Since the cost limitations of the Flathead and Mission Valley divisions of the project have already been exceeded, no further construction may be undertaken without securing supplemental repayment contracts with these districts. 59-30

The authority of the Secretary under the reclamation laws extends to the construction of all irrigation features or works which may be necessary or advisable and practicable to provide irrigation facilities for the arid lands within a project area. 59-299

VI. DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS The authority conferred by the reclamation laws upon the Secretary is sufficiently broad to permit the roughing in of farm distribution systems on public lands as an incident of the construction of an irrigation project. 59-299

Where the topography is such that a farm distribution system cannot effect the ready spreading of water by gravity, the leveling of such public lands within an irrigation project for prospective farm use is authorized by the reclamation laws.

The prohibition in section 3 of the act of Aug. 9, 1912 (37 Stat. 275) against holding lands within reclamation entries in excess of 160 acres acquired by descent, will, or foreclosure for a longer period than two years has no application to irrigation districts bidding in lands under the acts of Aug. 11, 1916 (39 Stat. 506) and May 15, 1922 (42 Stat. 541), but section 6 of the former act fixes the procedure as to them. 53-658

VIII. INVESTIGATIONS

Funds appropriated for the construction of the Davis Dam project may be used to defray the cost of excavating archaeologi

cal sites on lands owned by the Government in order to preserve from loss by flooding valuable relics belonging to the Government which would necessarily be lost otherwise as a result of the construction of the project and the spreading of the waters in the reservoir. 59-465

Authority to determine whether, and to what extent, funds appropriated to the Bureau of Reclamation shall be transferred to the Fish and Wildlife Service for the making of surveys and investigations as to the probable effect upon wildlife resources of the impounding of waters is vested in the Secretary of the Interior. 59-471

The existence of authority in section 2 of the act of Mar. 10, 1934, as amended (31 U.S.C. 686), for the transfer of funds from the Bureau of Reclamation to the Fish and Wildlife Service for surveys and investigations does not prohibit the two Bureaus from entering into cooperative agreements under the Economy Act, with transfers of funds under such agreements from the Bureau of Reclamation to the Fish and Wildlife Service, for services to be performed by the latter in fields other than those specifically contemplated by section 2. 59-471

IX. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE Where the administrative officers of the Government fail to apply the net profits derived from the operation of a project power plant annually to the operation and maintenance costs of the project taken over by an irrigation district as required by subsection I of section 4 of the act of Dec. 5, 1924 (43 Stat. 672), and such profits together with the amount paid by the irrigation district would have liquidated the debt of the district, no penalty can be charged against the district. 53-257

The Federal statutes relative to the payment of debts and demands due the United States do not require the acceptance of money only in the settlement of such debts and demands, and accordingly the proper administrative official representing the United States may, where it would be to the interest of the United States, accept a "call" warrant for indebtedness of an irrigation district under its contract with the United States Reclamation Service for

operation and maintenance of storage works, such warrant to be held by the United States until paid. 54-264

X. RECLAMATION FUND

Indian irrigation projects are constructed pursuant to special acts of Congress and annual appropriations from the Treasury, and the moneys resulting from payment of construction charges, etc., are returned to the Treasury as general funds, whereas the Reclamation Act fund is in fact a revolving trust fund, money expended therefrom being returned thereto by the owners of the lands benefited, to be again expended in connection with Reclamation Act projects. 54-90

Scope of Authority Granted Reconstruction Finance Corporation and Secretary of the Interior by act of Jan. 22, 1932.

XI. REIMBURSABILITY

54-216

The primary "public interest" in contracts for the reimbursement of the United States for its investment in the project required by subsection (b) of section 4 of the Boulder Canyon Project Act is in the soundness of the contracts and the solvency of the contractor, and the rights of certain States or municipalities to be preferred in the award of contracts is subordinate to that public interest. 53-1

XII. REPAYMENT AND WATER SERVICE CONTRACTS

A contract entered into between the United States and a project irrigation district, organized under the laws of the State of Montana, whereunder it is agreed by the district that it will collect and pay to the United States the construction charges due the latter, does not intend that there shall be a moratorium between the termination of the payment by any individual landowner on the primary charge and the beginning of payment on the secondary charge, where the completion of payments of the primary charge on the various units occurs in different years. 53-323 Section 963 of the Wyoming Compiled Statutes of 1920 is to be construed in conjunction with sections 993 and 994 of those statutes and, when so construed, the requirement in the former section that, be

The procedure for the collection of defaulted interest upon the principal debt and of simple interest which may accumulate upon the interest due from a water user, water users' association, or irrigation district, is to be governed by the terms of the contract or of the applicable Federal statute; but where neither the contract nor the statute is applicable because of the particular conditions, then the remedy is to be pursued in accordance with the law of the State in which the project is located. 54-86

Use by the city of San Diego, California, of water obtained from the All-American Canal will be, in the language of the Boulder Canyon Project Act, a beneficial use and exclusively within the United States, and accordingly, a contract made by the Secretary of the Interior with the city of San Diego, whereby the carrying capacity of said canal is to be increased, the work to be performed by the United States with provision made for repayment of the cost by the city, is permissible under the terms of the said act. 54-414

Nowhere in the Boulder Canyon Project Act (45 Stat. 1057) is there any specific limitation upon the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior in determining the use to which the All-American Canal

shall be put other than the specific direction that the water carried therein shall be for the reclamation of public lands and for other beneficial uses exclusively within the United States. 54-414

Since the Boulder Canyon Project Act provides that reimbursement to the Government for outlay for the canal and appurtenances provided by the act shall be "in the manner provided in the Reclamation law," payment in advance by the city of San Diego is not required but, instead, the plan followed in the Reclamation Service, namely, payment without interest extending over a period not to exceed 40 years, is acceptable.

