authorizing the grants. He would also be authorized to provide Federal exhibits, out of that $600,000.

Recommendations for projects and their administration would be the responsibility of the State of Alaska.

In view of the close adherence of S. 2614 to recommendations of the Department of Commerce, and in view of the appropriateness of Federal participation and its long-range benefits to both Alaska and the Nation, I urge this committee to favorably report this legislation.

Before I close, I will refer to the amendments that might be considered by this committee to make this bill conform with the changes imposed by the House committee.

On page 1, line 11-this is just what you might call an improving amendment-page 1, line 11, of the bill, S. 2614, after the word "enduring", insert the words "symbol of the significance to the United States of its purchase of Alaska in 1867 and a permanent".

The following amendment occurred on motion in the Public Works Committee of the House which reported the bill. On page 3, line 6, delete "$7,200,000", and substitute "$5,000,000". I was disappointed that the committee reduced the amount.

Senator HART. Were those the two conforming changes?

Mr. RIVERS. Yes. The other comment I have on amendments is that the title be amended to conform a bit more to stressing that this is actually a public works effort, in conjunction with the centennial celebration. It is not an exposition in the technical sense of the word, which might cause us many complications in regard to international expositions. This is a centennial celebration, but with a stress upon the permanent development for Alaska.

In other words, we do not intend spending millions for floss and then tearing it down. Everything built under this program is to be convertible, and will end up in public ownership in Alaska, and either in the hands of the State or local governments. Some projects will be convertible from centennial exhibit buildings to permanent, tourist visitors centers during ensuing years. They will be maintained and will be of permanent value for the development of Alaska.

Some of these projects we are asking for, on a dollar for dollar matching basis, are just not available under any other program. We must follow a tight schedule here if we are to have a centennial celebration in 1967.

Time is of the essence. The State has appropriated money to get the local commissions underway and functioning, so we have got to carry through with this, in order to have a centennial celebration during the magic year of 1967.

Senator LAUSCHE. What was the amendment that you offered? Line 6, you said, delete "$7,200,000" and insert what?

Mr. RIVERS. The House committee reduced the figure to $5 million. That occurred in the full Committee on Public Works in the House of Representatives, on motion of one of the members. Now I can explain

that.

The projection was for $8 million, based upon estimates received from Alaska. Alaskans, when asked how much they could firmly back up on this dollar-for-dollar basis, said $5 million. When my colleagues in the House Public Works Committee moved to make this $5 million, and my information from Alaska was Alaskans could back up the

$5 million, but weren't too sure about backing up the $8 million, I conceded to having the amount reduced from $7,200,000 down to $5 million.

Senators, that is the way it is in my bill now, which has been ordered reported to the House favorably.

The House committee amended the title of the bill as follows:

A bill to provide for United States participation in the 1967 statewide celebration of the Centennial of the Alaska Purchase.

And after marking up my bill, and after stressing again that these projects under this construction program could be utilized on a longterm basis, and actually augment Alaska's growth and development, we amended the title to change the emphasis.

Senator HART. Congressman, we thank you.

Mr. RIVERS. Mr. Chairman, between the two of us, we stand ready to answer questions.

Senator HART. Thank you.

Your statement itself, though very brief, is a dramatic reminder to the people of America, I think, of the extraordinary symbolism of Alaska and its acquisition. And I, not necessarily with honors, got through most schools the normal American boy gets through, but I confess that much of this history is news to me. And it would be my strong impression that we might make a very valuable contribution by using this centennial as a device for educating young and old in this country as to the role of Alaska and the way the forces of history sometimes run, currents that are unpredictable, but which prove, when we are lucky, good.

Mr. RIVERS. I certainly concur. Calling Americans' attention to the history of the Alaska acquisition is of very great importance. We hope the people of the United States will come to Alaska, and what we do now is to prepare to provide the accommodations, and the historical landmarks.

Senator HART. I can see the way one might attempt to suggest an analogy between the matching program and the facilities that would be produced here with other programs that the Government has in mind. But if Alaska was to wait until those newer programs came into being, you would be celebrating the sesquicentennial, rather than the centennial. So I think we ought to concentrate our attention here on the question of whether it is prudent and responsible for the Congress to memorialize this as a centennial, pure and simple, recognizing too, the happy accident, that there will be facilities that will remain, that will prove of benefit not just to Alaskans, but to toolmakers in Detroit and tradesmen elsewhere.

