as Paul Revere, Betsy Ross, Alexander Hamilton, Robert B, Lee, and Robert Fulton* The readings in Courses III, XV, V, and VI in 1945 took the form of a story of a Mexican family travelling through the United States; ■^Instituto Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relacianes Culturales, A Textbook of American English. Book I (Mexico, D* F,: Editorial Intercontinental, 1949), 179 pp* •kO^Virginia Williams and Barbara Ocheltree, A Text book of American English*. Book II (Mexico, Du F*; Editorial Intercontinental, 1951), 275 pp. ■ ^ M itc h e ll, op. c i t ., p* 21* 591 Their journey is related, and the places of his torical interest and natural beauty are described to acquaint the students with some of the geography and history and every-day life of the United S t a t e s * 10^ In its published form, Book IV was composed of ten chapters, of which two were a review of the language* The eight chapters which contained reading material were based on the same theme of travel through the United States* The Moreno family planned and executed a trip from Mexico City to New York via Laredo, New Orleans, and Philadelphia, This took them through railroad stations, a customs inspec tion, hotel dining rooms, restaurants, a post office, a dime store, a department store, and a private home in New York City. Their itinerary offered opportunities to visit some of the points of historical interest In the French Quarter In New Orleans, Independence Hall, the Philadelphia Orchestra and the Franklin Institute in Philadelphia, and the customary attractions for tourists in New York City. The language exercises accompanying these chapters were neither consecutive in thought nor related to the reading passages earlier in the chapter* •In their former mimeographed forms, Books V and VI continued the trip of the same family through the United States and provided an opportunity for the discussion of x c % b i d , ^^tnstituta Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales,,. A Textbook o£ American English, u . Book IV (Mexico, U* f«; Editorial Jakes, 1949), 139 pp« 592 American customs* the American home* educational system, 110 government, agriculture, art, and literature. When the intermediate courses were reorganized, the institute adopted as an intermediate text Praetique Su Ingles by Audrey Wright.It was used in Courses II, III, V, and VI in 1952. In terms of content, it was similar to the texts that were abandoned. In Part I, some conception of life in the United States was introduced by the device of having a young lady from Latin America study at an American university. Of eight reading passages which could be identified as having their scene of action in the United States, four discussed student ’'dating.1' The other four were concerned with introductions, American names, a vaca tion trip to New York, and a survey of the American educa tional system. Part II gave the student an imaginary and circuitous trip through the principal cities and regions of the United States, beginning at Hiami, Florida, and ending in Seattle, Washington. In so doing, the text offered in survey form brief sketches of American customs, history, geography, natural resources, economy, and cultural life. ^-^Interview with Margaret Moye del Barrio, Detroit, Michigan, October 13, 1952; Interview with Virginia Grant Williams, Mexico City, August 11, 1953* Mrs* del Barrio served as a grantee teacher in the institute from 1945 to 1947, and Mrs* Williams taught there from 1944 to 1951* ^^Wew York's American Book Company.* I949h 593 Host of the conversation exercises and a few of the written exercises supplemented or reviewed this material. But* despite a conscious effort to supply information about the United States, a total of only about thirty of nearly four hundred pages were devoted to it. The remainder of the book, was concerned with explanations of the structure of English and exercises in writing and speaking in conformity with the principal aim of the text. Text material in the advanced courses had an even more varied record. During the Second World war, the Office of the Coordinator supplied a quantity of the spe* cial armed forces edition of The New York Times to the Benjamin Franklin Library. Xn 1943, some fifty copies a week were used in the advanced English classes.It was still being used in 1945, For Course VIX, articles were sometimes selected or edited with a view to simplifying the vocabulary to fit the linguistic level of the students. There was no editing for Course VIII students, for whom no other regular reading material was assigned. Occasionally the advanced students received as supplementary material informative pamphlets on the life or history of the United States, or such material was read to them to improve their listening skills and for conversational purposes.* which ^■^Rudolph h* Gjelsness, "Report o£ the Director* Librarian,,Biblioteca, Benjamin Franklin, Mexico Gity., .November, 1943, p, 6 (mimeographed) s . . 1 I f were the principal objectives of the course. During 1947 and 1948, Course VII purported to give students some acquaintance •with American life and thought through a selection of representative American short stories* Students were then asked to write brief analyses in English of what they had read. Prises were given as incentives for the best reports based on these stories. By 1950, the same course provided for outside reading of selected American short stories and class discussions based on these readings. The class also wrote and presented 11 c dialogues and a short play. Course VIXI in 1950 provided for reading The Reader's Digest In English with conversation and class dis cussion based on the readings. The course continued the study of phonetics and reviewed English grammar. Students also wrote short compositions and dialogues. In 1953, the course, which was now numbered Course IE, was con structed according to a similar plan. The use of The Reader's Digest was continued* as was the review of the ^%itchell, op. cit., pp. 23-24. ^^Irnan (student newspaper at the cultural Insti tute, Mexico City), October, 1948, At least one such prize was awarded for an essay based on the relationship of freedom and happiness. It was inspired by a story by Stephen Vincent Benef, ifThe Devil and .Daniel Webster, * * I1% eraQrandum from Elmendorf to Murphy, April 21, 1950, ■ 116lbid, . . language Itself through grammar exercises. Added to the 117 course now was a collection of short stories* This col** lection contained nine stories by 0* Henry., Edgar Allan Poe, Richard Harding Davis,, Nathaniel Hawthorne, and Washington Irving. One British author, A. Conan Doyle, was also included. The stories were edited to reduce the vocabulary to the intermediate level., and In so doing the 118 stories had been somewhat simplified. The elementary conversation course which was placed in the regular curriculum as Course IV In 1951 (Course V in 1953) was based on the pedagogical principle that conversa tion in a foreign language is easier to achieve if the con tent is familiar material. Consequently, it was con structed chiefly around familiar scenes in Mexico City. The chief contact with American culture in the course con sisted of meeting imaginary American tourists in Mexico City and enacting dialogues designed to interest and assist them. Mexican students took them on sight-seeing tours# to an art exhibit# to a bull fight., and on shopping trips. Practice was given making Introductions# in giving direc tions.* making hotel reservations and travel arrangements# g . ^ fo W n .W W H W •W S f t V t - f f i Ml f —..Hitt John# 'Academic Report for the First Quar ter# 1953 (Narrative)*'4 'k-^'Kobert J* Dixson. Easy Reading Selections in English for the Foreign Born (New York: Regents, .Publishing ■ Company.^.Incorporated., 1,948),, pp> , v-vii,6 .596 and explaining Mexican customs and traditions, The second conversation course (Course VIXX in the 1953 curriculum) projected the student into the United States by means of a trip to this country. There were seven units of work, which consisted of making travel plans, securing reservations, eating in restaurants, ex- perfences in a beauty parlor, barber shop and at the dry cleaners, going to the bank and the post office, and making purchases at department, drug, shoe, and grocery stores* Each lesson was illustrated with a humorous anecdote, but, like the dialogues to be enacted, they might actually take place in any Western country. The stated objectives of the course were to develop an ability to speak correctly and fluently, to improve intonation and pronunciation, to re* view grammatical constructions, and to increase the stu dent’s vocabulary. -^0 For the first two graduate conversation courses, the institute adopted a book of short stories, The preface to the book stated; OrfWrtn W «■ ■^^Memarandum from Elmendorf to Murphy, April 21, 1950; Manual for Course Five. Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, 1953, 25 pp* (mimeographed); inter’ 0 view with Doris Havener, Washington, April 26, 1953, Miss Havener taught as a grantee teacher in the cultural .institute in 1950* ■HOfrlanual. for.Course Eight- . Mexican’ "American Cul tural Institute,* Mexico City, .1953, 55 pp* (mimeographed), 597 All the stories in this book have appeared in cut" rent magazines. They have been written by well-known authors and deal almost entirely with present-day American life. The stories should be of particular interest to the many students everywhere who, while studying English,, wish at the same time to learn some- thing of the American scene. ’ **21 Among the seventeen authors of the stories are Octavus Roy Cohen, Rube Goldberg, Vina Delmar, and Elmer Davis. The stories were edited only slightly to remove slang and unusual words, and no attempt was made to alter the style of the authors. Each story was accompanied by linguistic exercises.They were chiefly human interest stories* Among the themes treated were romance, mystery, illness, murder, crime, and a sea voyage. The book was adopted for cultural, pedagogical, and linguistic reasons: The book was selected because it contains modern short stories by American authors, short enough to be appropriate for one day*s assignment, and because the vocabulary is not too literary, but rather one of use ful everyday English.*23 A second text provided practice in English idioms. Students were assigned topics for both conversation and •composition. The director reported that 'k^Robert J. Bixson, Modem Short Stories ..by. Ameri can Authors: An Advanced Reader in English for the Foreign Born (New York: Regents Publishing Company., 1950), p„ iii, pp, li-iii, St* John, #'Second Quarterly Report, 1953: Nar rative Report.to Accompany Statistical. Academic Report*" . , „ the main objective of the course [was] to improve the student’s ability to speak and understand spoken English and to provide him with an opportunity to prac tice orally the structure he has previously studied* The advanced conversation course as it existed from 1950 to 1952 used such publications as The American Observer. Collier’s. Life. The Reader’s Digest, and other popular American magazines. Discussions in the classroom were centered on current events involving United States, hemispheric, and world problems. The course also included discussions of various lectures the students had attended and short talks by occasional American visitors to the class. This course was open only to graduates of the regu lar courses and others who were similarly qualified. In the first term of 1953, the advanced conversa tion course discussed topics selected by the teacher or the students, and no specific text was used. The topics dis cussed Included holidays, customs in Mexico and the United States, modem painting, the new University City in 124Ibid, 2 ^Memorandum from Elmendorf to Murphy, April 21, 1950; American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 2,613 to the Department of State, Washington, April 17, 1951 (en closure, "Quarterly Report of the Mexican-North American Institute*'); idem, No. 437, August 16, 1951 (enclosure, "Second Quarterly Narrative and Statistical Report,l t Mexican-American Cultural Institute); idem. No, 1,654, February 8, 1952 (enclosure, "Third 1951 Quarterly Report of the Binational Center, July-1 to September 31, 1951"); idem, No* 2,498, April 22, 1952 (enclosure, "First Quar terly Report of 1952 of the Instituto Mexlcauo- Norteamericano de Relactanes Culturales1 1 )* Mexico City* medieval customs, life on the moon, and a quiz program* In the second tern of 1953, the advanced conversation course used The Reader*s Digest for May, 1953. The readings assigned included a condensation, of a book and seven of the condensed articles from recent American periodicals. Hot all the articles were concerned with the United States. Students were required to give short talks and participate in class discussions on the articles read. They were also asked to write three compositions. Two of the written compositions, based on articles in The Reader's Digest, were entitled, "The Sea,u and "How to Get Ahead on Your Job,” The third was based on an American custom not discussed in class and which presumably required some research. The short talks concerned such topics as two of the stories in The Reader’s Digest, ghost stories, superstitions* a telephone conversation, transportation, and a favorite building in Mexico City. There was no con sistent pattern of American content apparent in the read ings, the short talks, or the written compositions, al though some American content was included. The instructor of the course was American-born but educated in Europe and married to a Britisher who taught in the British 3 26 ' St* John, "Academic Report of the First Quarter, 1953 (narrative) . * , v cultural Institute* Classroom discussions,--The amount and type o£ American content in classroom discussions is difficult to trace because of its oral nature. Some index of the quantity and quality of such discussions is available, nevertheless, from a closer inspection of the English courses and from Interviews with former members of the teaching staff* The director of the English Language Institute in 1943 Indicated that the cultural content of the advanced courses was greater than in the elementary courses: The advanced classes afford an exceptionally good opportunity to present culturally interpretative ma- terials, although significant beginnings in this direc~ tion may be made in the more elementary courses,128 A similar observation was made by the director of the cultural institute for the period 1950“1952, He re ported that the amount of American content In the elemen tary courses was relatively less than in the advanced 129 courses. One of the reasons for this was linguistic. In ■ ^ ^Course Outline of Conversation C-300, May 26 to August 18, 1953, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, May, 1953 (typewritten), ■^^Marckwardt, "Present, Assured Future, and