54-414

The common object of the acts of Apr. 1, 1932 (47 Stat. 75) and Mar. 27, 1934 (48 Stat. 500) being the relief of settlers on Reclamation projects by extending the period of payment of construction charges, such legislation should receive a liberal construction and the two acts be considered in pari materia. 54-550

Although the act of Apr. 1, 1932 (47 Stat. 75), for the relief of water users on irrigation projects of the Reclamation Service by extending the period of payment of construction charges, provides for the deferment of "regular construction charges," and a charge already deferred is not a regular construction charge, it does not of necessity follow that the deferred charges cannot be further deferred under the later act of Mar. 27, 1934 (48 Stat. 500), enacted to extend the operation of the earlier act. Such a further extension comes reasonably within the scope of the language, "all similar charges coming due for the year 1934" contained in the later act. 54-551

The provisions of the repayment contracts between the United States and the Flathead irrigation district, the Jocko Valley irrigation district, and the Mission irrigation district, which limit construction costs to specified amounts per acre but include power development costs as part of the construction costs of the Flathead irrigation project, are in harmony in this respect with the acts of Congress in accordance with which the project was built.

Neither the language of the Flathead project legislation nor its legislative or

departmental history reveals any intention to segregate power construction costs from irrigation construction costs, so far as the repayment contract requirements of the legislation are concerned.

The approval of the repayment contracts by the Department constitutes a practical contemporaneous construction of the requirements of the legislation.

Power development has always been an integral part of the irrigation project system.

The term "construction costs," as employed in the Flathead project legislation, includes all construction costs.

To exclude power costs from construction costs would, in effect, make the former a deferred obligation, but the only such obligation specifically deferred is the excess cost of the Camas division of the project. The fact that the legislation provides that the power construction costs are to be liquidated first from the net power revenues is of no significance, since various other obligations were also to be liquidated from these revenues, including irrigation construction costs.

The lien provisions of the legislation apply to power as well as irrigation construction costs and are not contingent on lack of power revenue.

The directions in the legislation for the issuance of a public notice refer to "the total unpaid construction costs."

The maintenance of a separate bookkeeping account for power is also of no significance, since power revenues are set aside for certain purposes.

The fact that the power development is capable of continuous expansion only demonstrates the desirability of limiting the power costs.

Repayment contract requirements of irrigation legislation should be strictly construed to insure the reimbursement of the Government.

Since the cost limitations on the Flathead and Mission Valley divisions of the project have already been exceeded, no further construction may be undertaken without securing supplemental repayment contracts with these districts.

59-30

A repayment contract entered into under subsection (d) which prescribes a formula pursuant to which the amount of each

annual installment is to be determined, which formula has no relationship to the "normal and percentages plan" authorized by Congress in subsection (d) for variable payments, is not in conformity with the requirements of the Reclamation Project Act of 1939. 60-150

The verb "to fix," as used in that part of subsection (d), section 9, Reclamation Project Act of 1939 (43 U.S.C. 485h), stating that the general repayment obligation of a contracting organization "shall be spread in annual installments, of the number and amounts fixed by the Secretary," means to establish definitely, so that the contracting parties know how many installments are contemplated by the contract and how much money is involved in each installment.

60-150

The Secretary, in embarking upon a program to furnish water for irrigation purposes under section 9(e), Reclamation Project Act of 1939 (43 U.S.C. 485h) is not necessarily limited to a 40-year period for effecting the reimbursement to the United States of that part of the cost of the construction of works connected with water supply and allocated to irrigation. 60-180

After executing an amendatory repayment contract with an irrigation district under sections 7(a) and 7 (c) of the Reclamation Project Act of 1939 (43 U.S.C. 485), the classification of the lands of the district as temporarily or permanently unproductive, made under sections 41 and 43 of the Omnibus Adjustment Act of May 25, 1926 (43 U.S.C. sec. 423, 424 (b)), and the authority of the Secretary of the Interior under these sections, are no longer effective unless made so by express provisions in the amendatory repayment contract and in the approval act of the Congress required under section 7(c); the authority of the Secretary of the Interior in the premises is that in section 8 of the Reclamation Project Act of 1939 (43 U.S.C. sec. 485), and it can be exercised only upon request of the irrigation district or its duly authorized representative. 61-154

