Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub
[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

Mr. BINGHAM, from the Committee on Territories and Insular Affairs, submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany S. 4142]

The Committee on Territories and Insular Affairs, to whom was referred the bill (S. 4142) to fix the salary of the Governor of the Territory of Alaska, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon and recommends that the bill do pass.

The bill proposes to increase the salary of the Governor of Alaska from $7,000, as now fixed by law, to $10,000, which would make it conform to that received by the executive of the other Territory, Hawaii.

Favorable attitude toward this proposed legislation on the part of the Secretary of the Interior is indicated by the following letter from that official, recommending that the bill receive favorable consideration:

Hon. HIRAM BINGHAM,

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
Washington, May 3, 1930.

Chairman Committee on Territories and Insular Affairs,
United States Senate.

MY DEAR SENATOR BINGHAM: Your letter of April 24, 1930, has been received, inclosing, with request for an expression of opinion thereon, Senate bill 4142, to fix the salary of the Governor of the Territory of Alaska.

The salary of the Governor of Alaska is fixed at $7,000 in the act making appropriations for the Department of the Interior for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1930, approved March 4, 1929, and the bill under consideration proposes to increase his salary to $10,000 per annum. The salary of the Governor of Hawaii, as fixed by law, is $10,000 per annum, and there is no good reason why the Governor of Alaska should not receive a similar amount.

I recommend that the bill receive favorable consideration.

Very truly yours,

О

RAY LYMAN WILBUR.

[blocks in formation]

Mr. GILLETT, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the

following

REPORT

[To accompany H. R. 7643]

The Committee on the Judiciary, having considered the bill (H. R. 7643) to establish a term of the District Court of the United States for the district of Nevada at Las Vegas, Nev., reports the same favorably to the Senate without amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.

The effect and need of this legislation is explained in the following excerpt from House Report No. 576, Seventy-first Congress, second session:

This bill provides for a term of the Federal court at Las Vegas, Clark County, Nev. Las Vegas is the county seat of Clark County and the distribution center for a vast mining territory, also it will be a distribution point for all supplies going into the Boulder Canyon Dam. It is at Las Vegas that the executives in charge of this great work will be located. All supplies and labor will flow through Las Vegas to the dam site 30 miles away. North of Las Vegas is the agricultural section along the Muddy River and still north of this section is Caliente, the junction point for the railroad leading to Pioche, an active mining center. Pioche is the county seat of Lincoln County.

Carson City, where the Federal court now sits three times a year, is located in the extreme western part of Nevada and is reached both from Las Vegas and Caliente by automobile only, unless a detour is made out of the State and this is a distance of over 400 miles by the shortest route from either point. To go by railroad from Las Vegas or Caliente, or Clark and Lincoln Counties one has to go by way of Salt Lake City or Los Angeles and Sacramento, at least a thousand miles of travel.

Clark and Lincoln Counties are located in the extreme southeastern point of Nevada and separated from the rest of Nevada by 200 miles of desert which must be crossed, if at all, by automobile. For the people of this section to be compelled to go to Carson City for appearance at court is neither fair nor just and is intensely discriminatory in its effect. Tens of thousands of dollars can be saved to the residents of Clark and Lincoln Counties if at least one term of the Federal court sits at Las Vegas. In view of the number of cases arising in Clark County at the present time Congress is justified in providing for one term of the Federal court at Las Vegas, Nev.

2

TERM OF COURT AT LAS VEGAS, NEV.

Within a short time, it is presumed, an appropriation will be made to begin the construction of the Boulder Canyon Dam. This will bring thousands of people into Clark County and cases in the Federal court will increase proportionately. Because of the anticipated increase in population at Las Vegas a substantial appropriation has been made for the construction of a Federal building at Las Vegas. This building should contain necessary court space. legislation such as this bill proposes the inclusion of such court space is prohibited and this bill makes this provision without disturbing the three sittings of the. Without Federal court at Carson City.

71ST CONGRESS 2d Session

SENATE

{No. 935

REPORT

TO TRANSFER WILLACY COUNTY IN THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TO THE BROWNSVILLE DIVISION

JUNE 17, 1930.-Ordered to be printed

Mr. GILLETT, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany H. R. 11050]

The Committee on the Judiciary, having considered the bill (H. R. 11050) to transfer Willacy County in the State of Texas from the Corpus Christi division of the southern district of Texas to the Brownsville division of such district, reports the same favorably to the Senate without amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.

The desirability of this legislation is set out in the following excerpt from House Report No. 1273, Seventy-first Congress, second session:

This bill transfers Willacy County in the State of Texas from the Corpus Christi division of the southern district of Texas to the Brownsville division of such district.

The bill is recommended by the United States district judge for the southern district of Texas, the United States district attorney, the Willacy County Bar Association of Texas, as well as the Attorney General who, in a communication to the chairman of the committee, Hon. George S. Graham, on April 1, said:

"Willacy County logically belongs in the Brownsville division and the transfer would, in all probability, result in a reduction in travel expense, both to the Government and to private litigants. You are, therefore, advised that I have no objection to the proposed change."

O

« ÎnapoiContinuă »