« ÎnapoiContinuă »
BRIDGE ACROSS ST. LAWRENCE RIVER AT OR NEAR
HOGANSBURG, N. Y.
JANUARY 27, 1932.—Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed
Mr. PARKER of New York, from the Committee on Interstate and
Foreign Commerce, submitted the following
(To accompany H. R. 483)
The Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 483) to amend the act of March 2, 1897, authorizing the construction and maintenance of a bridge across the St. Lawrence River, having considered the same, report thereon with a recommendation that it pass.
Hon. Bertrand H. Snell, who introduced this bill, has submitted the following information with reference thereto:
House OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Washington, D. C., January 26, 1932. Hon. Jacob L. MilliGAN,
House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR COLLEAGUE: H. R. 483 introduced by me is for the purpose of amending the act of March 2, 1897, authorizing the construction and maintenance of a bridge across the St. Lawrence River.
The only changes in the act are on pages 2 and 3. The amendment is in lines 23, 24, 25, page 2, and lines 1 and 2, page 3, down to and including the word "lease.” This is the only change from the original act.
The situation is this: The New York Central Railroad built this bridge about thirty-odd years ago, At that time they had considerable business over this branch of the railroad, but at the present time this branch only runs up through the Adirondacks to Tupper Lake and comes to a dead end and there is practically no business whatever and I believe they only run two trains a day across this railroad bridge. There is no vehicular bridge across the St. Lawrence River from Montreal to Niagara Falls, a distance of about 400 miles. The villages of Malone, United States, and Cornwall in Canada have made arrangements to lease this bridge from the New York Central Railroad at a merely nominal rental. They are organizing a company of citizens in these two villages with $150,000 capital for the purpose of planking this bridge and using it for vehicular and foot traffic under a lease made to them by the New York Central.
When the lawyers examined the original act they found there was no provision in the act to grant the lessee to collect the tolls for this vehicular bridge that were
granted in the original act to the New York Central Railroad and the only purpose for this amendment is simply to grant these two communities the right to do in the way of collecting tolls for a vehicular bridge what was granted in the original act to the railroad.
I can see no objection that anyone could have to this amendment. It is agreeable to the railroad owning the property and to the people in the two communities that are making the lease for the purpose above stated. I trust there will be no opposition in the committee and we can get early action on the bill, because the matter has been held up now for about six months awaiting the action of Congress in this matter. Thanking you for your early attention, I am, Very truly yours,
BERT. SNELL. The bill has the approval of the State and War Departments, and the partial approval of the Agriculture Department, as will appear by the following letters:
DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
Washington, December 24, 1931. The Hon. Sam RAYBURN,
House of Representatives. Sir: In reply to your letter of December 16, 1931, inclosing bill H. R. 483, Seventy-second Congress, first session, with the request for a report thereon in duplicate, you are advised that in so far as the interest intrusted to this department are concerned there is no objection to the proposed legislation. Very truly yours,
H. L. STIMSON.
WAR DEPARTMENT, December 23, 1931. 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. 483, 72d Cong., 1st sess.) to amend the act of March 2, 1897, authorizing the construction and maintenance of a bridge across the St. Lawrence River.
PATRICK J. HURLEY,
Secretary of War.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
Washington, December 24, 1931. Hon. Sam RAYBURN, Chairman Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives. DEAR Mr. RAYBURN. Careful consideration has been given to the bill (H. R. 483) transmitted with your letter of December 16 with request for a report thereon and such views relative thereto as the department might desire to communicate.
This bill would amend section 1 of an act approved March 2, 1897 (29 Stat. 603), entitled “An act to authorize the construction and maintenance of a bridge across the St. Lawrence River.". The proposed amendment would authorize the Northern New York Railroad Co., a New York corporation, or such railway or bridge company now or hereafter incorporated under the laws of said State or of the Dominion of Canada as the said Northern New York Railroad Co. or its assigns may unite with, to construct, own, maintain, and operate a bridge and approaches thereto across the St. Lawrence River, from a point at or near the village of Hogansburg, Franklin County, State of New York, to a point on the island of Cornwall near the town of Cornwall, in the county of Cornwall, and Stormont, Province of Ontario. Said amendment would further authorize such bridge to be constructed for the passage of railway trains, with the option of constructing it as a combination railroad and highway bridge, with the right to charge reasonable rates of toll for the passage thereover of vehicles, animals, and foot passengers.
