and leadership of the other. A struggle for ascendancy in military
strength and in economic output was inevitable. It is a struggle in which
we find ourselves embroiled today.

The rapid advancements made by the Russians in science and tech-
nology took most of the world by surprise. The launching of the first
earth satellite, the first rocket moonstrike and other achievements in the
exploration of outer space convinced the peoples of the other parts of
the world that the Russians were not just boasting in claiming that they
possessed the knowledge and the resources to become a dominant force.
How had the Soviet Union, a few years ago a backward and illiterate
nation, accomplished so much in such a short time? In most minds, the
answer was education, and the immediate reaction in this country was
that we should have to quicken the pace in the education and training
of our citizens if we hoped to escape the mastery of our enemies. No
responsible person today would dispute the fact that we are compelled by
these circumstances to expend our best efforts in the improvement of
education.

Much criticism has been leveled at our system of education in this
country as a result of the Russian accomplishments. This criticism is
aimed at both the quality and the quantity of the education we are
offering. There is no doubt in my mind that we must do more than we
have done, but I do not believe this will require drastic alteration of our
educational system. The system of public education we have established,
in my opinion, is a good one. The dominant feature of our educational
system in Maryland is the apportionment of authority and responsibility
between the State and its political subdivisions. This partnership
arrangement under which the State and local governments jointly
support and operate our public schools has worked well and should, in
my opinion, be retained. The platform on which I ran for Governor
embraced the policy of joint responsibility, the principle I adhere to in my
personal philosophy. On the principle, most Marylanders are in accord,
but there is likely to be a wide divergence of opinion on the details of its
application.

The question of State and local support and participation in public
education is a complicated issue, and many difficulties remain to be ironed
out before we have attained the perfect partnership we desire. There is
disagreement on the amount and extent of State participation, although
there is very nearly common accord that local communities cannot bear
the burden alone and that substantial contributions must be made by the
State if we are to continue our progress in the instruction of the people.
But these disputes, I am convinced, can be settled without difficulty if all

216