Affairs, setting forth the status of this land, and recommending favorable consideration of the bill. The letter reads as follows: Hon. DAVID A. REED, Chairman Committee on Military Affairs, United States Senate. JUNE 18, 1930. DEAR SENATOR REED: Careful consideration has been given to bill S. 4683, authorizing the Secretary of War to sell certain lands constituting the former military_reservation of Fort Gratiot, to the Chicago, Detroit & Canada Grand Trunk Junction Railroad Co., or its successors and assigns, upon such terms and conditions as he considers advisable and to make proper deed of conveyance therefor to such railroad company. The bill also provides that the proceeds of the sale shall be deposited in the Treasury to the credit of the military post construction fund. The railroad company above named obtained an easement of right of way over this land under authority of the act of Congress approved February 8, 1859 (11 Stat. 381), subject to the condition, among others, that if the railroad should be discontinued the grant shall cease and determine. On March 5, 1859, the Secretary of War by grant approved by the President, granted the easement authorized by the act to the Chicago, Detroit & Canada Grand Trunk Junction Railroad Co. in consideration of the payment of $7,138.50 (being the estimated value of the premises at $150 per acre). The instrument granting the easement described the land as three different parcels, namely, lot No. 1 lying on the River St. Clair, containing 28.42 acres; lot No. 2 lying on the Black River, containing 9.74 acres; and the third tract as "all that portion of said reservation through which the line of the railroad of said company runs and connecting said lots 1 and 2," containing 9.41 acres. The tracts thus described contain a total of 47.57 acres. The Attorney General in an opinion dated October 18, 1873 (14 Ops. Atty. Gen. 320), said that the grant in this case conveyed "nothing more than an easement, a right to use the land for the purposes mentioned; the ownership of the soil remaining in the United States, and the latter consequently still retaining all the right of a proprietor over the same not inconsistent with the interest granted." By the act of April 28, 1922 (42 Stat. pt. 2, 1589), Congress authorized the Chicago, Detroit & Canada Grand Trunk Junction Railroad Co., or its successors and assigns, to lease lot No. 1, or any portion thereof, or any buildings thereon, described in the deed of March 8, 1859, subject to the conditions of the act of February 8, 1859, supra. The War Department has not used this land for military purposes for many years and has no military need for the land, even if the easement thereon should be forfeited or canceled. It is difficult to determine the present value of the Government's interest in this land. It is understood to be valuable for industrial purposes. At the present time the railroad company maintains no depot on the land and the tracks located thereon are used principally for serving industries in the vicinity. The War Department has no objection to the disposition of the Government's interest in this land if a fair price can be obtained therefor. It is recommended, therefore, that the committee give favorable consideration to the bill. 71ST CONGRESS 2d Session } SENATE { REPORT No. 1055 EXCHANGE OF LANDS OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS FOR LANDS OF THE PHILIPPINE GOVERNMENT JUNE 18 (calendar day, JUNE 19), 1930.—Ordered to be printed Mr. REED, from the Committee on Military Affairs, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany S. 1603] The Committee on Military Affairs, to which was referred the bill (S. 1603) to provide for the exchange of lands of the United States in the Philippine Islands for lands of the Philippine Government, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with the recommendation that it do pass with the following amendments: Page 1, line 4, strike out the word "any" at the end of the line and insert in lieu thereof the word "the". Page 1, line 5, after the word "land", at the beginning of the line insert "and buildings known as Fort San Pedro and Warwick Barracks, Cebu, ". Page 1, lines 5 and 6, strike out the words "or interest therein of the United States now held or hereafter acquired for military purposes". The amendments are for the purpose of specifying the particular lands which the Philippine Government desires to secure in exchange. This bill is proposed by the Secretary of War, and his letter to the chairman of the Senate Committee on Military Affairs, urging the same, is made a part of this report, and reads as follows:" Hon. DAVID A. REED, Chairman Committee on Military Affairs, AUGUST 24, 1929. DEAR SENATOR REED: It is requested that the inclosed draft of a bill be introduced and enacted into law. The subject of the proposed legislation is to provide for the exchange of lands of the United States in the Philippine Islands for lands of the Philippine Government. There are no applicable provisions of existing law which will permit a transfer of lands with the Philippine government. For some time past the War Department has been considering the project of obtaining suitable facilities for the operation of the Air Corps in the Philippine Department. Considerable progress has been made and a number of areas have been reserved for this purpose from the public domain by Executive order. In order to provide a suitable air route to the southern islands certain landing areas have been tentatively selected. In making such selections an effort has been made so far as practicable to locate such fields on public lands which are subject to acquisition by Executive order. After a thorough canvas of the situation, landing fields at San Jose, on the Island of Mindoro, and at Fort San Pedro at Iloilo, on the Island of Panay, have been tentatively approved as being suitable and necessary links in this airway along the western shore. The lands desired are privately owned and comprise about 39 acres adjacent to the military reservation at Fort San Pedro, Iloilo, and about 368 acres now owned by the Mindoro Sugar Estate at San Jose, Mindoro. The Philippine government has for some years been desirous of obtaining Fort San Pedro and Warwick Barracks, Cebu, which are desired for the port development of Cebu. These two posts are not now required for military purposes, provided arrangements can be made to exchange them for other lands more advantageously located for military purposes. Negotiations with the Governor General of the Philippine Islands have been in progress with a view to an exchange of Fort San Pedro and Warwick Barracks, Cebu, for the two privately owned tracts above described, which would be acquired for this purpose by the Philippine government. The Philippine government is willing to make the exchange