Con- template! Activities of the English Language Institute in Mexico at the Biblioteca Benjamin Franklin,'* p« 4* ^ I n t e r v i e w With John Elmendorf, Mexico City,, August 3* 1953* order to develop oral*-aural linguistic skills, all 'work possible in the classroom was conducted in English, This applied not only to grammatical explanations but also to the introduction of vocabulary. Translation into Spanish was avoided. Students were required to talk English in the classroom as much as possible. Much of the oral work in the elementary and. intermediate classes, however, was devoted to memorising patterns of speech and drills in pronunciation. Except for some freedom in choosing their own vocabulary in the higher intermediate courses, students were required to adhere to the patterns of speech being learned, 3-30 Even if the elementary and intermediate students had been given complete freedom to open discussions on whatever topic interested them, their vocabulary was limited. It was limited quantitatively because they were beginners. It was also limited qualitatively. Intro ductory vocabulary was generally limited to the names of tangible articles, many of which were found in the class room, -^1 The vocabulary continued to deal with tangible objects to a great extent throughout the first two years ^ ^Supra, pp, 550-54; interview with Aileen Traver Ritehin, April 15, 1953; interview with Stella Louise Ferreira, Washington, April 13, 1953, Interview with Aileen Traver Kit chin, April 15, 602 132 of instruction, This was .so'because of the nature of the reading material in these courses. To a great extent, this consisted of numerous descriptions of every day life which were brought out through the device of imaginary trips to the United States or around Mexico City*'*'33 The students were not only limited by the vocabulary they knew, but they were also limited by their general lack of skill in conversation at the lower levels. As a result, they were unable to converse easily on any topic, no matter how interested they might have been in the United States. Only in the upper classes, where linguistic skill had reached a point of genuine utility, the vocabulary had been enlarged to include abstract concepts, and greater freedom in choice of topics was permitted, was it possible for them to discuss in English broadly cultural or occasionally political subjects. The course materials provided some motivation to discuss life in the United States. One teacher reported that on reading about American holidays, such as Halloween, Christmas, and the Fourth of July, or as the dates for ^^Interview with Stella Louise Ferreira, April 18, 1953. 133Supra, pp. 589-92, 595-96. •^Interview with Aileen Traver Kitchin, April 15, 1953; interview with Stella Louise Ferreira, April 18, 1953* these holidays approached;, she explained American customs connected with them and something of their significance, Some effort was made to present informally and extempo raneously some comparison of the origins of government in the United States with those in Latin America* The inter est of the American people in political and social affairs was explained, such as the New England town meetings and the popular demand for public education. Efforts were also made to impart some notion of the scope of our educational system and American history. Many of these topics were 13 5 introduced in the reading material of the texts. Once students had achieved some ability to converse in English, the course content which took them on an imaginary trip through the United States raised some additional points for 136 classroom discussion. The reading materials for the more advanced courses stimulated further interest in discussions about the United States, Reading about the pending presidential elections in the United States during the Second World War in The New York Times, for example, stimulated student interest and further discussion in our political system and government. The mention of the Fourth of July celebrations provided an ^ I n t e r v i e w s w i t h M a r g a r e t M o y e del Barrio, October 13 and 20, 1952. ■ ^ Interview with Stella Louise Ferreira, April IS, 1953, opportunity for using the Declaration of Independence as reading material. In so doing, an effort was made to im part some concept of American ideals* Such material was brought up informally, however, at opportune moments, 117 rather than as an integral part of the course. Treatment of controversial material.— In presenting various aspects of the American way of life, the teachers made no direct attempt to discuss the politics or inter national relations of the United States or to correct any existing misconceptions of this country or its policies. It was considered that any direct and outspoken comments on these subjects would be self-defeating. The texts as well as the classroom instruction should first attempt to estab lish a position of prestige and credibility for the insti tute by the objectivity of the material and an unemotional approach to it. The intentional Introduction of contro versial material of any kind, it was held, would possibly defeat this objective. Moreover, the introduction of such materials would divert the attention of the students away 138 from the language itself. These views, held In 1944, when the English Language ■k^Interviews with Albert H. Marckwardt, Ann Arbor, Michigan, October 11 and 17, 1952, Dr. Marckwardt was Resident Director of the English Language Institute in Mexico during 1943 and 1944, ^^Interview with Aileen Traver Kitchin, April 15, 1953. .605 Institute was still in the experimental stage, -were com parable to those held by the director of courses and the author of the text used in four of the intermediate courses in the period from 1950 to 1953* She considered that con troversial material in the content of the course would arouse Interest in that area and take the focus of atten tion away from the primary interest of the students in learning the language. In discussing the United States with their classes* therefore* the teachers themselves generally avoided contro versial political* economic* social* and religious topics. In classroom discussions* however* not all the material brought to the attention of students was introduced by the instructor* Students themselves sometimes raised questions related to reading material or oral presentations. Since such questions often reflect political attitudes, an effort was made during the course of the research for the present study to determine the nature and extent of student inter est in historical or current topics of a political nature concerning the United States or Mexican-Ametican relations. In 1944, the former director of the English Lan guage Institute found that a few students were prompt in contrasting the ideals represented by the Declaration of Independence with the current events with which they were k^lnterview with Audrey Wright, July 27* 1953* 606 familiar at the time, such as the Detroit race riots and the T f , 20Qt suit1 ' incidents in Los Angeles. There was some resentment expressed regarding racial discrimination in the United States, particularly in the southern states, and it was held up as an area where ideals and practice did not coincide.14^ A grantee teacher reported that on one occasion she reviewed the problems of racial relations with another teacher who was involved in a complicated discussion on the 141 subject with her students. On the other hand, another grantee teacher reported that the question of racial rela tions and racial prejudice in the United States was raised only rarely in the classroom and that it was not very prominent as an Issue.14^ A locally*hired teacher who estimated that he had taught English to approximately 1,500 students in four years also confirmed that the subject of racial, relations came up rarely in the classroom. When it did, it was based on personal experiences of Mexicans in the southern part of the United States, particularly in Texas.143 14^Interviews with Albert E. Marckwardt, October 11 and 17, 1952. 141Interview with Stella Louise Ferreira, April IS, 1953. ' “ 'Interview with Doris Havener, Washington* April 26, 1953. • t / Q Interview with Sidney Haraolsky, Mexico City, August 5, 1953. 607 There was little interest in economic aid to Latin America, During the war, the former director of the English Language Institute discovered that there was some suspicion that the Good Neighbor Policy was only a tempo rary wartime measure.^* This point was expressed in the classroom at a later date by one student who felt that Che United States extended economic aid to Latin America only when this country wanted something in exchange. Another, on one occasion, expressed resentfully the view that the United States was sending more aid in the post-war period to Europe than to Latin America. But, In general, the question appeared in the classroom rather Infrequently.^^ Other possibly controversial points appear to have come up in the classroom even less often. The mention of Texas nearly always brought forth some resentful remark, one teacher reported. But other references to military and political conflict between Mexico and the United States were rare. The Veracruz incident of 1914 was mentioned only once In four years to this teacher* References to a Mexican-American battle site in Mexico City during the Mexican War failed to bring a response from classes, and Mexico's loss of California was never mentioned. ■^^Interview with Albert H. Marckwardt, October 11, 1952. Interview with Sidney Hamolsky, August 5, 1953, -^^Tdem, 608 A locally hired teacher and a former grantee teacher agreed that the Mexican War, the problems of the braceros and "wetbacks" in the United States, the exprapri- ation of the oil industry by the Mexican Government, and the question of religious differences were not expressed, Ihe grantee teacher stated that she had received no com ments on border incidents, boundary conflicts, "Yankee imperialism," or "dollar diplomacy,” She was unable to explain why these topics had not arisen.Another grantee teacher reported that such controversial questions involving the United States simply did not arise in her classes* A local teacher indicated that the only really heated discussions in his classes were on controversies within Mexico that had no direct relationship to the United States but seemed to be of immediate concern to the stu” dents. As examples, he mentioned a discussion on the merits of public versus private education, in which reli gious issues were involved, and the question of woman ^^Interview with Sidney Hamalsky, August 5, 1953; interview with Doris Havener, April 26, 1953. •^Interview with Doris Havener, April 26, 1953. Interview with Helen Aschbacher, Mexican- American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, August 4, 1953. Miss Aschbacher served as a grantee teacher in Mexico from 1950 to 1953. suffrage. Although the discussion of controversial topics in the classroom appears to have been rare, all the teachers interviewed agreed on a truthful and fair approach to them if they were raised by the students. Wo effort was made to present the American way of life or any international situ ation involving the United States in a favorable light for its political effect* An American grantee who taught at the institute in 1950 reported that she would have responded as objectively, truthfully, and intelligently as possible. "If such ques tions had arisen, 1 should have discussed them from both the Mexican and the Ih S. point of view in so far as I was able," she wrote,Another grantee teacher stated that her policy was to be truthful and frank about relations between Mexicans and Americans as a contribution to mutual understanding. She regarded this as useful to neighboring peoples even if the discussion was centered on unpleasant topics, ^2 This approach was regarded by the teachers who com mented on it as a contribution toward establishing the ^-^Interview with Sidney Hamolsky, August 5* 1953, ■^-^Letter from Doris Havener, Hartselle, Alabama, to the present writer, April 5, 1953. ^Interview with Stella Louise Ferreira, April 18, 1953, 610 credibility of the Institute as a source of information. One teacher believed that credibility was established by an objective classroom.approach and by achieving a position of respect with the students. Another believed that a truthful approach had to be accompanied by winning the friendship of the students.A third teacher believed that there was no question about the truth of her state- ments being believed, since she had no recollection of 1 a . e being called a propagandist. Only one former grantee teacher reported that she had ever found it useful to be able to explain the nature of her letter of award as a grantee teacher, the binational nature of the direction of the institute, and that she had not been instructed on what to say on controversial matters discussed in class. She believed that this argument was convincing in trying to prove the sincerity of her efforts to present a truthful version of what she was discussing. Effect of enrollment on information disseminated.-— Besides an analysis of the content of the courses and the ^^Interview with Aileen Traver Kitchin, April 15, 1953. ^^Tnterview with Virginia Grant Williams, August 11, 1953. •*■55interview with friargaret Moye del Barrio, Octo ber 13, 1952. Stella Louise Ferreira, April 13# 1953. 