Page images
PDF
EPUB

surveys of lands are very irregular and defective, and that the boundary line between Colorado and New Mexico has never been satisfactorily adjusted, and perhaps dozens of other circumstances from which Federal questions might arise.

In the course of our investigations a matter has come to our attention which we think should be mentioned. We find that several cases (particularly damage cases) have been removed from the local courts to the Federal courts, with the result that the plaintiff was unable to follow them there and to further prosecute them. We are not advised as to the merits of these cases, but certain it is that their removal to Denver and Pueblo deprived the plaintiffs in these cases of the opportunity to have tried the question involved. This condition ought not to exist, and if for no other reason, there should be a Federal court within easy reach, where such cases might be tried.

We have a list of the title of something over 200 cases which we can furnish you if desired, and we will endeavor to get returns from other counties, which will largely increase the number. It has been impossible for us to make anything like a full list of the cases from this section, but we have found that a very considerable amount of business, some of which was very important, has originated from this section. A very considerable number of the cases arising in this section have been in charge of Denver attorneys, and consequently are not found on the dockets of our local attorneys. We ask you to join us in urging the passage of the bill and suggest that you concur in the amendments indicated if such amendments meet with the approval of Mr. Taylor

Respectfully,

THE SOUTHWESTERN COLORADO BAR ASSOCIATION,
By REESE MCCLOSKEY, President.
ROBT. S. CLEMENTS, Secretary.

REESE MCCLOSKEY,
ROBT. S. CLEMENTS,
B. W. RITTER,

Committee.

1st

EXCLUSION OF LIQUORS FROM NATIONAL PARKS.

MARCH 30, 1916.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union and ordered to be printed.

FEBRUARY 22, 1917.-The Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union discharged, referred to the House Calendar, and ordered to be printed.

Mr. HAYDEN, from the Committee on the Public Lands, submitted the following

REPORT.

[To accompany H. R. 6814.]

The Committee on the Public Lands, to whom was referred the bill H. R. 6814, having had the same under consideration, report the same back to the House with amendments, with the recommendation that the bill do pass.

Amend by striking out all after the enacting clause and inserting the following:

That from and after the approval of this act the issuance by any officer or employee of the United States to any lessee, permittee, concessioner, or other person, firm, or corporation whatsoever, of any permit or authority for the sale or dispensing of intoxicating liquors of any kind, including beer, ale, and wine, in any national park is hereby prohibited; and the Secretary of the Interior is hereby directed to take all necessary measures to carry this act into full force and effect.

Amend the title so as to read:

A bill to exclude intoxicating liquors from national parks.

This is primarily a safety measure. The national parks of the country have been opened to automobile travel, and though last year was practically the first season in which such traffic was permitted, the number of visitors who were conveyed through these parks by this means reached very large proportions.

As is well known, the roads in all national parks are necessarily very dangerous, and the safety of all the people who use these roads depends upon the care, skill, and sobriety of the chauffeur who guides the machines over them.

To permit the sale of intoxicating liquors in any national park is an invitation to disaster upon the mountain highways therein.

The principle of liquor restriction as a safety measure is well established.

A Pennsylvania statute (Act No. 410) makes it a misdemeanor for a driver of a traction engine to be intoxicated; while a law of Washington (ch. 165) extends the law of that State to cover intoxication of employees on highways and other public places as well as on

streets.

The sale of intoxicants near lumber or other camps is prohibited by an act of the Michigan Legislature (No. 110), which makes it unlawful to sell or deliver intoxicating liquor at any lumber camp, sawmill, yard, or along the right of way of any railroad.

The bill was referred to the Secretary of the Interior, and his report on the same is printed herewith. It is as follows:

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, Washington, February 8, 1916. MY DEAR MR. FERRIS: I have your letter of February 1, inclosing for report H. R. 6814 entitled "A bill to exclude intoxicating liquors from national parks and national forest reserves."

[ocr errors]

Drinking saloons and barrooms are not permitted upon Government lands within the national parks, but where hotel and permanent camp privileges have been granted in the parks it has been customary in States where prohibition is not in effect to permit the supplying of wines and liquors to guests at tables and in their rooms. In prohibition States the State law has been followed.

As the bill covers also forest reserves, it is suggested that it be called to the attention of the Secretary of Agriculture.

Cordially, yours,

[blocks in formation]

FRANKLIN K. LANE,

Secretary.