involved and the Philippine Legislature has passed an act No. 3447, approved November 30, 1928, known as "An act to provide for the acquisition of lands and the transfer thereof to the Government of the United States in exchange of lands known as Fort San Pedro and Warwick Barracks, Cebu, Cebu, and for other purposes," under the authority of which the privately owned lands mentioned above can be acquired by the Philippine government for exchange. Inasmuch as the value of Fort San Pedro and Warwick Barracks, Cebu, is considerably in excess of the two private tracts to be acquired, section 3 of said Act No. 3447 provides that any excess in valuation found to be due the United States shall be considered as a standing credit in favor of the United States to be offset and discharged by future transfers of lands by the Philippine government to the United States from time to time as the need may arise. If any additional information from the War Department is desired, I shall be pleased to furnish it. Should hearings be held on the proposed legislation, suitable witnesses will be designated to appear. The proposed legislation has been submitted to the Director of the Bureau of the Budget who advises that it is not in conflict with the financial program of the President. A similar request has been sent to the chairman, Committee on Military Affairs, House of Representatives. SENATE 71ST CONGRESS 2d Session } { REPORT No. 1056 CONVEYANCE OF FORT GRISWOLD (CONN.) TRACT TO THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT JUNE 18 (calendar day, JUNE 19), 1930.-Ordered to be printed Mr. HATFIELD, from the Committee on Military Affairs, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany S. 4248] The Committee on Military Affairs, to whom was referred the bill (S. 4248) authorizing the Secretary of War to convey the Fort Griswold tract to the State of Connecticut, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon with the recommendation that the bill do pass. The Fort Griswold tract is one of the few remaining memorials of the Revolutionary period, and for a number of years it has been used by the State of Connecticut as a public park. Situated on the east shore of New London Harbor, it contains evidences and mementoes of great historical interest, harking back to the first-line defenses of the State and the Union. It has come to be a sacred shrine of the people of a sovereign State, whose chief battle memorial it is. Begun in 1774 and completed within the next few years, Old Fort Griswold was retained by the Commonwealth of Connecticut until June 9, 1842, when upon request of the United States it was ceded, by act of the State legislature, to the Federal Government. In 1902, through the efforts of patriotic citizens, the tract was placed in the custody of the State, with the ownership still vested in the United States. The land reservation ceded to the National Government comprises 12.3 acres, but additional adjacent land has been acquired by gift to the number of four tracts, making the total acreage of the reservation now used for public park purposes 13.8 acres. The bill which is the subject of this report has been drawn with care after conferences of parties in interest, including the Governor of Connecticut, the Fort Griswold Tract Commission, and others. It is intended to supersede a previous bill and to meet so far as possible the argument set up by the War Department that the tract might SR-71-2-VOL 2- 75 sometime be needed for defensive purposes. To that end a specific provision is included in the bill that reserves to the United Statesthe right to resume possession and occupy said tract or any portion thereof whenever in the judgment of the President an emergency exists that requires the use and appropriation of the same for the public defense. The passage of the bill would protect the State of Connecticut and its people from action by the War Department in disposing of the tract as surplus property, which has been twice attempted by the department through congressional enactment within the past decade. Following is a letter addressed to Senator Hiram Bingham, author of the bill, by Hon. Ernest E. Rogers, president of the Fort Griswold Tract Commission of Connecticut: FORT GRISWOLD TRACT COMMISSION OF CONNECTICUT, Hon. HIRAM BINGHAM, DEAR SENATOR BINGHAM: This is the chief battle field of Connecticut and has been used as a public park by act of Congress. It would be unfortunate if the matter of the sale of the fort were proposed at some future time when those of us who are officially responsible for its safety should be absent from home. While there is no doubt the United States has jurisdiction of the fort, as the State Legislature of Connecticut in 1842 ceded this land to the Government, yet no record of a deed having been given can be found either by the United States or the State of Connecticut. The land reservation ceded contains 12.3 acres and the State of Connecticut also owns by gift to the State, four adjacent tracts, amounting to 1.618 acres, which now form a part of fort lands used as a public park. Cordially yours, ERNEST E. ROGERS, President. A distinguished educator, Dr. George Grafton Wilson, professor of international law at Harvard University, sets forth in the following communication the importance of preserving Fort Griswold as a Revolutionary shrine: Hon. HIRAM BINGHAM, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. HARVARD UNIVERSITY, Cambridge, Mass., March 31, 1930. DEAR MR. BINGHAM: When in Groton, Conn., recently, I found there a considerable concern on the part of prominent citizens lest the Government make some disposition of the grounds of Fort Griswold, which would mitigate against its continued preservation as a memorial. The Groton Monument, the earthworks, and other evidences of Revolutionary days form one of the most cherished places in southeastern Connecticut. Near to these, the public library, the public school, and the town common are located. The people of the town have also bought strips of land with the idea of keeping open access to the fort and to the grounds about it, and they have much pride in its maintenance. This is one of the few war memorials of the Revolutionary period in Connecticut, and it would seem a grave misfortune if every effort was not made to encourage its preservation and upkeep. As Connecticut is my native State, I am interested to have everything possible done, not merely to preserve but also to develop such historical monuments as this old fortification in Groton and the grounds of Fort Griswold. Probably you are familiar with the movements under way, and I hope you will aid in seeing that the wishes of the people of Groton, who are desirous of preserving for posterity the spot so full of historical memories, are not disappointed. With best wishes, Very sincerely, GEO. G. WILSON. |