davidaulloa/AmericanStories huggingface dataset:
Evening star., 1955-01-30

Only one student receives the high
est award in the Essay Contest or
in the Oratorical Contest. In this
field Of the extra a-curricular activi-
ties, competition is keen and excel
lence Is at a premium.
Pursuit Of MediocriH
In the curricular program pre-
Sented In the classrooms, such Is
not the case, however. 1t seems
that quite different view of the
natural desire to excel applies In
the English, algebra. history and
chemistry classes. In our classrooms.
1t appears that "the average" is
what is desired, that mediocrity is
the objective. that superiority is to
be avoided.
It seems that America always
has taken q very casual attitude
toward the formal education of
those citizens who have the best
minds and the best personalities.
We have been so imbued with the
desirability of democracy that we
have been little bit afraid Of the
qualities of excellence. Any kind
of ariStocracy has been under more
or less suspicion, even though 1t
may have been intellectual rather
than social aristocracy.
We have exalted the average man.
We have made it appear that the
middle of the scale is the appro-
PIRATE place for Americans to stand.
Our whole academic program has
been geared to the abilities and
capacities of the average. We have
raised q number Of generations of
people who have understood that
10 is q passing" grade and that
1t is a foolish waste of time and
effort to achieve 80 or 90 or 100.
What has been the advantage Of
doing any more than enough to
get by?
In other nations this has not
been the case. The countries Of
Western Europe have maintained
dual or triple educational systems
for several hundred years. They
have had one system of schools
for the masses and another for the
classes schools and elite
schools, But their selection Of
pupils for the class schools has been
wrong. Selecting ON the basis of
family name, entrenched social
status, titles Of nobility. and entailed
wealth has been at fault and has
been criticized. properly.
MentoI Aristocrocy
In the newer nations where In
herited position has been Of little
value, there Is an opportunity for
another type Of elite school--a school
for the aristocracy OF brains and
ability. We have good reason to
believe that our CHIEF rival In the
present family Of nations, the
USSR, Is providing special educa-
tion for young people who indicate
that they can profit by an enlarged
and enriched program. II America
Evening star., 1955-01-30
Are We Bringing Up a Nation Of Average Citizens?

scale. Glasses for the mentally re-
tarded should be limited to about
is to 10 pupils per teacher. Glasses
for the gifted can number 80. Equip
ment for the handicapped should be
extensive and 1t certainly is expen-
sive. Equipment for the gifted
should be plentiful and varied. but
1t is not the costly type of equipment
needed for mentally retarded boys
and girls.
Slight increased Expense
The chances are that special edu-
cation for our gifted youngsters can
be provided at only slightly higher
cost per pupil, per year. than school,
ing for our present groups where
average and superior pupils are in
the same more or less heterogeneous
classes. Merely separating our most
promising pupils from the others,
giving them alert, well-trained
teachers. and setting standards Of
excellence for them to reach for
would result In very significant i'm
provements in their learning and In
their all-around development.
The chief need is for teachers who
understand gifted pupils and who
have the mental and physical energy
to work with them to advantage.
These teachers also should be alert
and fully conscious of the complex
age in which they live. they should
know in detail the need for those
who can handle top-fiight positions
in various fields. Such teachers
should receive some additional pay.
beyond that provided in the regular
salary schedule. Special classes for
the gifted also should have certain
amounts Of unusual equipment and
funds to pay for trips and other
extra projects. Even with such ex-
penses, the cost Of providing special
education for the gifted viii be less
than the cost OF special classes for
the retarded. II S225.l5 Is the cur
rent D. c. need for better education
to bring the retarded up TO medioc-
rity. then perhaps 500, 900 would be
quite ample to save an equal number
Of the gifted from that same dull
level.
Undoubtedly. there will be some
citizens who will say that an average
education was good enough in the
past for those who have become our
leaders today. The best answer for
that argument is this: With each
succeeding generation. our civiiiza-
ton becomes more complex.
America faces an era when 1t needs
leaders. We need our best minds
and we need them equipped with
knowledge and power. Never before
have American statesmen and Dip
lomats dealt with such serious in,
ternational problems as those that
perplex us today. Never before has
q generation looked forward to the
widespread use OF atomic power.
Even the very number Of our people
and the value Of their goods have
gone far beyond our dreams. These
factors make persuasive the aTgu-
ment for providing the best possible
education for our children who haye
l. Q.'s Of l25 and above.
Evening star., 1955-01-30
How They Compare

