TO EXPEDITE THE CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS OUTSIDE OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

DECEMBER 9, 1930.-Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

Mr. GRAHAM, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following REPORT

[To accompany H. R. 14255]

The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill H. R. 14255, after consideration, reports the same favorably with amendments and recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass. The committee amendments are as follows:

Page 2, line 17, strike out the words "registry of the."

Page 3, line 8, strike out the word "registry" where used twice in this line and insert in each case in lieu thereof the word "court." Page 3, lines 11 and 12, strike out the words "registry of the."

The bill is intended to expedite the taking of title and possession of lands authorized to be acquired by the Government for use outside the District of Columbia and thus hasten the construction of public buildings and works authorized by Congress. It will enable the Government to begin construction work before final judgment. A somewhat similar bill was passed in 1929 (45 Stat. 1415) for the District of Columbia, and it is believed that if the present bill is enacted into law it will be of great benefit to the unemployed because it will enable the Government to begin its construction work at an earlier date than if it were compelled to await final judgment in condemnation proceedings.

Operation under this measure will result in no hardship on the owners of property taken by the Government. Their rights are amply protected thereunder. By this bill it is sought merely to provide a means whereby the Government may take title immediately, and leave the amount of compensation to be determined by the court according to the usual procedure.

The constitutionality of the method provided for in the bill has been passed upon in the following cases, and in several of the States the plan is recognized and adopted: Sweet v. Rechel (159 U. S. 380, 400), Williams v. Parker (188 U. S. 491, 502, 503), Adirondack Ry. Co. v. New York (176 U. S. 335, 349), Crozier v. Krupp (224 U. S. 290, 306).

The bill is clearly one which comes under the head of rendering aid to the meeting of unemployment conditions. If the work of the Government is held back and is suspended through legal obstructions the opportunity for employment will be retarded also.

The bill has the approval of the Attorney General and his communication dated December 2, 1930, is printed herewith and made a part of this report.

Hon. GEORGE S. GRAHAM,

Chairman Committee on the Judiciary,

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D. C., December 2, 1930.

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: I inclose herewith a draft of a bill, the purpose of which is to expedite the taking of title and possession of lands authorized to be acquired by the Government for public use outside the District of Columbia and thus expedite the construction of public buildings and works authorized by Congress. In drafting this bill, the act of March 1, 1929 (45 Stat. 1415), providing for the acquisition of lands in the District of Columbia for the use of the United States, has been closely followed.

Outside of the District of Columbia, proceedings by the Federal Government are usually conducted in accordance with procedure prescribed by State statutes. Many of these State statutes provide that the condemning authority may, upon deposit or security or pledge of adequate compensation, take immediate possession of the property on the institution of the condemnation proceedings, so that the public improvements or public works do not have to be delayed until the end of the litigation as to compensation, which often is carried through appellate courts. Except in the case of the Secretary of War, we have not been able to take advantage of such procedure under State law because Congress usually places a limit on the amount which may be expended for sites, and there is no statute which authorizes the head of any executive department, except the Secretary of War, in condemnation proceedings outside of the District of Columbia, to irrevocably commit the Government to pay the ultimate award, which may possibly exceed the appropriation. The Secretary of War has that power under the provisions of the act of July 18, 1918. (Chap. 155, sec. 5, 40 Stat. 911; U. S. C., title 33, sec. 594.) In many cases we know that the ultimate award will not exceed the existing appropriation, but, nevertheless, can not legally commit the Government irrevocably to payment of the award, and of course, unless the Government is ready to bind itself to pay the ultimate award it should not be allowed to take possession before the final judgment.

In the act of March 1, 1929 (45 Stat. 1417, sec. 370, title 40, U. S. C.), relating to the District of Columbia, Congress enacted a provision authorizing the executive authority in charge of the condemnation proceeding for sites for public buildings within the District of Columbia to take possession and title in condemnation proceedings before the final judgment, upon depositing in the registry of the court what the executive head considers to be a fair value and binding the Government to pay any additional amount that may be awarded. It would greatly expedite the public building program if a similar authority is given with respect to public building sites outside of the District. We have a number of cases now where the Treasury is ready to go ahead and construct public buildings outside of the District, but is unable to do so because appeals have been taken from the compensation awards and final judgment has thus been postponed. There are many causes for delay in the acquisition of these sites outside of the District and this proposed measure affords, in my opinion, the most important step that can be taken to expedite construction.

As Congress has already given this subject careful consideration in enacting the act of March 1, 1929, relating to the District of Columbia, the inclosed bill follows verbatim the provisions of section 10 of that act. I have inserted one safeguard that is not in the District of Columbia act, and that is the provision that the head of the executive department in charge of the condemnation will not exercise the power to take immediate possession and thus commit the Government irrevocably to pay the final award unless, in his opinion, the ultimate award will probably be within any limit set by Congress.

I hope, therefore, that you will introduce this measure and shall appreciate anything you may be able to do to secure its early passage. If I can be of any assistance to the committee I shall be glad to appear before it if requested.

Respectfully yours,

O

WILLIAM D. MITCHELL,
Attorney General.

3d Session

No. 2088

AUTHORIZE THE SECRETARY OF THE

INTERIOR TO ACCEPT

DONATIONS TO OR IN BEHALF OF INSTITUTIONS CONDUCTED FOR THE BENEFIT OF INDIANS

DECEMBER 10, 1930.-Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed.