611 methods of presenting information about the United States, any attempt to estimate the value of the regular courses to the cultural relations program must take info account the number of students enrolled on each level and the length of time they remained at the institute- Since the curriculum went through three periods of development, the statistics presented in the following paragraphs are not entirely com parable, but they indicate major patterns and trends. During 1943 and 1944, the regular curriculum covered a three-year period of time. Enrollment reports indicate that there were 551 students in the regular classes at the close of the semester in December, 1943, and 893 at the highest point in the fall semester of 1944. Of a combined total of 78 classes in the fall semester of these two years, there were 34 beginning classes, 30 intermediate classes, and 14 advanced classes* These figures show that approximately 44 per cent of the classes were on the ele mentary level and that nearly 18 per cent were on the ad vanced level, Between 1945 and 1949, the institute had a four- year curriculum of preparatory courses and eight regular -^-^Rudolph H, Gjelsness, ''Report of the Director- Librarian," Biblioteca Benjamin Franklin, Mexico City, December- 1943 (mimeographed); "Enrollment Figures as of Sept. 1, 1944" (unsigned MS in pencil in the files of the English Language Institute, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City), 6X2 courses* During this period* the total enrollment rose from 1,000 in January* 1945* to nearly 3*100 four years later. The enrollment figures on August 15* 1946, show that there were 46 elementary classes* of which 24 were preparatory* 27 intermediate classes, and only 4 advanced classes. In the spring of 1947, almost half the students In the institute were in the preparatory classes* Combined statistics for the two spring semesters of 1948 and 1949 show that of 233 classes, 160 were on the elementary level and that two-thirds of these were preparatory classes. For the four courses on the intermediate level in the two semesters* there was a combined total of 64 classes. There were only 9 classes in the two semesters on the advanced level. Approximately 70 per cent of the classes were thus regularly on the elementary level and only about 4 per cent 1 58 were advanced classes. The reorganization of the courses in 1950 and 1951 into a three-year curriculum arranged in trimesters had no ^ Ultimas Noticias (Mexico City)* January 16* 1945; Francis E. Townsend, Supervisor of Courses, ’'English Language Institute in Mexico Bulletin,, r Mexico City* August 21, 1945 (mimeographed); idem, ’’ Reporting of Sta- tistics and General Activities of the English Language Institute in Mexico from January 15th to March 1st, 1947*n Mexico City, March, 1947 (mimeographed); American Embassy* Mexico City, Despatch No. 422 to the Department of State, Washington, March 23, 1949 (enclosure, "Monthly Statement of the Institute Mexicana-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales,“ Mexico City, February, 1949); Iman (student newspaper at the cultural Institute, Mexico City).f i July, 1948; ibid.» Aprils 1949*. 6 1 . 3 immediate effect on the distribution of the enrollment in the year 1951* Enrollment statistics continued to show that about 70 per cent of the classes were elementary and 4 per cent were advanced. Of a total of 386 classes taught in the three trimesters of 1951, 274 were on Che elementary.* 96 on the intermediate, and 16 on the advanced level, The total enrollment increased moderately to 3,274 by September of 1951.159 By the end of 1952, however, a noticeable change in the distribution of enrollment was apparent. From the first trimester in 1951 to the third one in 1952, there had been a steady growth in the number of intermediate and advanced classes. The intermediate level rose from 27 sections in early 1951 to a total of 67 sections by the end of 1952, Similarly, the advanced classes rose from 5 in number in early 1951 to a total of 16 by the end of 1952, Although the growth in total enrollment to nearly 4,000 students accounted for some of the increase in intermediate and advanced classes, the percentage of students enrolled in these glasses also increased. Of a total of 450 classes taught in the three trimesters of 1952, 249, or 55 per cent, were now on the elementary level; 167, or 37 per cent. ■^9Johrt Elmendarf, Executive Director, ^Statistical, Reports for Academic Program,, l ' Mexican "■American Cultural . Institute.. Mexico City, 1951* 614 were on the intermediate level; and 34, or 8 per cent, were T advanced classes* The change in the relative distribution of element tary and intermediate students continued in 1953* In the first quarter of that year, there were 3,914 students registered in the regular courses. They were enrolled in 78 elementary, 70 intermediate, and 16 advanced classes. By 1953, enrollment statistics thus showed that 47 per cent of the classes were elementary, 43 per cent intermediate, T C T and 10 per cent advanced. The length of time students remained at the insti" tute is roughly indicated by the relative numbers in the intermediate and advanced classes. A statistical study made by the director in the spring of 1953 also indicates more accurately the length of time students remained err rolled. Of a total of 4,060 students registered in all classes in the first trimester of that year, only 1,959 had been enrolled for four terms or more, 1,029 for seven terms or mare* and 427 for ten terms or more* About half were on 1 9 the elementary level at this time, I6QIdem, 1951 and 1952, ^■^Francis C. St* John, Executive Director, "Stu dents Registered in First Term 1953 Who Did not Return for Second Term," Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, 1953 (MS statistical study), •^^Idem, "Number of Students., According to Number of Terms in Which Enrolled at Institute,l r Mexican-American. Cultural Institute,, Mexico C.ity,s 1953- (mimeographed) 615 Although the percentages varied in the three periods according to the length of the curriculum and the methods of instruction, it may be observed that enrollment figures for a decade showed that at least half the students were on the elementary level, where the amount of informa- tion about the United States in the courses appeared to be insignificant except perhaps in Course II* Comparatively few students were enrolled in the advanced courses, where the opportunity to learn about the United States was greatest. Summary After offering a three-year curriculum of six courses in English in 1943 and 1944, the English language Institute in Mexico discovered several factors that inter fered with desirable standards of student achievement* Some of the students had other activities and interests that demanded their attention, and some lacked adequate background or aptitude for the study of English as a for eign language. It was considered essential to maintain the highest possible standards of instruction for the sake of the pres« tige of the institute, the reputation of the Benjamin Franklin Library, and the caliber of the board of directors of the cultural institute. Since Ximited classroom facili ties prevented a large enrollment, it was held that the 616 institute should emphasise the quality of its instruction. To do this, it reorganised the curriculum and Intensified its methods of instruction in 1945* First, it lengthened its curriculum to a sequence of eight regular courses to be covered in four years* Pre paratory courses were established in order to teach larger numbers of students and to serve as a pool from which to select better qualified applicants for the regular begin ning courses* Remedial courses for those deficient in English grammar and conversation courses for those needing to improve their conversational ability were established for students who were unsuccessful in the regular courses but who showed some promise of improving. The institute then proceeded to take a more disci plined approach to its teaching. The primary objective of the courses was to develop an ability to speak and under stand English with facility* Grammatical explanations, the memorisation of speech patterns, reading, and written work were oriented toward developing the oral use of the lan guage* Dictation exercises, which the students were re quired to transcribe to the International Phonetic Alphabet and to memorize and practice, were designed to improve pronunciation* The instruction became highly technical, carefully controlled,, and given under strict academic dis cipline* Individual initiative in the use of the language. in oral and written work was discouraged in the first three years of instruction* The teaching staff was closely supervised. Classes were visited and both, the content and methods of instruc- tion were coordinated by the supervisor of courses and his assistants. Teachers were uniformly required to use phonetic transcriptions and lesson plans with standardized course content. In order to encourage higher achievement# the in-* stitute adopted an aptitude test# attendance regulations and minimum passing standards# and prizes of American books were awarded for outstanding work. Those who failed to meet the minimum standards were excluded from the institute. Although the institute developed a reputation for its high standards and the excellence of its instruction# the highly disciplined approach to English teaching had met with some disapproval by 1950. The desire for high levels of achievement had led to excessive attention to grammar# speech patterns# the use of phonetics, and written assign ments to the exclusion of adequate conversational practice* This resulted in some tension and disappointment among the students, A poll of a representative sample of the stu dents at the institute in 1951 clearly reflected a desire for more conversational practice and raised questions about the use of phonetics#, the length of written, assignments# 618 and the amount of: material covered in the courses* Under new administration after 1950, the institute proceeded to reorganize its instruction to meet these and other problems* It abandoned the four-year curriculum based on the semester system and adopted a three-year curriculum based on an academic year of eleven months divided into tri mesters* The number of regular courses leading to the certificate was increased to nine, and the preparatory* remedial, and corrective conversational courses were elimi nated. All the courses were revised extensively to put greater emphasis on conversational practice, and two courses which were devoted almost entirely to conversation were made part of the regular sequence of courses. Old materials were discarded in several courses and new texts were adopted, The amount of grammatical content, phonetic transcriptions, and written homework was reduced, and testing techniques were simplified. Written work was reoriented toward en couraging the students to use the language as a medium of expression. Since it was found that three years of study still left something to be desired in terms of conversational ability, three fourth-year conversational courses were created as post-graduate courses to be taken after the cer tificate was awarded* The.se courses emphasized oral and ■written composition based on reading. Some of the basic procedures and regulations adopted before 1950 were retained, but in other cases they were modified* Book prizes for the best students in each class and certificates for graduating students were con tinued. Placement examinations, accompanied by interviews, were used to place students in courses best suited to their ability. The minimum passing grade of 75 per cent was re tained, but the regulations no longer threatened with dis missal those who failed a course or exceeded the minimum number of absences* The practice of excluding from class those who arrived late was discontinued. Teachers were allowed greater freedom to determine their own methods of presenting the material and providing conversational practice. Uniform lesson plans were aban doned and teaching procedures to improve instruction were only suggested* Some supervisory control was retained, however, through standardized course content, uniform examinations, visiting classes, individual conferences with teachers, and staff meetings. Although these techniques for the most part succeeded in reorienting the staff toward greater consideration for student interests and needs, there were still two or three senior members on the staff who. continued to emphasize the technical aspects of English rather than, the conversational, approach*. 620 Satisfactory textbooks for teaching English to Spanish-speaking persons were not available in 1942* when classes in. English were first offered in the Benjamin Franklin Library* Accordingly, as one of its first tasks in 1943, the English Language Institute undertook to develop text materials* This work was still incomplete by the end of 1944, and the lengthening of the curriculum to four years in 1945 made it necessary to revise the materials accordingly. Although the care with which the materials were written won approval for them, it also con tributed to delays in having them printed in textbook form. Consequently, the elementary and intermediate courses were taught largely with mimeographed materials until 1950. By that year, three volumes in the series had appeared, but the availability of other texts for teaching English by this time and the need to have the teachers participate more actively in other cultural activities of greater interest to the public resulted in the termination of the publications program. Although one of the objectives of the cultural relations program was to provide opportunities for Latin Americans to become better acquainted with the United States, the primary objective of the texts and of the English courses at the institute was to develop linguistic skills* An obligation to- .impart some knowledge of the 621 United States through texts and classroom discussions was recognized, but it was clearly secondary to teaching the language. It was held that the interest of Mexicans in learning English had to be met adequately as a service to them before meeting the American interest in imparting in" formation about the United States. It was believed that undue emphasis on, such material would take valuable time from the study and practice of the language. An analysis of the text material used in the courses for more than a decade shows that in the introductory course there was virtually no reference to the United States, In the second course and to a somewhat greater extent in the intermediate courses, some information about the United States was introduced in the reading passages accompanying the lessons. The reading consisted for the most part of brief passages on selected American holidays, historical personages, places of historical and cultural interest, and every day experiences one might have as the result of travel through the United States, Some attention was paid to American customs, home life, education, industry, agri culture, geography, literature, art, and government* The material was introductory in nature, however, and only briefly developed, since nearly all the material in the texts was primarily concerned with teaching the language. The greatest amount of information about the United States was found in the advanced courses and in the advanced conversation courses that were created after 1950. These courses used such materials as the armed forces edi- tion of The New York Times during the war. The Reader*s Digest, CollierTsf Life, and collections of short stories by classical as well as modem popular American authors* Although American content* as well as linguistic and peda- gogical objectives* was the reason for selecting such materials* they were designed primarily to provide inter esting reading rather than to survey the American way of life, furthermore, considerable time was allotted in such courses to further study of the language. Since this was still the primary aim at this level of instruction* much of the reading material and many of the themes for oral and written composition bore no particular relationship to the United States* Since they followed the pattern of the text materi als, the elementary courses provided little opportunity for the classroom discussions on the United States* Attention was focused primarily on learning the language as such. Furthermore, the