Mr. RIVERS. I agree, Mr. Chairman.

Senator HART. The only other note I made, as we listened, was to suggest, if there is no objection, the desirability that the record, without mere reference to the earlier record made in the Public Works hearing, include the list of precedents that you say you have filed in the other hearing.

Mr. RIVERS. I think Senator Bartlett's office has that list.

Senator HART. If there is no objection, let us include it in the record at this point.

Mr. RIVERS. Yes, I offer it and will provide it.

PRECEDENTS FOR FEDERAL PARTICIPATION IN CENTENNIAL AND OTHER CELEBRATIONS1

During the last 80 years there have been 36 domestic celebrations, centennials, expositions, fairs, etc., which have been aided by Federal participation funds (exhibit 2). In broad terms these events can be broken down by purpose and scope as follows:

International fairs (including Western Hemisphere celebrations) -
Land purchase and multistate territorial anniversaries___

Industrial expositions--.

State centennials___

Special anniversaries_.

Miscellaneous___.

14

11

413332

It is noteworthy that the proposed Alaska Purchase centennial has 11 specific precedents for Federal participation. In addition, since a part of the Alaska Purchase centennial is planned for an international exhibition on a limited basis (staying within the necessary rules and regulations of the Bureau of International Exhibitions; see infra p. 16), it has 14 additional Federal participation precedents, making a total of 25. In other words, the Alaska Purchase centennial bears a resemblance to 70 percent of the events which have received congressional support in the past 80 years.

Examples of Federal participation in international fairs

A total of $1,374,000 was appropriated for the Panama Pacific International Exposition in San Francisco in 1915. (The initial $500,000 was authorized in

1 Statutory references in this section are to laws authorizing and appropriating funde for Federal participation.

38 Stat. 76, June 23, 1913.)

This amount was used for exhibit and exposition purposes. In addition, subsequent amounts were authorized for ancillary purposes including permanent economic and civic projects:

$200,000 for customs service.

$500,000 for Government buildings.

$30,000 for branch copyright and patent office.

$40,000 for hospital facilities.

The most recently completed "world fair" participation by the Federal Government was the Century 21 event in Seattle during 1962. This was a "science exhibit" qualifying as a "general exposition on the second category" under the rules and regulations of the Bureau of International Exhibitions. (For a general discussion of these rules see infra, p. 16.) Appropriations (under Public Laws 86-383 and 87-332) totaled $9,900,000. Total expenditures were $9,238,000. This Federal participation resulted from the union of two groups of people with separate but complementary goals. A number of scientists and Federal agencies in the United States were disturbed at the lack of popular understanding by U.S. citizens of scientific research and the role which it played in the development of the economy and other national interests of the United States. The Seattle promoters of the Century 21 Exposition had selected the theme of "science" as the major emphasis for their 21st century world exposition. These two groups got together with the cognizant Federal agencies and congressional delegations and ultimately worked up the necessary program for Federal participation. The 86th Congress, by an amendment to the mutual security bill in September 1959, appropriated the initial $9 million for a U.S. Government exhibit in Seattle. The procedure for obtaining the necessary complete Federal participation legislation and other relevant matters in connection with this Century 21 Exposition are contained in the section on "Methods of Providing Federal Participation” (infra, p. 26).

Land purchase and territorial anniversaries

Congress has shown a consistent disposition to authorize and appropriate Federal funds for those commemorations celebrating territorial purchases and acquisitions. Federal participation in this category has been a combination of moneys for exhibits plus in many instances moneys for economic and cultural development of the areas for which the celebration (usually a centennial one) has been held. A few examples:

The Louisiana Purchase Exposition (31 Stat. 644; 31 Stat. 1443; 32 Stat. 1108; 33 Stat. 18) held in St. Louis in 1904 commemorated the 100th anniversary of the purchase of the Louisiana territory. Its announced purpose was “an exhibition of the resources of the territory, their development, and of the progress therein." However, the total amount of Federal funds made available (in excess of $11 million) was used for many other purposes. In addition to specifically authorizing various Federal agencies to participate in the exhibit aspects of the exposition, Congress authorized a total of $5 million for "matching” loans and grants contingent upon the exposition commission raising an additional $10 million. Much of these matching funds was ultimately used for monuments, buildings, and other cultural and economic development items.

