Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

WAR DEPARTMENT, February 1, 1932. 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. 8510, 72d. Čong., 1st sess.) granting the consent of Congress to the Connecticut River State Bridge Commission to construct a bridge across the Connecticut River. PATRICK J. HURLEY, Secretary of War.

о

RESTORE CERTAIN LANDS TO THE SAN CARLOS (WHITE MOUNTAIN) INDIAN RESERVATION, ARIZ.

FEBRUARY 10, 1932.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union and ordered to be printed

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

REPORT

[To accompany H. R. 8824]

The Committee on Indian Affairs, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 8824) to restore certain lands to the San Carlos (White Mountain) Indian Reservation, Ariz., having considered the same, report thereon with a recommendation that it do pass without amendment.

This measure provides that the tract of land in Arizona ceded by the San Carlos Indians to the United States by an agreement with the Indians, under date of February 25, 1896, be restored to the San Carlos Indians, for the reason that at the time this land was ceded to the United States there was the impression that it contained valuable. minerals, but this claim has never been established. Small tracts have been disposed of and the moneys therefrom have been set aside for said Indians, and the balance of the land is to be restored to them so they can utilize it for grazing and other purposes, or lease same and thus receive some benefits from same.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
Washington, February 3, 1932.

CHAIRMAN COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS,

House of Representatives.

MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: There is transmitted herewith draft of a proposed bill for the purpose of restoring to the San Carlos (White Mountain) Indian Reservation, in Arizona, the lands ceded by the San Carlos Indians to the United States by the agreement of February 25, 1896, ratified by the act of June 10, 1896 (29 Stat. L. 358).

At the time the lands described in the inclosed draft were ceded by the Indians it was believed they were coal and mineral in character. No outright payment was made the Indians, but it was provided that the coal and mineral lands should be disposed of under applicable laws and that the proceeds should be credited to them. The lands were later found to contain but very little coal or minerals. Small tracts have been disposed of through mineral entries and homesteads but

the total amount which the Indians have received from these lands, comprising approximately 232,320 acres, is $12,433.63. They feel that this is not a fair price for the lands, which is undoubtedly true, and ask that such of the lands which have not been disposed of be restored to the reservation. A recent report from the Commissioner of the General Land Office indicates that approximately 17,200 acres are subject to mining permits and 7,920 acres have been sold, homesteaded, or made subject to settlement claims. It would follow from this that there are over 207,000 acres still undisposed of.

About 10,500 acres of the ceded area are now within the Santa Teresa division of the Crook National Forest. The question of transferring this land to the jurisdiction of this department for the use of the Indians was taken up with the Department of Agriculture, and under date of January 7, 1931, the Acting Secretary of Agriculture advised that the land contained no accessible saw timber and accordingly that department would interpose no objection to the transfer.

The area was withdrawn from all forms of entry or disposal by the Secretary of the Interior on March 30, 1931, in aid of legislation, and the proposed bill provides that all valid claims initiated prior to that date shall not be affected.

It is believed that the enactment of legislation for the purpose of restoring the lands to the reservation would be justified. The Indians have been deprived of the use of the land in question for over 36 years. They have received a very small sum and there is no indication that more of the lands will be disposed of at any time in the near future. If the lands are returned to the Indians they will be able to utilize or lease them for grazing purposes, receiving at least some annual rental or benefit therefrom.

It is therefore recommended that the inclosed draft of proposed legislation be given favorable consideration.

Very truly yours,

RAY LYMAN WILBUR, Secretary.

О

BRIDGE ACROSS THE OHIO RIVER APPROXIMATELY MIDWAY BETWEEN THE CITIES OF OWENSBORO, KY., AND ROCKPORT, IND.

FEBRUARY 11, 1932.-Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed.

Mr. GILLEN, from the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany H. R. 7897]

The Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 7897) to extend the times for commencing and completing the construction of a bridge across the Ohio River approximately midway between the cities of Owensboro, Ky., and Rockport, Ind., having considered and amended the same, report thereon with a recommendation that it pass.

