} SENATE 71ST CONGRESS 2d Session { REPORT No. 1116 CHANGING THE NAME OF THE ISLAND OF PORTO RICO TO PUERTO RICO JUNE 27, 1930.-Ordered to be printed Mr. BINGHAM, from the Committee on Territories and Insular Affairs, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany S. J. Res 193] The Committee on Territories and Insular Affairs, to whom was referred the joint resolution, S. J. Res. 193, to change the name of the island of Porto Rico to "Puerto Rico," having considered the same, reports favorably thereon and recommends that the joint resolution do pass. This legislation is proposed in accordance with the will of the people of Porto Rico, as expressed in a concurrent resolution adopted by the Porto Rican Legislature in April last, a copy of which is embodied in this report. The legislative resolution stresses the desirability of thus doing justice to the history, language, and traditions of the island, and points out that the word "porto," although of Latin derivation has not been adopted into the language of the island. The resolution of the Porto Rican Legislature referred to is as follows: I, Jose Munoz Rivera, secretary of the Senate of Porto Rico, do hereby certify: That the following concurrent resolution was unanimously approved by the Senate of Porto Rico on April 3, 1930, and by the House of Representatives on April 12: CONCURRENT RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA OFFICIALLY TO RESTORE THE TRUE NAME OF THIS ISLAND Whereas in accordance with all historical data relative to the discovery and colonization of our island, the original name given thereto by its discoverer and consecrated in the royal orders of the colonizing nation was Isla de San Juan; Whereas the first city founded on Porto Rican soil, and denominated Villa de Caparra, was given the name of Ciudad de Puertorrico; Whereas subsequently, and by virtue of the transfer of the old Ciudad de Puertorrico to the site now occupied by our capital city, the aforesaid names of San Juan and Puertorrico became the exclusive patrimony of our city and of our island, respectively; Whereas the history and traditions of our people have since then sustained and consecrated the name of Puerto Rico, given to our island, as its sole name; Whereas immediately following the change of sovereignty which took place in the island, the Congress of the United States of America, without justifying reasons, officially gave this island the name of Porto Rico; Whereas the aforesaid name of Porto Rico is an impure idiomatic compound partly formed of the foreign word porto, which, although of Latin origin, has not yet been adopted into our language, but is here used illegitimately to substitute the word puerto, genuinely Spanish, though no license, reasons of diction, or advantages of euphony exist to warrant such substitution; Whereas there are no reasons either in the history, the language, or the traditions of our people, supporting the legitimacy of the foreign term porto which officially forms part of the name of our island; now therefore be it Resolved by the Senate of Porto Rico, the House of Representatives concurring: 1. To request the Congress of the United States of America, and the same is hereby requested, officially to restore to our island its true name of Puerto Rico in place of Porto Rico as it is now called, because it is considered that full justice will thus be done to our history, our language, and our traditions. 2. That for the proper purposes, a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Congress of the United States of America; to the Hon. Herbert Hoover, President, and to our Resident Commissioner, Hon. Felix Cordova Davila. For transmittal to His Excellency Herbert Hoover, President of the United States of America, as provided in the second paragraph of said resolution, I have hereunto set my hand and caused to be affixed the seal of the Senate of Porto Rico at San Juan, P. R., on this the 6th day of May, 1930, A. D. [SEAL.] O JOSE MUÑOZ RIVERA, 71ST CONGRESS 2d Session } SENATE { REPORT No. 1125 BRIDGE ACROSS THE TENNESSEE RIVER AT KNOXVILLE, TENN. JUNE 27, 1930.-Ordered to be printed Mr. DALE, from the Committee on Commerce, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany H. R. 12554] The Committee on Commerce, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 12554) to extend the times for commencing and completing the construction of a bridge across the Tennessee River at or near Knoxville, Tenn., having considered the same, report favorably thereon and recommend that the bill do pass without amendment. The bill has the approval of the Departments of War and Agriculture, as will appear by the annexed House Report No. 1763, which is made a part of this report. The Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 12554) to extend the times for commencing and completing the construction of a bridge across the Tennessee River at or' near Knoxville, Tenn., having considered