A BILL To exclude intoxicating liquors from national parks and national forest reserves.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled. That the sale, gift, manufacture, transportation, or possession of any spirituous, vinous, malted, fermented, or other intoxicating liquor of any kind for beverage purposes within any national park or national forest reserve of the United States is hereby prohibited. Whoever shall violate any provision of this act or cause the same to be violated shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both; and for any subsequent violation of this act shall be imprisoned not more than five years.

O

TO PROMOTE THE RECLAMATION OF ARID LANDS.

MARCH 31, 1916.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union and ordered to be printed.

Mr. MCCRACKEN, from the Committee on Irrigation of Arid Lands, submitted the following

REPORT.

[To accompany H. R. 12365.]

The Committee on Irrigation of Arid Lands, to which was referred the bills (H. R. 262 and H. R. 12365) to promote the reclamation of arid lands, having carefully considered the same, report the latter herewith and recommend that the bill, with amendments, do pass.

COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS.

Page 5, line 25, strike out the word "hereinabove" and insert in lieu thereof the word "herein before."

Page 9, line 10, strike out the word "heretofore."

H. R. 262, to promote the reclamation of arid lands, introduced by Hon. Addison T. Smith, of Idaho, was referred to the Secretary of the Interior for consideration and report. After a most careful consideration the Secretary recommended the enactment of the proposed legislation, but suggested certain amendments, and a substitute bill was introduced, H. R. 12365. The recommendation of the Secretary of the Interior is hereto attached and made a part of this report.

The purpose of the proposed legislation is to enable irrigation districts which are municipal corporations to distribute the cost of an irrigation system, and the operation and maintenance thereof, over all the lands, both public and private, which are to be benefited. The bill is further intended to give relief in those cases where most of the land within an irrigation district is held by entrymen, generally by homesteaders, who must have water to irrigate their lands to enable them to make a living. Under the present law, the entryman can not bind his land for the payment of his proportionate share of the cost of the construction of an irrigation system. The result is that a bond

buyer will not accept bonds on the lands of an entryman, because the title to the lands remains in the Government until patent issues, and any assessment against such unpatented lands can not be held to be a lien. In most cases entrymen who live within the boundaries of a proposed irrigation district are quite willing to bind their lands for the payment of the cost of the irrigation works, but they are precluded from so doing, because the Government has not provided a way whereby they may use their entries to satisfy the bond purchaser that there is any real security for the bonds issued by the district.

It is obvious that entrymen within the confines of an irrigation district who have secured patents to their lands must now bear the full cost of the construction and operation of any irrigation system which may be established for the utilization of all the lands within the district, both public and private. The entrymen upon the lands which have not yet passed to patent can refuse to have any part in the organization of an irrigation district, and thus permit the entire cost of the water system to fall upon those who own patented lands within the proposed district, yet he becomes the beneficiary of the toil of his neighbors who have made it possible to reclaim the lands of the district. Upon the completion of an irrigation system the value of the lands of the entire district will have materially increased, and the entryman who has had no part in constructing the water system is tempted to, and often does, speculate upon his relinquishment. It is true that such an entryman who has not participated in the organization of an irrigation district must pay the district the cost of the water right if he ever gets it, but he is not prevented, under the statutes of most States, from compelling the district to deliver him water for any season that it may be needed for the preservation of any crops that he may have growing upon his entry.

It must be borne in mind that the cost of an irrigation system for a district embracing 20,000 acres is no greater in most instances than the cost of a system for 10,000 acres, and the very object of this bill is to protect any small group of entrymen who may undertake the reclamation of a given tract of land and enable them to equitably distribute the cost upon all the lands which are to be benefited.

The reclamation of a large part of the lands of the arid regions of the West now under cultivation was accomplished by the organization of canal companies, the membership of which constituted practically every settler within the area proposed to be reclaimed. For the most part there were no expensive dams or other irrigation works to be constructed and the work of digging canals and ditches was done by the settlers upon the lands to be benefited. Naturally these easy and cheap projects were built first, and those remaining to be constructed, either by private enterprise through the irrigation districts or by the Government, are generally costly and large. In order to make these larger projects feasible and to encourage their construction it is necessary that the cost shall be distributed so that each acre will contribute its proportionate share; otherwise the cost. which would have to be levied upon the portion which could be taxed would be so high that the projects would not be feasible. The only means and the best means by which all of the lands in private ownership can be brought into the project and made to pay their proportionate cost of the work and operation is by the irrigation district plan.

« PreviousContinue »