limited vocabulary and lack of conversa tional skill of the students made classroom discussions difficult at this level. Reading materials on the inter mediate level encouraged to some extent discussions about life in the United States, and the advanced courses 623 provided, somewhat greater* opportunity to focus attention on such subject matter. Classroom discussions intentionally avoided any organised attempt to correct stereotype misconceptions about the United States or its policies in international relations. It was believed that any attempt to do so would not be accepted by the students and would be self-defeating. Furthermore, it was held that it would divert attention from the students’ primary objective of learning the lan guage. Controversial topics, therefore, were generally avoided by the teachers, and they were rather infrequently brought up by the students. Nevertheless, there was occa sionally a discussion on a controversial topic involving the United States and Mexico. The mention of Texas nearly always brought out some expression of resentment, and there were a few discussions on racial relations and less often on economic aid to Latin America. Other references to con flicts between the United States and Mexico, whether cur rent or historical, were rare or non-existent. Current issues within Mexico and the personal experiences of the students with Americans were more likely to be the basis for student-inspired discussions. Despite the general infrequency of discussions on controversial questions, the teaching staff agreed that a truthful, frank, and objective approach to them, was the best contribution to mutual understanding between Mexicans and Americans. It was considered essential to establish and maintain the reliability and credibility of the insti* tute as a source of information. In sum, although the primary emphasis of the regu- lar courses of instruction was on the English language, some information about the United States was included in courses above the elementary level. In general, the courses were not organized to present this information systematically, but as' the student progressed through the intermediate to the advanced courses, he encountered a greater amount of such material on each level, It is esti mated that those students who completed the entire curricu lum of regular courses acquired an appreciable amount of general knowledge about the United States, In order to estimate the value of the regular courses as a source of Information about the United States, it is necessary to take into account the distribution of students in these courses. During the five-year period from 1945 to 1949, when the curriculum consisted of pre paratory classes and a four-year schedule of regular courses, approximately 70 per cent of the students were enrolled in elementary classes. During the war years and In 1952 and 1953., when the curriculum consisted of three 625 years of regular courses, approximately half the students were in such classes* The reorganization of the curriculum and course content in the period from 1950 to 1953 appeared to en courage students to remain longer at the institute. From 1945 to 1951, enrollment statistics show that approximately one-fourth the students were in the Intermediate courses. In 1952, their total rose to 3? per cent, and in 1953 it increased still further to about 43 per cent. Noteworthy improvement in the total number and in the percentage of students taking the advanced courses was also observed. In 1947f less than 4 per cent of the students were enrolled in advanced classes. In the first term of 1953. about 10 per cent of the students were in the advanced classes. To conclude, there was little question about the ability of the institute to attract all the students for which if had space available and to teach English to the more capable and persistent. The difficulties of learning a foreign language and the limited amount of conversational practice, however, combined with the strict academic dis cipline and drive for linguistic perfection until 1950 must have been source of disappointment, and perhaps even irri tation, to some of the students, particularly those in the elementary classes. Moreover, since students in these classes concentrated almost entirely on the linguistic 626 aspects of the courses* relatively little information about the United States was disseminated to at least half the students each year for more than a decade. On the other hand* it is estimated that those who completed three or four years of study probably became reasonably proficient in the language. The reorganization of the curriculum and the increased enrollment on the intermediate and advanced levels after 1950 appears to have increased the number of Mexicans who had some ability to use the English language. Whether the revised courses resulted in improved mastery of English for those who com pleted the entire curriculum, it is impossible to say. From an informational point of view, the increase in total enrollment to more than 4,200 students and the marked increase in the percentage taking the intermediate and advanced courses suggest that the institute was more effective in disseminating information about the United States after 1952. The fact that the institute still en rolled but 10 per cent of its students in the advanced courses, where the amount of such information was greatest, nevertheless, appears to have left some room for improve ment in the future* CHAPTER VIII SPECIAL COURSES AND ADVANCED STUDIES Introduction Besides the regular curriculum in English* the Mexican-American Cultural Institute in Its first ten years of existence offered a variety of other courses to meet special needs and interests. Among these were special courses and services for Mexican educational institutions, language courses for special groups and purposes, and courses on American literature, history, and thought. It also sponsored a creative writing center and made an un successful attempt to establish a center for advanced studies that would develop courses and activities of some cultural and intellectual content above the level of In struction in language. Although these courses and activities were intended in general to enhance the value of the cultural institute in the program, of cultural relations, the instituted ex perience with them indicates that they were not uniformly successful from all points of view* Any estimate of the value of the special and cultural courses to the insti tute's program, therefore, must not only consider their content but also the problems they presented. These prob lems and the difficulties encountered in attempting to 6 2 8 establish a tenter for advanced studies point to certain limitations on the capacity of the institute to contribute to the cultural relations program. Special Courses 'the special language courses differed from the regular courses in that they were designed for specific groups of people or for special purposes. Some were offered as a service to assist other phases of the cultural relations program, and some were developed to reach ele ments of the population not contacted by the regular courses. While some of these courses were offered in the instituted own buildings, many were taught elsewhere in Mexico City. This was the case with several special courses taught in Mexican educational institutions between 1944 and 1946, Although the special courses tended to be different from each other, they often created similar prob lems for the institute. Educational institutions and government agencies,~~ In 1943 and 1944, the director of the English Language Institute conducted a survey of the foreign language offer ings at the National School of Anthropology and taught a course in methodology for teachers there. In connection with these services, the institute was invited to teach the beginning and second courses there in 1944, Although the .assistant director of the institute, who taught the courses, 6 2 9 reported an enrollment o£ forty-four students In March, the actual attendance fluctuated greatly. A total of sixty-two students appeared at some time or other during the course, but by the end of the semester the enrollment dropped to twenty*five, A considerable amount of absence and tardi ness interfered with the effectiveness of the instruction. Nevertheless, the courses were continued in the fall se mester with a total enrollment in the two classes of fifty- two. In the spring of 1944, the English Language Insti tute was invited to teach two special courses in English at the Colegio de Mexico, a semi-official institute of higher studies and research. These courses were designed to pre pare nineteen students for a visit of a distinguished American historian who had been Invited to conduct a seminar in English*^ Because attendance at the English courses and adequate preparation for them interfered with ^Albert H. Marckwardt, Resident Director, "Report of the English Language Institute in Mexico for March, 1944," Mexico City (processed); idem. "A Critical Examina tion of the Purposes, Sphere, and Possible Extent of Government Sponsored English Teaching Activities in Mexico," English Language Institute, Mexico City, October, 1944, ? p. 5-6 £typewritten); "Enrollment Figures as of Sept* 1, 944." (Unsigned MS in pencil in the files of the English Language Institute, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City*) 2Supra, p* 363; Albert H* Marckwardt, Resident Director, "Report of the English Language Institute in Mexico for the Period December 1, 1943-March 1, 1944," Mexico City (processed) * • 630 the regular work o£ the students, however, the Colegio de Mexico discontinued the courses after one semester. In 1945, the Mexican School of Library Science decided to provide English classes for its students. The English Language Institute cooperated with this plan by supplying two teachers for two beginning classes three times a week. The institute used its own materials for instruction.^ This work was continued in 1946 in the classes of the Library School held in the Palace of Fine Arts* No request was received in the spring of 1947, how** ever, to continue these services. In the fall of 1946, the English Language Institute was asked by the Ministry of Communications to give a course in English to the employees of that government agency. The tuition fees, amounting to 120 pesos per month, were paid to the institute for the services of one of the locally employed teachers. By the spring semester of 1947, ^Marckwardt, , f A Critical Examination of the Pur poses* Sphere, and Possible Extent of Government Sponsored English Teaching Activities in Mexico/’ pp. 3**4, ^Hazel Mitchell, r , The English Language Institute in Mexico/’ Mexico City, December, 1946, p. 29 (processed). 5 Francis E. Townsend, Supervisor of Courses, "English Language Institute in Mexico 1946*” Mexico City* n, d, (typewritten); idem. "Reporting of Statistical and General Activities.of the English Language Institute in Mexico from January 15th to March 1st, 1947/’ Mexico City (processed)* 6 3 1 this course had been abandoned because of the lack of interest of the students*^ Aviation technicians and mechanics. - •'During the Second 'World War, the United States Government offered a civil aviation training program to Latin American pilots, technicians, and mechanics under the guidance of the Civil Aeronautics Administration and, after 1943, under the general supervision of the Interdepartmental Committee on Scientific and Cultural Cooperation. Mexico was one of the Latin American countries that sent its aviation personnel 7 to the United States for special training* In operating this program, the Civil Aeronautics Administration had found that in many cases the personnel selected for this training had an inadequate knowledge of English. Consequently, their progress during the first few weeks of study was retarded. To remedy this situation, the embassy suggested to the cultural institute that a special course in technical aviation vocabulary be given to the ^Idem, "English Language Institute in Mexico Bul letin, l f Mexico City, September 17, 1946 (processed); idem. "Reporting of Statistical and General Activities of the English Language Institute in Mexico from January 15th to March 1st, 1947," Mexico City* ^Howard W. Sinclair, "Cooperation with the American Republics in Civil Aviation," The Program of the Inter" departmental Committee on Scientific and Cultural Cooper ation. Department of State Publication 2994 (Washington:: U* S, Government Printing Office, .1947).,, pp„ 33*41., 632 O group of mechanics and technicians selected in 1944, Accordingly, the English Language Institute organized courses in English for Mexican aviation personnel,^ The varied ability of the students made it diffi cult to organize the content of the courses. In 1944, it was found that the poorest student had had but two months of English instruction and the best had had some experience as a teacher of English, The rest of the class ranged between these two extremes,A similar experience was reported in 1945* In the second year, it was discovered that all but one of the students were so in need of ele mentary instruction that it was impossible to introduce the technical vocabulary for which the course was intended.^ An additional handicap was found in the matter of tardiness and absence. Five of the eighteen students never attended at all. Of the 221 potential student hours for ^Letter from Charles H. Stevens, American Embassy, to Daniel.F, Rubin de la Borbolla, Executive Director, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, March 24, 1944, ^Marckwardt, T t A Critical Examination of the Pur poses, Sphere, and Possible Extent of Government Sponsored English Teaching Activities in Mexico,, f p, 2j Howard W. Tessen, Supervisor of Courses, "Report on Intensive Course in English for Aviation Scholarship Holders,, r English Lan guage Institute, Mexico City, April 6, 1945* ^Marckwardt, "A Critical Examination of the Pur poses, Sphere, and Possible Extent of Government Sponsored English Teaching Activities in Mexico," ^* 2* •^Tessert, loc*. cit* 6 3 3 the seventeen sessions o£ the course, there was a 25 per cent rate of absence and an 18 per cent rate of tardiness* During the last week of instruction, absence was at its worst because the students were busy arranging official documents for their travel to the United States* Further more, little time was spent on outside preparation. In sura, the instructor of the course reported: The course was not an abysmal failure, nor was it a booming success. All of the students have at least a stepping stone to a more substantial knowledge of the English language. , ♦ , Those more advanced than rank beginners certainly benefited most from the course* As in the case of every course given to people of vary ing ability and background in a language stupendous results cannot be expected. Had the attendance, arrival on time, and outside preparation been better, the course would have been far more successful* As it was, it served as a helpful brush-up on English for the majority of the students.12 Members of the medical profession.