Let's take look at the. manner
in which the seven Washington tax
areas compare-tax by tax.
In the first table, we assume for
Case I married couple with two
children and $500 income. The
couple is buying a $4,000 home and
owns a light car which uses $50
gallons of gas per year.
In Case 2 we assume q working
married couple with no children.
the husband earning $4,000 per year
and the wife $500; otherwise the
factors are the same as the nrst
example.
In Case 3 we assume single
person earning $500 who lives In
an apartment, other factors being
the same as in the first two cases.
Parallel considerations are used
In the second table, which shows
taxes levied on $4,000 family in
comes. The house in question is .
$4,000 one. and the car heavy
car, also using $50 gallons Of gas.
The bachelor Cease 81 lives in an
apartment.
Evening star., 1955-01-30
MARYLAND

cent Of market value and the tax
rate is $2.20 per 500 Of assessed
value.
In both Montgomery and Prince
Georges counties, assessments also
run between SO and 55 per cent Of
market value. In Montgomery the
tax rate on residential property
varies between $1.98 and $2.93 per
500 assessed valuation. with the
average being about $3.50. In Prince
Georges the rate is .$1.98 per 500,
or $2.08 where the fre-protection
tax Is added.
In Arlington the assessments run
about 80 per cent of market value
and the rate is So per 800. In
Alexandria assessments run about SO
per cent Of market value and the
rate is $2.75. In Falls Church
assessments are 40 per cent Of mar
ket value and the rate Is $2.75. In
Fairfax assessments are 40 per cent
Of market value and the rate is
$2.70. or $3.10 If the property Is in
q sanitary district.
Evening star., 1955-01-30
By Somuel EngIe Burr. Jr.
chairmcn. Dspofsmsni Of Edoeosien.
The Amerieon University,

OHiNotkiIfs
is to take Its rightful place in the
international scene 1t also should
provide appropriate educational
facilities for potential statesmen,
diplomats, scientists, engineers.
writer's. artists and members of the
recognized professional groups.
Too frequently. in the American
educational scene. superior perform
ance which can be accomplished by
gifted pupils is made to appear url-
popular rather than desirable. The
pupil who studies. who looks UP
extra things, which were not as
signed, who reads all the available
sources and who discovers some new
ones is labeled a grind" or 'jerk"
by those who worship the average.
And il the teacher expects only an
average performance, the nnentally
gifted pupil is able, to do all that Is
required, with plenty Of time left
over to get into trouble. He Is en-
couraged to take moge time than he
needs, to waste his best efforts, TO
dawdle, and to be satisfied with
something less than his best work.
His mental powers are not properly
challenged and lacking reasonable
challenge, he fails to achieve his
maximum possible development.
Should They Skip?
One school Of thought suggests
that acceleration is the answer TO
the problem Of the gifted child. 1t
has been suggested that our bright
pupils should skip" grades and 8.
But this easy answer is not the right
one. The child who skips q grade
never is properly adjusted in his
school work after that experience.
OF course, skipping is even more
subject to criticism II we think of
school as social as well as an edu-
cational experience. And we do not
want 15-year-old high school gradu-
ateS.
Another exploded and outmoded
theory is that pupils having qualities
of excellence should be required TO
fight their own way TO places Of
prominence. This theory indicates
that the battle for places Of prefer
ence helps to develop and to
strengthen the superior mental
ability which brilliant young people
possess. This process is too expen-
sive and too uncertain in today's
world II the superior pupils can be
identified - and they can - their
schooling should be fitted TO their
Unusual mental processes and po-
tentialities.
The right answer. from almost
every approach, is special types Of
educational opportunity at both
\ ends OF the scale-~special classes
and programs for both the mentally
retarded and the mentally gifted,
Fortunately, q program Of special
education for gifted pupils Is less ex-
pensiye than is the program for boys
Nd girls ct the lower end Of In
Evening star., 1955-01-30