Mr. LEAVITT, from the Committee on Indian Affairs, submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany H. R. 13053]

The Committee on Indian Affairs, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 13053) to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to accept donations on behalf of institutions conducted for the benefit of Indians, having considered the same report thereon with a recommendation that it do pass without amendment.

Enactment of this bill would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to accept donations for the benefit of Federal Indian institutions, or of individual Indians.

There are numerous purposes to which such donations could be applied. Scholarships could be established which would offer an inducement to Indian pupils who are unable to continue their education beyond the training offered by the Indian Service because of limited means. Equipment could be purchased for hospitals, school playgrounds, and other Indian institutions, etc.

There have been instances where legislative authority has been granted for the acceptance of gifts by certain agencies of the Federal Government and, although it is not the intention of the Indian Service to request donations for the benefit of the Indians, yet it would seem that there is no apparent reason why this practice should not be recognized in a more general way and proper authority granted by appropriate legislation.

The bill is indorsed by the Secretary of the Interior, as indicated by the inclosed favorable report of the Secretary:

Hon. SCOTT LEAVITT,

THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR,

Chairman Committee on Indian Affairs,

Washington, June 18, 1930.

House of Representatives.

MY DEAR MR. LEAVITT: There is inclosed draft of proposed legislation which would authorize the acceptance of donations to, or in behalf of, institutions conducted for the benefit of Indians and to apply or properly utilize such donations for the benefit of individual Indians or Indian institutions.

While the matter of proposed donations for the benefit of Indians has frequently been brought to the attention of the Indian Office, the question has more recently arisen at the Pawnee jurisdiction in Oklahoma. The superintendent of that unit advises that certain people have asked that they be permitted to furnish at their own expense a room in the new hospital now under construction. He says it seems to be a custom in that section of the State for people to do this, and it appears that they take an especial interest in thus giving expression to their desire to present charitable benefactions of this kind. Although it is not the intention of the Indian Service to request donations for the benefit of Indian institutions or activities, yet if donations are to be offered either by bequest or by gift inter vivos it would seem that the practice should be recognized and proper authority afforded by appropriate legislation which may be applicable to all such cases.

There are many useful purposes to which donations could be applied. For example, there are a number of Indian pupils who desire to pursue their education beyond the courses offered by the Indian Service but because of limited means are unable to finance the advanced courses. Funds might also be applied to the furnishing of playground equipment for schools and for other useful needs. Legislative authority has heretofore been granted for the acceptance of gifts by certain departments or other establishments of the Federal Government in individual cases, but there does not appear to be any general enactment covering this subject. Title 16, section 179, United States Code, reads as follows:

"The Secretary of the Interior is authorized, in his discretion, to accept buildings, moneys, or other property which may be useful in the betterment of the administration and affairs of the Glacier National Park under his supervision and which may be donated for park purposes. He may accept patented lands or rights of way over patented lands in the Glacier National Park that may be donated for park purposes.

Also, in title 24, section 111, United States Code, we find the following provision:

"The board of managers are authorized to receive all donations of money or property made by any person or persons for the benefit of the home, and to hold or dispose of the same for its sole and exclusive use.

Under proper regulations, donations made for the benefit of Indian institutions, or for individual Indians, could be used to advantage, and I therefore recommend that the legislation submitted herewith be enacted.

Very truly yours,

PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF ISOLATED TRACTS IN THE FORMER CROW INDIAN RESERVATION, MONT.

DECEMBER 10, 1930.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union and ordered to be printed

Mr. LEAVITT, from the Committee on Indian Affairs, submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany H. R. 12871]

The Committee on Indian Affairs, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 12871) providing for the sale of isolated tracts in the former Crow Indian Reservation, Mont., having considered the same, report thereon with a recommendation that it do pass without amendment.

Enactment of this measure would make possible, under the provisions of the law now applying to other public lands generally, the disposal of isolated tracts of land which were formerly in the Crow Indian Reservation but which were purchased by the Government from the Indians a number of years ago. The section of existing law which would be made applicable reads as follows:

SEC. 2455 (section 1171, title 43, United States Code). It shall be lawful for the Secretary of the Interior to order into market and sell at public auction, at the land office of the district in which the land is situated, for not less than $1.25 an acre, any isolated or disconnected tract or parcel of the public domain not exceeding three hundred and twenty acres which, in his judgment, it would be proper to expose for sale after at least thirty days' notice by the land office of the district in which such land may be situated: Provided, That any legal subdivisions of the public land, not exceeding one hundred and sixty acres, the greater part of which is mountainous or too rough for cultivation, may, in the discretion of the said Secretary, be ordered into the market and sold pursuant to this section upon the application of any person who owns land or holds a valid entry of lands adjoining such tract, regardless of the fact that such tract may not be isolated or disconnected within the meaning of this section: Provided further, That this section shall not defeat any valid right which has already attached under any pending entry or location.

The description of this provision as set forth in the report itself is as follows:

SEC. 2455 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, as amended by the act of March 9, 1928 (45 Stat. L. 253; U. S. C., 2nd supp., title 43, ch. 28, section 1171), known as the isolated tract law.