XIII. WARREN ACT

Section 2 of the act of Feb. 21, 1911 (36 Stat. 925), authorizes the Secretary of the Interior, "upon such terms as may be agreed upon, to cooperate with irrigation

districts, for the construction or use of such reservoirs, canals, or ditches as may be advantageously used by the Government and irrigation districts, water users associations, corporations, entrymen, or water users for impounding, delivering, and carrying water for irrigation purposes." Ordinarily, the legal effect of approval of a map of location of rights-of-way by the Secretary pursuant to the act of Mar. 3, 1891 (26 Stat. 1095), is that title to the rights-of-way vests, subject only, to forfeiture by judicial decree or Act of Congress. Held, rights-of-way granted under the act of Mar. 3, 1891, may be forfeited and canceled without judicial decree or Act. of Congress if (1) they are granted as an incident to an agreement under section 2 of the act of Feb. 21, 1911, (2) the approval or reapproval of the maps of rights-of-way is made subject to the terms of the agreement, and (3) the agreement provides for such forfeiture or cancellation. 56-98

Section 1 of the Warren Act (act of Feb. 21, 1911, 36 Stat. 925) provides: "That whenever in carrying out the provisions of the reclamation law, storage or carrying capacity has been or may be provided in excess of the requirements of the lands to be irrigated under any project, the Secretary of the Interior, preserving a first right to lands and entrymen under the project, is hereby authorized, upon such terms as he may determine to be just and equitable, to contract for the impounding, storage, and carriage of water to an extent not exceeding such excess capacity with irrigation systems operating under the act of August eighteenth, eighteen hundred and ninety-four, known as the Carey Act, and individuals, corporations, associations, and irrrigation districts organized for or engaged in furnishing or in distributing water for irrigation. ***" Held, That a contract made by an irrigation district, pursuant to the Warren Act, and providing for the delivery of an aggregate amount of water according to a graduated schedule "as in full satisfaction of all its rights to the water, both natural flow and surplus storage," limits the district's use of water to the amounts specified in the contract schedule at any given time, notwithstanding what its natural flow appropriation may be under State law. 56-148

flow and surplus storage," constitutes a promise to forbear the exercise of its natural flow appropriation right in consideration of the delivery by the United States of the regulated supply provided for in the contract, and the aggregate amount of water specified in the contract consequently is the total to which the contractor is entitled annually. 56-149

The Farmers Irrigation District, holding a right under the laws of the State of Nebraska to appropriate a certain amount of the natural flow of the North Platte River, agreed with the United States to accept a certain graduated flow "as in full satisfaction of all its rights to the water of the North Platte River, both natural flow and surplus storage." By a separate contract with the United States it agreed to carry a maximum of 250 second-feet of water in its main canal for delivery to the Northport Irrigation District, a Government project district. Held, That the failure of the Farmers Irrigation District to deliver water to the Northport district, although itself receiving water in excess of its Warren Act schedule, constituted a breach of its carriage contract with the United States.

56-149

When the aggregate amount of water specified for delivery by the United States in a Warren Act contract is the approximate equivalent of three acre-feet per acre annually, the limitation imposed by State law on the use of water, no sale or assignment of a water right is effected. 56–149

CITIZENSHIP

Where no record of naturalization can be produced, evidence that one had declared his intention of becoming a citizen and had alleged under oath in an application to make entry of public land that he was a citizen of the United States is sufficient to warrant the holding in a land case that he had been duly naturalized as a citizen. Boyd v. Thayer (143 U.S. 135).

53-648

A foreign-born Indian, an enrolled member of an American Indian Tribe and the son of an alien father and a citizen mother who obtained her citizenship on June 2, 1924, while he was a minor, is a citizen of the United States, provided he was residing in the United States on June 2, 1924, or established his permanent residence therein prior to attaining majority. 57-180

The treaty of Dec. 10, 1898 (30 Stat. 1754), did not make the Philippine Islands an integral part of the United States. Under that treaty the native inhabitants of the Philippine Islands were impliedly denied American citizenship until Congress by further action should signify assent thereto. 57-190

The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States does not make a Filipino ipso facto a citizen of the United States. Nor does it follow from the fact that a Filipino enjoys certain civil rights under the Constitution and owes allegiance to the United States that he is a citizen thereof. 57-190

A person born in the Philippine Islands of Filipino parentage is not a citizen of the United States and, if he has not filed his declaration of intention to become a citizen of the United States in the manner prescribed by the naturalization laws, is not qualified under section 2289, Revised Statutes, 43 U.S.C. 161, 218a, to make an entry under the Enlarged Homestead Act (act of Feb. 18, 1909, 35 Stat. 639, 43 U.S.C. 218). 57-190

Declarants holding first citizenship papers are not excluded from fishing in Alaskan waters under the act of June 25, 1938 (52 Stat. 1174, 48 U.S.C. 243), amending section 1 of the act of June 14, 1906 (34 Stat. 263). 57-290

A Puerto Rican who has become a naturalized United States citizen in the aforementioned manner (31 Stat. 77) is subject to the provisions of section 404 (c) of the Nationality Act of 1940 (54 Stat. 1137) and hence will lose his nationality if he has resided continuously for five years in any foreign state, unless he returns to the United States before two years after the date of the approval of that act. 58-135 A person born in Puerto Rico of native parents prior to its cession by Spain