Gen. James A. Van Fleet was
another witness before the Subcom-
mittee and shared Gen. Clark's
amazernent over the refusal Of
washington to approve the use Of
the Nationalist troops:
IT never have understood why
we did not use Chang Kai-shek's
divisions. Looking on it today, it
was q terrible mistake, because It
would have given them q wonderful
training +. to develop what the
Nationalist troops can really do.
Even today We do not know that
answer. !"
Gen. Van Fleet appeared before
the subcommittee last September.
His comments would seem to be
even more pertinent at the present
time with the Chinese Communist
threat hanging over Formosa.
Other witnesses who were heard
by the subcommittee were 1t. Gen.
George E. Stratemeyer. retired. the
air commander in the first part Of
the Korean War: 1t. Gen. Edme I'd
M. Almond. commander of the 10th
Corps. and Admiral Charles Turner
Joy, the naval commander and later
chief truce negotiator with the
Chinese and Korean Communists.
As measure of their disappoint-
ment with the way the Korean war
was conducted. all five agreed with
Gen. Douglas Macarthur that the
Allied forces should have been per-
mitted to bomb points beyond the
Yalu River in North China and
Korea. that this would not have
brought on q conflict with Russia
and the third world war as WASH
ington seemed to believe, and that
Korea was as good place as any TO
challenge Communist expansion.
Joys Testimony
Admiral Joy testified that when
he was assigned to Tokyo in the fall
Of 1949 he received no briefing in
Washington on the major review Of
Far Eastern policy then in progress.
He also testified, as did Gen. 'Strate-
meyer, that he got the impression
from Philip Jessup. then United
States Ambassador at large. that
Washington leaders were discounting
the Importance of Formosa. With
this idea none of the Far Eastern
military commanders agreed.
The Illustrations carried over into
the armistice negotiations conducted
by Admiral JOY. The Communists
proposed an agreement fixing the
battle lines at the time as the Anal
demarcation line for the armistice.
The allied negotiators rejected the
proposal on the ground that 1t would
amount to a cease-fire while other
matters on the agenda still were to
be resolved. But Washington over
ruled the negotiators' decision and
said an early armistice outweighed
the disadvantages.
In Admiral joys opinion, this
decision was "a serious mistake"
and lost for the United Nations side
the balance Of power in the negotia-
tions.
There are many other examples
of the disappointments Of the field
commanders during the fighting and
in the armistice negotiations The
subcommittee's hearings failed to
reveal all the why's" of what was
done and not done.
It published the report as docu-
ment of historic interest and wants
1t to be circulated widely. II is not
calculated to provide pleasant
reading.
Evening star., 1955-01-30
By Phil Ysoqer and John Stork


The ingredients Of good cock
tail-party argument are three Met
ropolitan Area residents, one from
Maryland, one from Virginia and
one from the District. Mix well, add
q couple Of martins apiece (very
dry, no olives, please and start the
participants talking about taxes.
In no more time than it takes to
say "rea1 property assessment. "
you'll have the argument going fun
swing on this question:
Where does II cost the most to
live?
At the risk Of ending this wonder
full debate, here is the story: There
really isn't much difference. at mid
dle-income levels or lower, in the
taxes levied In the three jurisdic-
tions. Certainly the difference isn't
great enough to carry much weight
in determining which locality one
should choose as his home.
A survey Of the current tax pic
tare as it applies to the District OF
Columbia; Montgomery and Prince
Georges Counties In Maryland; and
Alexandria, Falls Church. Fairfax
and Arlington In Virginia, shows
that for the middle-income family
man there is only about $32 per
year tax differential between the
highest tax Jurisdiction (Montgom-
erv) and the lowest (Arlington).
The survey takes into account In
come, sales, automobile and gasoline
taxes at the State level. It includes
real. personal property and auto
mobile taxes at the county level
And here is what it shows:
What Is saved in one locality
through absence Of sales tax Is
lost through personal property
tax; what Is gained via real prop
erty levies Is lost via income tax,
and SO on.
Two things must be emphasized at
this point.
oFirst, 1t is impossible to obtain a
completely accurate comparative
picture. There Is too much variation
In the individual sales taxes. per-
sonal property declarations and real
estate assessments. Figures in the
table are, Of necessity. estimated.
OSecond, the overall picture begins
to shift radically as the taxpayer
approaches the higher income levels.
AS the income increases, tax dis
advantages show UP in Virginia.
Conversely, in Maryland the higher
the income goes (assuming it is all
earned income) the greater becomes
the relative tax advantage. OF
course, this situation results from
the respective income tax rates
which, at the higher levels. tend to
oyershadow the other taxes.
A word about water rates: Be-
cause payments for the use Of water
are levied in some Jurisdictions
practically on the same basis as a
tax and in other places more on
the basis Of a utility. water rates
are not figured in these calculations
They are regarded, rather, as utility
payments like gas, electric and
phone bills.
Evening star., 1955-01-30
VIRGINIA