--Similar diffi culties were encountered by the institute in teaching English to the members of the medical profession. The records of the institute show that at least four special courses were taught to persons of this group. In the fall of 1943, during the course of a special seminar for holders of fellowships for advanced study in the United States, a group of doctors requested a special course In medical terminology. The director of the English Language Institute organised the course especially for ; X2lbid, 634 twelve, doctors* The course was concerned primarily with translating the layman's terms for parts of the body., diseases, remedies, and similar terms associated with medi cine* The course also covered common questions and expres sions that a doctor needs to know in conversing with 13 English-speaking patients* This was the first such course given for a medical group, and the practice was not resumed until 1950* Xn the spring of that year, a beginning and an intermediate course were given at the Hospital de Enferme- dades de Nutrlcion for doctors and medical students who found it impossible to attend the institute for regular classes because of their working hours* There were twelve students in each class.^ In September, 1950, the institute was requested to offer a course at the Military Hospital to a class of thirty interns. Since these doctors were unable to leave the hospital to attend classes at the institute, a regular teacher with Institute materials was sent to give the ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 14,282 to the Department of State, Washington, November 18, 1943. ^Memorandum from John Elmendorf,, Executive Direc tor, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, to Edmund R„ Murphy, Assistant Cultural Attache, American Embassy, Mexico City, April 2.1, 195CU 6 3 5 course three days a week as a special class*^ The interest in 1950 in special medical courses prompted the institute to offer a course in the institute building for doctors and nurses in January.* 1951* Twenty** three students enrolled. The course consisted of dialogues, film strips, movies, discussion of medical topics, and remedial grammar based on the students1 actual errors. The basic text was one that had been prepared at the cultural institute in Bogota, Colombia, in 1945 to meet a similar need* Although all the students were required to have some knowledge of English in order to be admitted, the varied ability of the students presented a problem. Furthermore, because of professional obligations, attendance was irregu lar,^ For these reasons, when a similar course was can celled for lack of sufficient registration the following term, the institute placed the remaining applicants in the 17 regular classes. ^Memorandum from John Elmendorf, Executive Direc tor, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, to Dorsey Fisher, Public Affairs Officer, "Weekly Report of Activities at the Institute*1 ' Mexico City, September 12, 1950. ■^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 2,613 to the Department of State, Washington* April 17* 1951 (enclosure, "Quarterly Report of the Mexican~North American: Institute")* ■ ^Tdem, Despatch No. 437, August 16, 1951 (enclo sure, "Second. Quarterly Narrative and Statistical Report," Mexican-American. Cultural Institute}, 636 Low-*income groups*— The cultural institute reported three experiences teaching members of the low**income groups of Mexico City. The first of these occurred in the regular classes during the Second World War. The other two occurred with special classes in 1952 and 1953. During the first year of teaching English in the Benjamin Franklin Library* it was noted that the classes contained a considerable number of artisans and manual laborers. As time went on* they diminished in number and their places were taken by white-collar workers and profes sional groups. As this trend continued into 1944* some consideration was given to teaching certain members of the 18 working classes in special classes.4* The interest of the English Language Institute in 1943 and 1944 in the laboring group was characterized by a mixture of patriotic and scholarly motives: Aside from the cultural relations value of this move* for there appears to be a considerable latent antagonism to the United States among this group, it would constitute a valuable test of the validity of our materials among the less literate.i" •^Albert H. Marckwardt, Resident Director, "Present, Assured Future, and Contemplated Activities of the English Language Institute in Mexico at the Biblioteca Benjamin Franklin," Mexico City, June* 1943 (typewritten); idem, memorandum to the Board of Directors of the Mexican- . American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, March* 1944. ^Marckwardt, "Present, Assured Future, and Contem plated Activities of the English Language Institute in Mexico at the Biblioteca. Benjamin Franklin," p« IQ* 637 By early 1944, Interest had been focused on the needs of the braceros* or farm hands, who were being sent to the United States, The possibility of being of real service, however, was considered remote: Moreover, since many of these people are only slightly literate there is a special teaching problem here, which is very important and certainly worth serious investigation. The single group which in view of the social and economic situation needs such in* struction at the present time is that of the braceros. Obviously it is beyond our facilities to teach more than an infinitesimal portion of the group* It seems reasonable therefore to conclude that our service here can best be of an experimental and exploratory nature,^ Aside from a consideration of the values and needs for special classes for the laboring groups, however, no further action was taken during the war years. Because the working classes were burdened with after-work fatigue and were untrained in the elements of grammar of their own lan guage, they learned so slowly that it was necessary to go over a topic several times for them* By the end of 1944, the Institute had discovered that they were a definite handicap in the regular classes and plans were made for an aptitude test that would screen them out* Since the insti tute considered that it was not ready to prepare the neces sary materials to teach the working classes in special ! ^Memorandum from Marckwardt to the Board of Direc* , •tors* Mexicau-Amarlean Cultural Institute, March* 1944, 21 classes, the project was dropped. The next effort to reach the laboring and low- income groups was in 1952. In that year, the Benjamin Franklin Library opened a branch in the Casa Multifamiliar in Mexico City. This is a large, multiple dwelling housing unit built by the Mexican Government. Residents of this housing project were chiefly low-salaried government workers for whom rents and utilities were kept at a mini mum, In general, they and most of the people of the im mediate neighborhood came from environments where reading had played little part in their lives and their reading level was generally low. Nevertheless, they were con sidered an important group to be reached as members of the lower middle class.^ In connection with the activities of the library, arrangements were made for English classes to be given by the cultural institute.^ Two beginning classes were opened at the Casa Multifamiliar in July, 1952. Active en rollment in the two courses dwindled to one group the ^Marckwardt, "A Critical Examination of the Pur poses, Sphere, and Possible Extent of Government Sponsored English Teaching Activities in Mexico, “ pp, 4-6. ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 168 to the Department of State, Washington, July 17, 1952; idem. Despatch No. 1,475, January 9, 1953 (enclosing, "Semi-Annual Evaluation Report of US1S Activities in Mexico").* 2'3'ldem,), Despatch No* ■ 1.68* .July X7* 1,952.« 639 second trimester* When it came time to register far a third trimester of work in January, 1953, interest was so lacking that the few remaining students were sent to the cultural institute to the regular classes* The experiment was considered unsuccessful, and the classes at the housing project were discontinued*^ The third effort to reach the low*income groups came in 1953. At the suggestion of the labor attache in the American Embassy, the president of the Mexican govern ment workers' union requested the institute to give free classes for the members of the union in their headquarters. The board of directors of the institute was at first in clined to limit its participation to the extent of recom mending a teacher which the union itself could employ in order to avoid further requests of this type. On second consideration, however, it was considered advisable by the board to maintain good relations with the unions. Accord ingly, two elementary English courses were offered by the institute at the union headquarters in the spring and ^Interview with Audrey Wright, Director of Courses, Mexic an-'American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, July 27, 1953. ■^Minutes of the Meeting of the Board of Directors, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, Janu ary 14, 1953 (typewritten, in Spanish)* 6 4 0 summer trimesters of 1953* Something of the importance attached to this group is indicated by the fact that the Department of State contributed $200 to support the classes* The union con tributed 600 pesos* Since most of the students could not afford to pay the tuition charges, they were admitted to 27 the classes free of charge* The courses were inaugurated in the union's audi torium before an audience of 400 or 500 union members. The inaugural ceremony included speeches by the secretary- general of the union, the labor attache of the embassy, and the director of the institute. Plans were being made in the spring of 1953 not only to continue the courses but 28 also to extend them eventually to other labor groups* The institute optimistically reported in the spring of 1953 that the classes "have met with great success,"^ On the other hand, it was later explained that not all the students who took Course X the first term actually passed ^Francis C. St. John, Executive Director, "Semi- Annual Report, January 1-June 30, 1953," Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, June 30, 1953, p. 2* ^Idem, "Academic Report for the First Quarter, 1953 (Narrative)," Mexican-American Gultural Institute, Mexico City, April, 1953* 28Ibid* ^IbicL 641 the course, They were permitted* nevertheless* to continue into Course II the second term in order to assemble enough persons to warrant continuing the instruction. There were 30 thirty-seven students enrolled in the second term. Many of these students were allowed to continue because of the difficulty of setting up a new Course I for those that had failed and because of the possibility of disappointments for the better students if Course II were not offered. In general* the director of courses at the cultural institute considered that branch operations of this type were not satisfactory. Radio classes.— The week that the Benjamin Franklin Library opened its doors to the Mexican public in 1942 it began broadcasting English lessons by radio. Financial responsibility for the activity during the war years was assumed by the “coordination committee’ 1 in Mexico City with funds from the Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs. Programs were broadcast over the radio station of 32 the National University of Mexico. ^Francis C« St. John* Executive Director* "Second Quarterly Report* 1953; Narrative Report to Accompany Statistical Academic Report* u Mexican-American Cultural Institute* Mexico City, July, 1953 (typewritten). ^Interview with Audrey Wright, July 27* 1953. ■^American Embassy* Mexico City, Despatch No* 14,282 to the Department of State* Washington, November 18, 1943. 642 During 1942, the radio lessons were under the direction, of a teacher and a committee of advanced students who undertook to prepare and edit the script, for which final approval was given by the radio office of the univer s i t y * - ^ When the English Language Institute formally began its operations In July, 1943, it assumed academic responsi bility for this phase of English teaching. It proceeded to revise the materials "In accordance with the pedagogical and linguistic approach of the Institute,It also assigned a regular staff member to conduct the courses. These were divided into two sections, beginning and Inter mediate. Students were assigned homework, which they sent in for correction, and they were given a final examination. Those who passed the course were given a certificate.-^ By 1945, the radio courses consisted of a beginning and an intermediate course, each of which was broadcast for fifteen minutes. The beginning course was broadcast three times a week before a studio audience of some 200 students, who participated In the program and remained afterwards for 3%. M. Lydenberg, "Director *s Report for Septem ber, " Benj arain Franklin Library, Mexico City, September, 1942 (mimeographed), -^Marckwardt, "Present, Assured Future, and Con templated Activities of the English Language Institute in Mexico at the Biblioteca Benjamin Franklin," p. 8, ■^Rudolph B, Gjelsness, "Report of the Acting Librarian,"’ Benjamin Franklin Library, Mexico City, July, 1943 (mimeographed). 643 practice of the materials presented during the broadcast* The intermediate course continued the practice of assigning homework, and the students of the radio audience sent their papers in to be corrected. From one to three advanced stu dents served as the studio audience for purposes of in struction, ^ The classes were continued in similar fashion over 37 two radio stations on a national network in 1946. In September, 1946, the lessons by radio were returned to the radio station of the National University as funds from the United States Government were no longer available.^ With the beginning of the academic year in 1947, the classes were discontinued entirely on instructions from the em bassy. ^ They were never resumed.^ Formal enrollment in the radio classes was never large. In August, 1942, there were 180 persons who took 3%litchell, op. cit,, pp. 27-28. ^Charles Foore, "Everybody's Learnin* English," American Society Bulletin (Mexico City), VIXI (July, 1946), 11. ^Townsend, "English Language Institute in Mexico Bulletin." ~ ^Idem, "Reporting of Statistics and General Activities of the English Language Institute in Mexico from January 15th to March 1st, 1947." ^Memorandum from Elmendorf to Murphy, April 21, :X95Ch 644 the final examination.*^ In the fall of 1943* some 300 students were enrolled in the course and regularly sent in papers for correction. Officials of the university's radio station estimated that this represented about 2,000 listen** ers, most of whom were residents of the Federal District* since the university's radio station was not a powerful one.