the same, report thereon with a recommendation that it pass. The bill has the approval of the War and Agriculture Departments, as will appear by the letters attached. WAR DEPARTMENT, May 29, 1930. Respectfully returned to the chairman Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives. So far as the interests committed to this department are concerned, I know of no objection to the favorable consideration of the accompanying bill (H. R. 12554, 71st Cong., 2d sess.) to extend the times for commencing and completing the construction of a bridge across the Tennessee River at or near Knoxville, Tenn. F. TRUBEE DAVISON, Hon. JAMES S. PARKER, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Chairman Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, "House of Representatives. DEAR MR. PARKER: Careful consideration has been given to the bill (H. R. 12554) transmitted with your letter of May 23, 1930, with request for a report thereon and such views relative thereto as the department might desire to communicate. This bill would extend for one and three years, respectively, from February 13, 1930, the times for commencing and completing the construction of the bridge across the Tennessee River at or near Henley Street in the city of Knoxville, Knox County, State of Tennessee, authorized by act of Congress approved February 13, 1929, to be built by said city of Knoxville. The bill authorizing the construction of this bridge provides that same shall be maintained and operated as a free highway bridge. Favorable action on the pending bill to extend the times for commencing and completing its construction is recommended. Sincerely, R. W. DUNLAP, Acting Secretary. The act of Congress approved February 13, 1929, referred to in the bill is as follows: [PUBLIC-No. 739-70TH CONGRESS] (H. R. 14164] AN ACT Granting the consent of Congress to the city of Knoxville, Tennessee, to construct, maintain, and operate a free highway bridge across the Tennessee River at or near Henley Street in Knoxville, Knox County, Tennessee Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the consent of Congress is hereby granted to the city of Knoxville, Tennessee, to construct, maintain, and operate a free highway bridge and approaches thereto across the Tennessee River at a point suitable to the interest of navigation, at or near Henley Street, in Knoxville, Knox County, Tennessee, in accordance with the provisions of the act entitled, "An act to regulate the construction of bridges over navigable waters." approved March 23, 1906. SEC. 2. That the right to alter, amend, or repeal this act is hereby expressly reserved. 71ST CONGRESS 2d Session } SENATE { REPORT No. 1126 AUTHORIZING NAPA, CALIF., TO PURCHASE CERTAIN PUBLIC LANDS FOR PROTECTION OF ITS WATER SUPPLY JUNE 27, 1930.-Ordered to be printed Mr. McNARY, from the Committee on Public Lands and Surveys, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany H. R. 5292] The Committee on Public Lands and Surveys, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 5292) to authorize the city of Napa, Calif., to purchase. certain public lands for the protection of its water supply, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with the recommendation that the bill do pass without amendment. The facts are fully set forth in the report of the House Committee on the Public Lands (H. Rept. No. 1194, 71st Cong., 2d sess.), which is appended hereto and made a part of this report, as follows: [House Report No. 1194, Seventy-first Congress, second session] The Committee on the Public Lands, to whom was referred a bill (H. R. 5292) to authorize the city of Napa, Calif., to purchase certain public lands for the protection of its water supply, having considered the same, reports it to the House with the recommendation that it do pass. This is a bill to permit the city of Napa, Calif., to purchase, at a price of $1.25 per acre, approximately 320 acres of unoccupied public land, described in the bill, within the watershed of the Napa municipal water system. The land was withdrawn from entry by Executive Order No. 5222, November 12, 1929, and the Secretary of the Interior has stated that there is no objection to the enactment of this legislation. The city of Napa is anxious to purchase this land from the Federal Government so that it may maintain it in its natural state and take proper steps to enforce sanitary regulations that will stop possible pollution of the city water supply. Until it acquires title to the land the city has no authority over it, though it is adjacent to the Milliken Dam and city reservoir formed by the dam. The land to be purchased is rugged, rocky, and steep and covered with small brush and trees. It has no commercial value and, so far as known, contains no mineral deposits. The bill reserves all the mineral rights in the land in the United States and also provides that in the event the city of Napa should not put it to the use for which |