certain last week by State Legis-
lature action.
It was touch-and-go before the
legislative action whether Mary
lands auto tag rates would be main
tanned at the 1854 level or hiked to
$40 and $50. For the second time,
however, the boost was delayed for
q year.
In Virginia the auto tag costs q
nat $40. However, in addition. Ar
hngton and Fairfax each imposed
IS tax. Alexandria q 81 one.
The table does not take into ac-
count the fact that both the Dis
trict and Maryland impose q 2
per cent titling tax when q car is
first registered in their jurisdictions.
This could mean an additional $40
or more for ordinary new-car buyers,
something less for used car buyers
or owners moving into these tax
areas.
Evening star., 1955-01-30
Summary

To sum up for our average-in-
come taxpayer:
In Case l, the biggest differential
is between the 1867 paid in state and
local taxes in Montgomery County
and the $685., paid in Arlington
County, 90 per cent difference.
In Case there is q "A per cent
differential between the 1919 paid
in the District and the 1897 paid in
Montgomery County.
In Case there is 13 per cent
differential between the $198 paid
In the District and the 1928 paid In
Maryland.
lNote that when our average
family-man adds his Federal In
come tax 20 these taxes. he Is
paying around $1,300--or 17.5%
Of his salary in direct taxes.l
The sh-lncome Story
Suppose we take the same three
cases. but with the following differ
ences: Total income is $4,000: the
OWChAAAB 10 . OoVbOVV AAOAoCt VIC CaA
is a 1853 Chrysler.
The greatest differential in Case 1
will then occur between the $715
paid In Prince Georges County and
$917 paid in the sanitary districts
Of Fairfax County, q 28.3 per cent
difference. District taxes would
come to $772. Montgomery. $s55.
Arlington. 1851; Alexandria. $s45,
and Falls Church. eS72.
In Case 2 the biggest difierential
would be asa per cent spread be-
tween Prince Georges $73l tax and
Fairfax's $o37. Taxes In other
areas would be In ratio to those Of
Case /.
In Case 5, however, there would
be q 5s.A per cent differential be-
tween the S3e2 paid IN MONTGOMERY
and Prince Georges and the $605
& paid ia Arlington. The District tax
here would be $406. in Alexandria,
] sss6: In Falls Church. sSs5. and IN
Fairfax. $3.50. a.
Evening star., 1955-01-30

WIlGIl LIlC dtliiudl UuuSCU lUI btl0
District schools was submitted re-
Gently, there wasn't even q sug-
gestion that funds might be appro-
priated to provide special learning
facilities for the gifted and brilliant
pupils. Apparently 1t was assumed
that our potential leaders in science,
business, industry, the arts. and the
professions will receive appropriate
education If they are in classes with
less able students.
But an appropriation Of $225, ,155
to pay so special teachers was rec
commended in order to provide spe-
cial help for retarded and slow
Learning boys and girls. The Com
missioners for the District knocked
this item out Of the revised budget
that has been submitted to Con-
gress. One result Of the action by
the Commissioners has been more
or less of a furor over the educa-
tional facilities that should be pro-
vided for mentally handicapped
children.
There has been no corresponding
furor over the basic failure to ask
for special facilities for pupils at
the upper end of the ability scale.
Yet it would seem that one type Of
special facilities should not be rec
commended unless the pupils at the
other end of the scale are given
similar consideration. II special edu-
cation is to be provided for one
group Of atypical youngsters, it
would seem fair to assume that an
other group, just as atypical. should
be given special education, also.
l Side by side with the normal
pupils in the schools are those who
are brilliant, those with better than
average brain power, those who are
creative thinkers and near -geniuses.
those with leadership potential.
The Normal Curve
According to various studies that
have been made. there are about
as many gifted children in city's
population as there are retarded
ones. The so-called normal
curve Of distribution applies in any
urban population Of considerable
size. School officials realize this
and 1t is q fact that teachers con-
stantly admit and recognize. The
arguments for directing special at
tention to only one end Of the
curve are not convincing ones.
Those who are in charge Of our
school work provide both regular
curricular program and alse q pro-
gram Of extra-curricular or CO.
curricular activities. Although in
theory the extra-curricular program
Is supposed to involve all Of the
pupils, il actually gives greater at
tention to the favored and talented
few. Only the best football play
ers are members Of the varsity
squad, only those with the best
voices are members Of the glee
club. There are careful try-outs
for the orchestra and the band.
There is competition for the cast
OF the annual play Only one girl
is elected quesr Of the senior prom.
Evening star., 1955-01-30
Income Tux