^ In the fall of 1946, when the program was on the national network, the two classes had an enrollment of 740 students. Estimates of the total audience were not re ported. ^ Little is known of the effect of the program on the Mexican radio audience, since such analyses were not made by the institute. Nor do they appear in the reports of the embassy. In view of the crowded condition of the regular classes at the institute, they may have served as a means of maintaining interest among a few who were not able to enroll. On the other hand, it is probable that they also stimulated some interest in the study of English. Since they were beginning and intermediate courses taught "in M. Lydenberg, "Director's Report for August, 1942," Benjamin Franklin Library, Mexico City (mimeo graphed) . ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 14,282 to the Department of State, Washington, November 18, 1943. ^Francis E. Townsend, Supervisor of Courses, "Reporting of Activities of the English Language Institute : in Mexico for July-Dee ember Semester 1946," Mexico City, January, 1947, p. 7 (mimeographed)* 645 accordance with the pedagogical and linguistic approach1' of the English Language Institute, whatever influence they may have had was undoubtedly chiefly linguistic rather than cultural in the broader sense* Commercial courses*--In the spring of 1949, the cul- tural Institute offered a course In commercial English for the first time* Sixteen students enrolled. It was con tinued in the second semester of the same year with an en rollment of twenty,^4 The course was offered again in the spring term of 1950, The course content included punctu ation, spelling, form and types of business letters, memo randa, summaries, and telegraph messages. The text in use was Davis, Lingham, and Stone, Modem Business English, a publication of the Armed Forces Institute of 1940.45 The second half of the course was suspended in the fall of the same year during the period of transition from the semester system to the trimester system* Most of the students taking the special course were unable to attend five days a week as required during the second term that y e a r . 4 6 ^Imart (student newspaper at the cultural insti tute, Mexico City), April, 1949; William F* Byess, Executive Director, ’ Monthly Statement of the Institute Mexicano- Norteamericano de Relacianes Culturales, ” Mexico City, July 31, 1949* ^Memorandum from Elmendorf to Murphy, April 21, 1950. ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 1,075 to the Department of State, Washington, October 24, 1950 (enclosure, ’ ’ Third Quarterly Report of the Mexican-American i Cultural Institute"). 646 The course was again offered in the first trimester of 195X with thirteen students.^ In the second trimester, It was cancelled for Insufficient registration, but during the third trimester of the same year it was again offered on demand of the students, and eighteen registered for it.48 During 1952, It was not offered the first trimester for lack of suitable texts, but on student demand it was again offered during the second trimester of 1952.^ It was taught again in the third trimester of 1952, but due to the departure of the teacher who had built up a fallowing for the course, it was not given in the spring of 1953."^ Spanish courses*“-When the Benjamin Franklin Library was in the planning stage in the fall of 1941, the General Advisory Committee of the Division of Cultural Relations was of the opinion that the library should offer Spanish ^Idem, Despatch No, 2,613, April 17, 1951 (enclo sure, ’’ Quarterly Report of the Mexican-North American Institute”)* ^Idem, Despatch No. 437, August 16, 1951 (enclo sure, "Second Quarterly Narrative and Statistical Report,“ Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City); idem. Despatch No* 1,854, February 8, 1952 (enclosure, "Third 1951 Quarterly Report of the Binational Center, July 1 to September 31, 1951"). Idem, Despatch No. 272, August 4, 1952 (enclosure, "Second Quarterly Report of the Mexican-North American Cul tural Institute"). 50St. John, "Academic Report for the First Quarter, 1953 (Narrative)*" 647 classes to American nationals resident in Mexico City.^ The teaching of Spanish to Foreign Service personnel and to resident. Americans soon became the practice in other cul tural centers in Latin America shortly after they were C 9 opened. But# although the charter of the cultural insti tute indicates that it clearly intended to encourage the study of Spanish, at least in the United States, Spanish classes were not offered until after the reorganization of the institute in 1947*"*^ In February of 1948, the cultural institute offered five classes in Spanish to resident Americans on elementary, intermediate, and advanced levels, Since it had been ^Minutes of the Meeting of September 17-18, 1941, General Advisory Committee, Division of Cultural Relations, Department of State, Washington, pp* 10-11 (mimeographed)* ^Edmund R. Murphy, "Cooperation with Cultural Centers in the Other American Republics,u The Program of the Interdepartmental Committee on Scientific and Cultural Cooperation, Department of State Publication 2994 (Washing- ton; U. S, Government Printing Office, 1947), pp* 26, 31. ^ Supra, p. 367. -^Andy G* Wilkison, "Biblioteca Benjamin Franklin, pp. cit., pp. 20-25; Francis E. Townsend, Supervisor of Courses, "The Historical Antecedents of the English Lan guage Institute in Mexico, ” Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, May 1, 1947 (photostat). Although = Mr. Wilkison and Mr. Townsend surveyed the activities of their respective institutions for their entire history before 1947, neither one mentions that Spanish classes were offered. Nor are they mentioned in the other reports of the two institutions between 1942 and 1947. 648 approved by the Veterans Administration for tuition, five of its students were studying under the !'G. I, Bill of Rights*According to a newspaper announcement, the classes were to meet three hours per week, they would be taught by experienced Mexican teachers, and they were to stress the spoken, rather than the written language* Tuition was set at double that for the English classes at 80 pesos per course* Approximately forty persons regis tered* It was estimated that half of them were employees of the embassy and other United States Government agencies in Mexico City.^ In the second semester of 1948, only fifteen stu dents registered for one class in Spanish, and two addi tional classes were disbanded because of insufficient enrollment*^ Enrollment in Spanish appears to have ■^William F* Byess, Executive Director, "Monthly Statement of the Institute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales,1 1 Mexico City, February 29, 1948, " ^Novedades (Mexico City), January 29, 1948. -^Memorandum from William F. Byess, Executive Di rector, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, to Dorsey Fisher, Public Affairs Officer, American Embassy, Mexico City, "Activities of the Cultural Institute, Period Ending February 29, n March 1, 1948* 5°Idem, "Activities of the Cultural Institute, June 27*July 10," July 10, 1948. 649 remained at that level in 1949 and 1950* Interest In the Institute's Spanish classes im proved somewhat in 1951. In the first trimester of that year* fifty-seven students enrolled In three classes, one on each level. After Easter, a new Spanish conversation class was formed by the wife of a prominent member of the board of directors of the institute. It was organized especially for the wives of officers of the embassy, and the course was organized around such cultural subjects as art, music, theater, and the ballet, with some remedial work in grammar.^ In the second and third trimesters of 1951, the advanced course was dropped for insufficient registration, but the special class for the wives of em- 61 bassy officers and their friends was continued. In 1952, enrollment in Spanish continued to in crease. Enough students for five sections enrolled in two Idem. ’’ Activities of the Cultural Institute February 7-13,” February 15, 1949; memorandum from Kenneth Croft, Director of Courses, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, to Dorsey Fisher, Public Affairs Officer, Ameri can Embassy, ’’ Activities of the Cultural Center, Febru ary 6-15,” Mexico City, February 16, 1950. ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 2,613 to the Department of State, Washington, April 17, 1951 (enclosure, "Quarterly Pveport of the Mexican-North American Institute”). ^Idem. Despatch No* 437, August 16, 1951 (enclo sure, nSecond Quarterly Narrative and Statistical Report,” Mexican-American Cultural Institute); idem. Despatch No* 1,854, February 8, 1952 (enclosure, "Third 1951 Quarterly Report of the Binational Center, July 1 to September 31, 1951")., . ‘ 650 elementary, two intermediate, and one advanced class. While the texts and materials for the first two courses were produced in Mexico* the advanced class used Selec- clones del Readers Digest in Spanish as the basis for a conversation course. In the third trimester of the same year, there were only enough students to warrant one sec tion of each of the three levels.^ In the spring tri- mester of 1953, there were again five Spanish classes. In the second term, the increasing demand for English and the limited building space limited the number of Spanish classes to three.^ The small, irregular enrollment in the Spanish classes does not appear to result from any lack of effort on the part of the institute. In 194$, it was reported that, "Unfortunately Americans have never shown much inter- est in taking these classes although they have always been Idem, Despatch No. 2,498, April 22, 1952 (en closure, "First Quarterly Report of 1952 of the Institute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales"). ^Idem, Despatch No, 1,010, November 6, 1952 (en closure, "1952 Third Quarterly Report of the Mexican-North American Cultural Institute"), ^Francis C* St* John, Executive Director, "Statis tical Report for Academic.Program," Mexican-American Cul tural Institute, Mexico City, March 31, 1952; idem. "Second Quarterly Report 1953; Narrative Report to Accompany Sta tistical Academic Report#" 651 publicized.1' ^ A fuller explanation was offered by the director in 1953: The number of students enrolled in the institute’s Spanish classes remains smaller than the institute would wish. Partly this is due to the make-up of the American group, which is composed of long-term resi dents who speak Spanish already and of transients who are in Mexico for too short a time to take a formal course. There is, however, a sizeable number of Ameri cans who should be drawn into our Spanish courses, and every effort is being made to attract their interest. A new teacher . . . has been hired, the program has been altered and improved, and increased interest on the part of the students is already apparent.66 Other opportunities for Americans to study Spanish also existed, and this may have been one reason for the lack of enrollment at the institute. The summer session of the National University offered a variety of courses in Spanish especially for Americans on all levels of instruc tion.. The comparatively new Mexico City College offered a full program of Spanish courses throughout the year. Fur thermore, the need to know Spanish in Mexico City was some what minimized by the fact that many Mexicans of all classes in Mexico City spoke English. To this situation, the institute itself had already made a contribution. Francis E« Townsend, wThe Cultural Center in Mexico City/' Department of State, Washington, November, 1948 {typewritten}* ^St* John, Academic .Report for the First Quarter . 1953 (Narrative). 652 Courses in American Literature, History, and Thought Courses in American literature*— The records of the cultural institute show that in the decade from 1944 to 1953 four courses in American literature were taught at the institute. They were given in 1944, 1947, 1948, and 1950. The need for such a course in a program of cultural relations became apparent to the resident director of the English Language Institute in Mexico in the summer of 1943: Although in the strict sense this is not an English language project, it is reasonable to raise the ques- tion . , . whether an introduction to American litera ture as a means of understanding American civilization is not the responsibility of one of the agencies now operating here in the interest of cultural relations. The National University offers nothing in this respect; the Instituto Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales is not organized in such a fashion that it could do this very easily, and the Biblioteca Beniamin Franklin is active in so many other directions.6/ Xt was not until a year later, however, that the director of the English Language Institute had the oppor tunity to offer a course in American literature. A group of Mexican teachers of English who had been taking courses in advanced English grammar and teaching methods requested it in their response to a questionnaire circulated by the director. There were twenty-four teachers in the class, seventeen from public schools, four from private schools, r -r Marckwardt, ^Present, Assured future, and Con-’ templated, Activities of the, English. Language Institute in. Mexico at the. Biblioteca, Benjamin. Franklin,,p.,- 10.. and three who gave private lessons. The course met for one hour twice a week for a series of twenty“four lectures over 68 a period of three months. In the fall of 1947, the Department of State had funds available that made possible the assignment of Dr. Stanley T. Williams, Sterling Professor of American Literature at Yale University, to the cultural institute 69 for nearly three months as a visiting lecturer. 