The purpose of the 1907 Jamestown tercentennial celebration (33 Stat. 764, 887, 1047) was to commemorate the birth of the American Nation as well as the first permanent settlement of English-speaking people on the American Continent. The preamble to the legislation also noted that this would insure "that the great events of American history may be accentuated to the present and future generations of American citizens." The amounts authorized by Congress

were as follows:

$250,000 for naval and military celebrations.

$200,000 for Government exhibitions.

$350,000 for permanent buildings.

$415,000 for piers to accommodate navigable vessels on the James River. $65,000 for dredging.

Other miscellaneous expenditures for exhibit and other expenses brought the total to $1,650,000.

In 1835 Texas, which at that time embraced areas which are now part of the States of New Mexico, Oklahoma, Kansas, Wyoming, and Colorado, proclaimed a provisional government after Santa Ana established a dictatorship in New Mexico. One hundred years later, Texas, then a State, celebrated the centennial of this action. The legislation (49 Stat. 575, August 12, 1935) authorized $3 million for Federal participation in order to "celebrate a century of independence

and progress." Most of this money was used for the exhibit aspects of this particular celebration, but permament buildings were also created and remained on the exposition site.

In 1935 the California Pacific International Exposition was held in San Diego. This celebration was "in commemoration of the 400th anniversary of the discovery of the Pacific Southwest by Coronado." Under House Joint Resolution 94, the Federal Government appropriated $425,000 and provided that these funds would be given to a commissioner who could allot them to any executive office, independent agency, or establishment of the Government, with consent of the heads of the relevant agencies, for the purpose of defraying any expenditure for participation in the exposition.

Industrial expositions

Ten thousand dollars was authorized by joint resolution of April 29, 1914 (38 Stat. 770), for participation in the exposition of forest products in Chicago and New York.

Statehood centennials

The last participation in a statehood centennial was in Mississippi in 1914 in which $73,000 for a Government exhibit was authorized (39 Stat. 854). It is pertinent to observe that West Virginia attempted to obtain similar Federal participation support in 1962, but no final congressional action was taken. This suggests a congressional belief that statehood commemorations are a responsibility of the State while purchase and land acquisition commemorations are more deserving of Federal support.

Special expositions

There have been a few instances in which Federal funds and Federal participation have been used for historical anniversaries. One example of this is the exposition and celebration of the 50th anniversary of the emancipation of Negro slaves in Richmond, 1915. The amount of Federal participation was $55,000 under the act of August 1, 1914 (38 Stat. 669).

Miscellaneous

An example in this category is the Philadelphia Exposition of 1899 in which, by act of December 21, 1898 (30 Stat. 768), $350,000 of Federal funds were authorized, of which $50,000 were earmarked "for collecting samples of foreign merchandise" and $300,000 were for buildings and Federal Government exhibits.

Senator HART. Senator Lausche?

Senator LAUSCHE. You testified before the Public Works Committee, didn't you, Congressman Rivers?

Mr. RIVERS. I did.

Senator LAUSCHE. Do you know why no action was taken in the Public Works Committee? If you don't know, you can state so.

Mr. RIVERS. It has gone all of the way through. The Public Works Committee provided an ad hoc committee to conduct hearings, and the ad hoc subcommittee reported the matter favorably to the full Public Works Committee. And the full Public Works Committee thereupon, about a week ago

Senator LAUSCHE. It did what? Oh, the House you are talking about?

Mr. RIVERS. Yes, the House.

It reported it favorably to the House, but we haven't obtained a rule yet.

Senator LAUSCHE. Was it sent to the Public Works Committee in the House?

Mr. RIVERS. It was, on the basis that a public construction factor was involved in the bill.

Senator LAUSCHE. Now, S. 2309 went to the Public Works Committee of the Senate and it is still pending there, as I understand it. Am I correct in that understanding?