Amend the title so as to read:

A bill to extend the times for commencing and completing the construction of a bridge across the Ohio River approximately midway between the cities of Owensboro, Kentucky, and Rockport, Indiana.

The bill has the approval of the War Department, as will appear by the letter attached.

WAR DEPARTMENT,
January 23, 1932.

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. 7897, Seventy-second Congress, first session, to extend the times for commencing and completing the construction of a bridge across the Ohio River approximately midway between the cities of Owensboro, Ky., and Rockport, Ind.

F. H. PAYNE, Acting Secretary of War.

Hon. SAM RAYBURN,

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
Washington, January 25, 1932.

Chairman Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,

House of Representatives.

DEAR MR. RAYBURN: Careful consideration has been given to the bill (H. R. 7897) transmitted with your letter of January 19 with request for a report thereon and such views relative thereto as the department might desire to communicate.

This bill would extend for two and four years, respectively, from February 26, 1932, the times for commencing and completing the construction of a bridge across the Ohio River about midway between the cities of Owensboro, Ky., and Rockport, Ind., authorized to be built by E. T. Franks, his heirs, legal representatives, and assigns, by act of Congress approved February 26, 1929, and here tofore extended by acts approved March 3, 1930, and February 20, 1931.

The first act authorizing Mr. Franks to construct a bridge across the Ohio River at the point indicated was passed by Congress and approved June 12, 1926 (44 Stat. 735), and two extensions of the times for commencing and completing the construction of the bridge under that authorization were made by acts of Congress approved February 25, 1927 (44 Stat. 1242), and February 25, 1928 (45 Stat. 146). Mr. Franks, therefore, has held an authorization from Congress to construct this bridge since June 12, 1926, a period of more than five years, and he obviously has been unable to finance the bridge himself or to dispose of the authorization granted him by Congress to other persons or agencies for the purpose of erecting the bridge. Having been favored by Congress with an authorization to construct a bridge for a period of more than five years and having been unable to accomplish anything under such authorization, he certainly should not longer be permitted to tie up the location for the proposed bridge through the medium of further time extensions. The department, therefore, would strongly urge against the enactment of this bill.

Sincerely yours,

R. W. DUNLAP, Acting Secretary.

Hon. John W. Boehne, jr., who introduced the bill has submitted the following information with reference thereto:

CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES,

Hon. SAM RAYBURN,

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D. C., February 11, 1932.

Chairman Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR MR. RAYBURN: I submit the following report on H. R. 7897, which I introduced in the present session of the Seventy-second Congress, on January 18, 1932.

Some years ago the War Department issued a permit for the construction of a purely highway bridge, after all rights of way and ferry rights had been secured. This franchise was originally in the name of E. T. Franks, which was later transferred to the Nashville Bridge Co. The Spencer County Bridge Commission (Rockport, Ind., being located on the Ohio River, in Spencer County) was organized under an Indiana law which provides that counties in Indiana, abutting on interstate streams, may authorize the organization of bridge commissions to promote and construct bridges over such streams. This commission is authorized to issue county bonds and these bonds are to be redeemed, interest and principal, out of the revenue derived from the tolls of said bridge. The bonds and the bridge are to be free from taxation.

It is true that an extension for commencing and completing this project has been granted before, but it is also true that immediately after the contract was let to the Nashville Bridge Co., the stock and bond market broke, and it has been impossible to float any bonds of any kind since that time. This bridge is a necessity and a convenience, as the Interstate Commerce Commission declared. It may be well to add that the Spencer County Bridge Commission, referred to, serves without compensation, and that when the bonds are paid off, the bridge will be free. The franchise which has been granted in this connection has not, and will not, be peddled about. I have the promise of the Nashville Bridge Co. that they expect to proceed with the construction as soon as they can dispose of enough bonds to justify such procedure. This bridge when completed, will be operated by the county until it becomes a free bridge.

Very truly yours,

JOHN W. BOEHNE, Jr.

« ÎnapoiContinuă »