The location indicated for the proposed bridge is not on the system of Federalaid highways approved for New York, but a route on said system passes through
Hogansburg so that the proposed bridge would constitute a lateral connection therewith. The department seriously questions the advisability of authorizing & combination railroad and highway bridge at this point, as such bridges frequently result in serious congestion, particularly to the highway traffic. Furthermore, the pending bill would grant authority for the construction of the bridge to some undetermined agency since it provides for such construction by the Northern New York Railroad Co., or such railway or bridge company now or hereafter incorporated as the said Northern New York Railroad Co. or its assigns may become affiliated with. The department, therefore, recommends that the bill be amended to specifically designate the agency to which it will grant authority for the construction of the bridge, and also that the provision authorizing the construction of a highway and railway bridge be so modified as to restrict the authority to the construction of the railway bridge. If the construction of a highway bridge across the St. Lawrence River at the point proposed is necessary at this time, from the standpoint of highway traffic, it is believed that it should be constructed separate and apart from any railroad bridge which may be undertaken. Sincerely yours,
R. W. DUNLAP, Acting Secretary. In compliance with paragraph 2a of Rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill are shown as follows: Existing law proposed to be omitted is inclosed in black brackets; new matter is printed in italics; existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman.
The Northern New York Railroad Company, a corporation organized and created under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, or such railway or bridge company now or hereafter incorporated under the laws of said State or of the Dominion of Canada as the said Northern New York Railroad Company or its assigns may unite with, be, and it hereby is, authorized and empowered to construct, own, maintain, and operate a bridge and approaches thereto across the Saint Lawrence River, from a point on the right or southerly bank thereof at or near the village of Hogansburg, in the county of Franklin, in the State of New York, to a point on the island of Cornwall near the town of Cornwall, in the county of [Cornwall] Cornwall, and Stormont, Province of Ontario, in the Dominion of Canada, at such point as may be most convenient to said corporation to unite and connect the railroad built or to be built by it in the said State of New York with any railroad or bridge that may be constructed by any person or corporation in the said Dominion of Canada. Said bridge shall be constructed to provide for the passage of railway trains and, at the option of the said corporation, may be used for the passage of vehicles, animals, and foot passengers upon such reasonable rates of toll as may be fixed and from time to time revised by the Secretary of War of the United [States.] States, the bridge may be equipped for use for the passage of vehicles, animals, and foot passengers by the lessee under a lease made by the corporation, and the tolls for such passage, as fixed and revised by the Secretary of War as aforesaid, may be collected by the lessee under such lease. Said bridge when completed shall be deemed and taken to be a lawful structure, and shall be recognized and known as a post route for the United States mails: Provided, That before the construction of the said bridge shall be begun all proper and requisite authority therefor shall be obtained from the Government of the Dominion of Canada.
FIRST DEFICIENCY APPROPRIATION BILL, 1932
JANUARY 27, 1932.-Ordered to be printed
Mr. Byens, from the committee of conference, submitted the following
[To accompany H. R. 6660)
The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 6660) making appropriations to supply urgent deficiencies in certain appropriations for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1932, and prior fiscal years, to provide supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1932, and for other purposes, having met, after full and free conference have agreed to recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses as follows:
That the Senate recede from its amendments numbered 16, and 24.
That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendments of the Senate numbered 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 14, 18, 20, 21, 22, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 43, 44, and 45, and agree to the same.
Amendment numbered 9:
That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate numbered 9, and agree to the same with an amendment as follows:
In lines 6, 7, and 8 of the matter inserted by said amendment strike out "$90,000, of which sum $70,000 is made available for the payment of salaries in the District of Columbia" and insert in lieu thereof $20,000; and the Senate agree to the same.
Amendment numbered 10:
That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate numbered 10, and agree to the same with an amendment as follows:
In lieu of the sum proposed insert $225,000; and the Senate agree to the same.