The District tax offers q big break
to taxpayers In the $500 bracket
because Of generous exemptions. 1t
allows q $4,000 exemption to the
head Of q family or single person,
with $500 additional for each de-
pendent. If both husband and wife
work and file separate returns they
are allowed $4,000 each. District
tax rates are rs per cent on the
first $1,000 Of taxable income. 3 per
cent on the next 5000, 3.6 per cent
on the third 5000 and I per cent
on everything over $4,000 Of taxable
income.
Maryland. at present allows q
$1,000 exemption each for husband
and wife and 5000 for each addi-
tional dependent. It has q nat 2
per cent rate on all taxable earned
income. Investment income above
$500 is taxed at the rate Of 5 per
cent.
Virginia permits $1,000 exemp-
ton for both husband and wife. but
only 5000 for each dependent. 1t
taxes at q rate Of per cent on
the first $4,000 Of taxable income.
3 per cent on the next $4,000 and
5 per cent on everything over $1,000.
In the samples shown in the table
q standard 10 per cent deduction
was assumed for all cases.
Comparison Of the $500 and
$4,000 tables show how the level 2
per cent income tax In Maryland
lets high-income taxpayers on rela-
lively easily compared to what the
graduated taxes in the District and
Virginia do.
For income tax purposes, legal
doniicile Is assumed in all cases to
be the place of residence. However,
it should be noted that the domicile
laws Of the District are somewhat
more lenient than those OF Mary
land and Virginia and. In some
cases, this makes q substantial diff
ference.
Evening star., 1955-01-30
Reol Property Tox

ALI figures shown are based on
1854 tax rates. It Is important to
understand that no rates have yet
been set for 1855. but that they win
probably be higher than last years.
Such Is the history Of real prop
erty taxes in residential areas. Usu-
ally new assessments are levied
every four to six years. They go up
and the tax rate iown--but not far
enough down to offset the new as
sessment. Then the rate creeps UP
each succeeding year.
IN the District assessments cur
rently run between 80 and IS per
Evening star., 1955-01-30
soIes Tux

Virginia has no sales tax. The
District sales tax Is . per cent. /
per cent on groceries. with certain
exemptions. Maryland's sales tax is
also per cent. but all food Is
exempt as well Is certain other
products.
Figuring how much Of . wage
earner's income goes to sales tax
Is dificult. Some tax experts think
it comes to about per cent Of his
income. In the samples shown, it
was assumed that about half the
income was subject to retail sales
tax. The table necessarily dis
regards the fact that many Of Vir-
ginia's residents contribute some-
thing to the Districts sales tax coli
lections. However. since most Vir-
ginians either buy their expensive
products in Virginia or have them
delivered from the District in order
to escape the sales tax. this figure
probably amounts TO little.
Evening star., 1955-01-30
Personal Property Tox

So far as the home owner is con-
cerned, the District and Maryland
now have no personal property tax.
Virginia does. and the rate varies by
county and municipality. In Arling-
tom the rate is $3.75 per 500 valua-
ton; Alexandria, 50: Falls Church.
$2.75: Fairfax, $2.75.. These are
fairly stiff rates; but the accepted
practice involves relatively low
declarations and in some cases the
law permits a standard declaration
equal to 10 per cent Of the assessed
real property valuation. Automobile
valuation Is In addition.
Evening star., 1955-01-30
Automobile Tox

New auto tag rates 60 into effect
in the District in April, as tina
auto property tax is done away
with. Tags will cost $22 for cars
weighing $500 pounds or less. $32
for cars over that weight.
Present Maryland rates are SIS
for cars OF $500 pounds or less. s2S
for heavier cars This was made
Evening star., 1955-01-30
Gasoline Tex

The tax on gasoline is now s
cents q gallon in all three juris-
dictions. the District, Maryland and
Virginia.