7 Begin* ning in October of that year, Dr. Williams delivered a series of seventeen lectures in English to two classes, which met two nights a week at the Benjamin Franklin Li brary. The course was offered free to members of the institute, but others were required to pay a special regis- 70 tration fee of 10 pesos. The series of lectures was conducted as a regular course. Assignments of required reading were made from a previously prepared bibliography, ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No* 18,555 to the Department of State, Washington, July 3, 1944* 6%. S., Department of State, Airgram No. A-526 to the American Embassy, Mexico City, June 23, 1947, Dr. Williams had lived in Spain at various times and had done research on the inter-relations of Spanish and Spanish American literature with literature of the United States, He was the author of many studies in the field of American literature, including The American Spirit in Letters and American Literature* U« S., Department of State, Press Release No. 705* August 30* 1947, ^ "Course in American Literature, , f Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, ru 1 p. (mimeographed announcement.) « 654 the schedule of lectures with precise dates was distributed, and a final examination was given to those who were formally registered. The minimum attendance at the two courses was fifty and the maximum was more than one hundred. About half the students were Mexican, and the others were Ameri- 71 can, English, German, and other nationalities. The third course in American literature to be offered at the cultural institute was given in the second semester of 1948. It was scheduled this time primarily as a course for regular institute students two evenings a week in sessions one hour and a half long. It was taught in English, and students from Course V and above were per- 77 mitted to enroll. The tuition fee was 40 pesos. The instructor was Rand Morton, who held the A, B» degree in American literature from the University of the South and who had been doing graduate work at the National University of Mexico since 1945, Supporting the sixteen lectures were sixteen discussion periods and a bibliography of assigned 73 readings in both English and Spanish. 71 '^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No, 5,170 to the Department of State, Washington, December 9, 1947* Iman (student newspaper at the cultural institute, Mexico City),July 1, 1948, ^William F, Byess, Executive Director, ’ ’ Monthly Statement of the Institute Mexicano^Norteamericana de Rela* = clones Culturales,” Mexico City, July 31, 1948 (enclosure* "Course Outline, American Literature* Colonial, to I860," 15 pp.:,, mimeographed),, The executive director of the culture! institute taught the fourth course In American literature in the spring terra of 1950* It consisted of lectures* assigned readings, and discussions on representative authors. It was designed as a survey course to cover both semesters, but only the first part was given.^ The periods of time covered in the courses varied. The first one was a general survey of American literature with emphasis on the late eighteenth and the nineteenth 7 5 centuries. The second one, a modification of a course given by Dr. Williams at Yale University for some time, briefly surveyed the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries in two lectures and then emphasized the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.^ The third was a survey of American literature from the colonial period to the Civil War. It was nearly evenly divided between the colonial period and 7 / Memorandum from Elmendorf to Murphy, April 21, 1950; American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 1,075 to the Department of State, Washington, October 24, 1950 (en closure, "Third Quarterly Report of Mexican-American Cul tural Institute"), ^Marckwardt, "Present, Assured Future, and Con templated Activities of the English Language Institute in Mexico at the Biblioteca Benjamin Franklin," p. 10* ^Letter from Stanley T* Williams, New Haven, Con necticut, to the present writer, Washington, March, n. d,, 1953; American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 5,170 to the Department of State, Washington, December 9, 1947, 6 5 6 the early nineteenth century,^ Since they were survey courses* in general they covered representative authors and the principal literary genres» They included the novel* short story* drama* poetry* essays* and literary criticism. Some attention was given to regional literature and to minor writers, particu larly in the third course, Although the four courses covered different periods of time and emphasized different aspects of American litera- tore* the four instructors agreed to a considerable extent on a broadly cultural approach* All were concerned with the presentation of American thought* including political thought, although the second course was apparently somewhat more narrowly literary in approach than the others. The others were especially concerned with historical* political, economic and social backgrounds of the literature being studied. Among the topics discussed in connection with American literature were colonial settlements* Puritanism, ^Byess, "Monthly Statement of the Institute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales," July 31* 1948 (enclosure* "Course Outline* American Literature* Colonial to 1860"). ^American Embassy* Mexico City* Despatch No. 18,555 to the Department of State* Washington, July 3, 1944; idem. Despatch No. 5*170* December 9> 1947; Byess, "Monthly State ment of the Institute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones . Culturales," July 31* 1948 (enclosure*, "Course Outline, American Literature, Colonial to I860"}; memorandum from Elmendorf to Murphy, April 21, 1950. 657 the rise of eighteenth-century rationalism, the political theory and literature of the American Revolution, and the democratic tradition. Occasional references to modem patterns of thought and conduct -were interpolated in con- 79 nection with discussions on these topics. The instructor of the first course reported that its purpose was "to direct attention toward our literature as a reflection of that which is typical of the intellectual life and social problems of the United States*" He reasoned as follows: First of all, as the course is outlined, it em bodies the '’ history of ideas1' approach which is rela tively new here, and particularly so when applied to the literary product of the English speaking peoples. It is more effective to do this with earlier literature than with modern, because the intellectual history of our own time is more confused than is that of a period which may be seen in retrospect. The interpretation in terms of American social, political, and economic his tory is valuable because in this satisfaction the course acts not only as an introduction to literature but an explanation of history as well.^O Comparisons with Mexican literature and historical background were sometimes expressed and sometimes implied* The third Instructor consciously used comparisons as a teaching device: 79Ibid. S0Letter from Albert H. Marckwardt, Resident Direc tor, English Language Institute, Mexico City, to Carl A, Sauer, Division of Science, Education and; Art, Department of State, Washington, August 5, 1944* 658 The purpose o£ this course is to acquaint the Mexican student with the broad outlines of American Literature by a constant comparison with his own, . * , Comparisons, similarities and differences will be called to the student’s attention by the professor as the course proceeds, , . , °1 Three lectures particularly in the third course used this device. Comparisons and contrasts between Mexico and the United States were made in regard to geography., historical development, religion, motives for colonization, native civilization, and political and economic factors. Their influence on literature and on cultural life in general was then indicated along with a comparison of the literary origins in the mother countries and in colonial literature. One lecture made a panoramic comparison of Mexico and the United States in terras of political history and thought from the founding of the colonies to 18G0 and indicated points of contact in terms of literature and politics.82 The second course, which emphasized to a greater extent American patterns of literary thought, did not intentionally stress comparisons, but Mexican students displayed some evidence of bringing their own cultural ^Byess, "Monthly Statement of the Institute Mexicano-'Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales," July 31? 1948 (enclosure? "Course Outline, American Literature,. Colonial to 186QT '}. 82Ib id . 659 backgrounds into a comparative position in their classroom observations and questions.^ £n order to be able to capitalize on the differences between American and Mexican culture and literature, the instructor of the first course assessed the cultural background of his audience and re viewed the history of Mexican literature.^ This enabled him to refer to concurrent developments in Mexican litera ture ”in order to clarify not only the situation in respect to American literature but in respect to American character and attitudes as well.f'^ Course in American history.--In the spring of 1948, the American Society of Mexico City sponsored a series of lectures in Spanish on the history of the United States. The lectures were given as a regular course to those stu dents who paid a registration fee of 10 pesos and took the final examination. Others who were interested in the lectures without a certificate for having taken the course might attend free of charge. The course met twice a week in the auditorium of the institute from early March until OJAmerican Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 5,170 to the Department of State, December 9, 1947; letter from Williams to the present writer, March, n, d,, 1953, ^Interview with Albert H* Marckwardt, Ann Arbor, Michigan, October 11, 1952, ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No, 18,555 to the Department of State, Washington, July 3, 1944* 660 late June* It surveyed the history of the United States from colonisation until 1940* The course, which had been given the year before at the National University of Mexico, was given by Enriqueta Lopeslira Castro. She held a M. A. degree In United States history from Harvard, where she had studied on a grant from the Rockefeller Founda tion. ^ Interest in the course was not reported except for a report that attendance at the first lecture was about fifteen.^ Course in American thought.— In place of a course in American literature, the institute offered in 1951 and 1952 a course entitled the history of American thought. The course was taught by the director of the institute. It was open to any qualified person with the permission of the director or the director of courses. The text used during the first two trimesters was Stephen Vincent Benet, ^Novedades (Mexico City), March 9, 1948. The lecturer was also a teacher of history in the public schools, director of the library of the Pan American Insti tute of Geography and History, and historian of the National Museum of History at Chapultepec Castle* She was an active member of the Mexican Academy of History, of the Associ ation of Lawyers, and of the Association of University Women. 87 Memorandum from William F. Byess, Executive Di rector, Mexican-American Cultural Institute, to Dorsey Fisher, Public Affairs Officer, American Embassy, Mexico City, "Activities of the Cultural Institute During the Week, March 7" 13, ' * March 12, 1948 * 661 This is America. ^ Like the courses in American literature, this course was broadly cultural, but there was more emphasis on political affairs: The chief purpose of the course is to trace the historical development of ideas common to most Ameri" cans with the aim of arriving at an understanding of just what ideas, attitudes and tastes are shared by- most of us. Through class discussions of U, S, his tory, literature, and political institutions, we hope to arrive at an interpretation of why Americans think, act, and react as they do.°9 The course was organised to cover three trimesters of work. During the first two trimesters, students were introduced to the fundamental patterns of colonization, the ideological backgrounds of the American Revolution, and the political and historical framework of the newly independent country. Students read and discussed some of the Federal ist Papers and some of the works of Jefferson, Emerson, Thoreau and 'Whitman. The course concentrated on patterns of American thought, rather than authors as such. “Some rather superficial attention" was also given to the purely literary production of the colonial and post-colonial ^American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 2,613 to the Department of State, Washington, April 17# 1951 (enclosure, "Quarterly Report of the Mexican-North American Institute"), Idem, Despatch No. 2,498, April 22, 1952 (en- closure* "First Quarterly Report of 1952 of the Institute Mexicano-Norteamericano de Relaciones Culturales")• 662 periods* including the works of Hawthorne, Hoe, Irving, Whitman, O. Henry, and Mark Twain. 9® Readings in colonial literature, particularly, were selected to show how American literature reflected the American personality and the American political scene. The type of persons who first settled in the colonies, their reasons for leaving Europe, and Puritan political and reli-* gious thought in America were related to the later develop- ment of democracy* The Puritan Influence on education through religious motivation was discussed. Comparisons were made on many of these points with Latin American his tory* Reference was made to eighteenth century political thought In France and to the French and American Revolu tions. Readings were assigned in the Constitution and Declaration of Independence* The basic constitutional framework of the United States was explained, and the con tinuity of political traditions and the social and economic bases of political parties were pointed out. Effort was made in many respects to bring these factors to bear on present-day life in the United States. The third trimester was concerned more with the 90Idem, Despatch No, 2,838, June 1, 1952 (enclosure, ‘ 'Report on Mexican-North American Cultural Institute"), 9^Interview with John Elmendorf, former Executive Director* Mexican-American Cultural Institute, Mexico City, ; Augus t .3* X953» 663 means of expression of Che basic patterns of thought. This portion of the course was designed to discuss the various media at the disposal of American writers and artists* Students studied the navel, essay, drama, radio, the pub* lishing business, the movies, and television as media of communication. The purpose was to demonstrate how the American nation has given permanent or temporary expression to national thinking,^ Greater emphasis was placed on the recreational aspects of these media than on their literary qualities.^ Evaluations of the cultural courses.— Some evidence of the worth of the courses devoted to cultural content is obtained only indirectly from estimates made by those who taught them or were directing the program. These take stu- dent reactions to them into account,, The lecturer in the first course in American literature found that the historical approach and the study of American literature of the nineteenth century and earlier helped explain modem American culture and conduct. He wrote to an officer of the Department of State as fol lows; no American Embassy, Mexico City, Despatch No. 2,836 to the Department of State, Washington, June 1, 1952 (en closure, "Report on Mexican-Worth American Cultural Insti tute") . - ^Interview with John Elmendorf, August 3, 1953. 664 Moreover, many aspects o£ our modem literature and of our culture as a whole which seem so normal and so natural to us as to not require any comment, are utterly incompreh

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Admission To Membership In The United Nations As An Instrument Of Diplomacy

PDF

An Examination Of Economic Expectations As A Determinant Of Political Behavior

PDF

United States Policy On Manifestations Of Anti-Colonialism In The United Nations

PDF

Graduated Deterrence: The Use Of Nuclear Weapons In A Strategy Of Limited War

PDF

The 1961 Mayoralty Election In Los Angeles: The Political Party In A Nonpartisan Election

PDF

Liberalism And Conservatism: A Study Of Mass-Media Foreign Policy Attitudes

PDF

A Method Of Inquiry For International Relations With A Special Application To The Study Of The Communicative Process

PDF

Political Aspects Of State Coordination Of Higher Education: The Processof Influence

PDF

The Support Of Local Populations For The Forces Of Order And Legal Government In A Developing And Insurgent Area: Identification Of Some Problems And Relevant Factors

PDF

Technical Assistance Programs Of The United Nations And Of The United States: A Comparative Study

PDF

The World Outlook Of India And Japan As Reflected In Their Participation In The United Nations, 1957-1966

PDF

United States Of Europe: A Twentieth-Century Challenge To Nationalism

PDF

Civil Rights And The Public Employee. An Analysis Of Legal Protections Available To Public Employees Dismissed Or Facing Dismissal

PDF

Some Administrative Relations Of The Indian States And Union, 1950-1956

PDF

Study of international intellectual cooperation

PDF

Alienation And Integration In The Political Attitudes Of Suburban Adolescents

PDF

The Formal Organization Of The Democratic Party At The State Level In California

PDF

An Analysis Of The Feasibility Of The Use Of Fiscal Policy To Stimulate Economic Growth In Iran

PDF

The Influence Of Anti-Poverty Policy-Making Upon Poverty Decision-Making: 1964-1974

PDF

The Political System Of Tanganyika: Origin, Characteristics, And Evolutionary Development

Asset Metadata

Creator Scott, Donald H. (author)

Core Title The Cultural Institute In Mexico City As An Example Of United States Policy In Cultural Relations

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Political Science

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag OAI-PMH Harvest,Political Science, international law and relations

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Berkes, Rose N. (committee chair), Anderson, Totton J. (committee member), Hadley, Paul E. (committee member), Harley, John Eugene (committee member), Rodee, Carlton C. (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-31707

Unique identifier UC11357536

Identifier 5902941.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-31707 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 5902941.pdf

Dmrecord 31707

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Scott, Donald H.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA