DAM ACROSS WHITE RIVER, MO.

JULY 30, 1912.-Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed.

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

REPORT.

[To accompany H. R. 25035.]

The Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 25035) granting to the Ozark Power & Water Co. authority to construct a dam across White River, Mo., having considered the same, report thereon with a recommendation that it

pass.

The following is the report of the Chief of Engineers on this bill: ENGINEER OFFICE, UNITED STATES ARMY, Little Rock, Ark., June 24, 1912.

The CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, UNITED STATES ARMY,

Washington, D. C.

GENERAL: I have the honor to submit the following report in compliance with the first indorsement (wrapper on H. R. 25035, 62d Cong., 2d sess., based on 85560) in reference to a bill granting to the Ozark Power & Water Co. authority to construct a dam across White River, Mo.

2. (a) Within a circle described by a 25-mile radius with the proposed site for the dam as a center, there is little to call for a water-power development. Such a circle just touches the edge of the zinc fields of north western Arkansas and of the zinc and lead district of Aurora, Mo. There are no towns of any importance within its limits, and the country is not such as will develop any. The present population within this circle is about 43,000, is practically the same as it was 20 years ago, and less than it was 10 years ago, and there is little market there for electric current. Within a circle described from the same center with a 50-mile radius there are the zinc fields of northwestern Arkansas and the lead and zinc fields of the Aurora, Mo., district. There are not over six towns between the first and second circles which have over 1,000 population. The three largest are Springfield, Mo., 35,000; Monett, Mo., 4,200; and Eureka Springs, Ark., 3,200. The total population between the two circles is about 193,000, an increase of 27,000 in 20 years, with no part of the increase occurring in the last 10 years. About half of the area between the two circles is susceptible to a development which will afford a market for the products from a water power on White River, and there is a prospect for the sale of all the power the dam can produce during the low-water period of three months. From what information there is available it appears that this power, i. e., during the low-water period, would not exceed about 1,800 horsepower.

(b) As inferred in the foregoing, there is little likelihood of the country in the immediate vicinity of the dam developing to a point calling for any large amount of water power, and the market will be at points over 25 miles distant. Beyond the 25

mile limit there should be an increase in the demand for such power: First, in connection with the development of the zinc fields in northwestern Arkansas; second, in the general commercial lighting and power business in southwestern Missouri, this including power for interurban lines, the construction of which is just now beginning in the territory around Springfield, Mo. Farther west, about Joplin, Mo., the interurban development is very well advanced, the power coming from plants on Spring River, Mo. I think the commercial needs for electrical power will increase, but as to whether or not the current from the water-power development can compete with the steam plants located directly at the place of consumption I am unable to state.

(c) The proposed site for the dam is about 20 miles above Forsythe, Mo., the head of steamboat navigation on White River, and about 86 miles below James Fork of White River, the head of raft navigation-i. e., the portion of the river crossed is navigable at present by rafts only. The time is remote when conditions would warrant the improvement of that portion of the river by the National Government for navigation purposes.

(d) The United States land office at Little Rock, Ark., states there are no national forest reserves along the White River in Missouri nor any public domain of any sort, excepting perhaps a few isolated tracks of public lands not yet sold.

(e) The dam without a lock or some other means for passing rafts would be an obstruction to the present navigation of the river. It will be directly at the head of the pool created by the Ozark Power & Water Co. dam authorized by act of February 4, 1911 (E. D. file 79566). That pool will be about 17 miles long, and by the terms of the instrument approving the plans for that dam (79566/26) it is a public waterway. Assuming the same terms will be incorporated in an instrument approving plans for this dam, when the work shall have advanced to that stage, the pool from the dam now under construction will also be a public waterway, and the dam without some means for passing rafts would be a complete separator between two directly adjacent navigable waters. The proposed dam if provided with a lock or other means of passing rafts would be of local value to the small rafting commerce terminating at Branson. In connection with the river as a whole it would not be of any particular benefit, because of the unimproved river between the dam 17 miles below this one and the head of the Government series extending upstream from Batesville. 3. There is no apparent objection to the bill receiving favorable consideration. Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

CLARKE S. SMITH,

Washington, June 27, 1912.

Respectfully returned to the Secretary of War. The accompanying bill, H. R. 25035, is designed to authorize the construction of a dam, presumably for the development of water power, across White River in the State of Missouri. The head of steamboat navigation on this river is at the town of Forsyth, Mo., and the location of the proposed dam, as fixed in the bill, is about 20 miles above this point, where the river is navigable only for canoes and for floating logs and rafts.

This portion of the river has never been improved by the General Government for navigation purposes, and conditions are such that the probability of its improvement being undertaken by Congress is very remote. Should the proposed dam be constructed and provided with proper facilities for the passing of canoes, logs, and rafts, it would be of some local advantage to this kind of commerce, but it would prove of no particular benefit to through navigation on account of the long stretch of unimproved river below.

The country adjacent to the site of the proposed dam is sparsely settled, the total population within a radius of 25 miles being only 43,000, which is less than it was 10 years ago, with no towns of any importance. Within a radius of 50 miles the population is about 193,000, with only six towns of more than 1,000, the only large one being Springfield, Mo., with about 35,000 population. It is estimated, however, that the total production of the proposed dam would not exceed 1,800 horsepower during the low-water period of three months in each year, and it is probable that a ready market for the whole of this production already exists or can be found at reasonable prices.

Further details as to the local conditions are given by the report of the district engineer officer, dated June 24, 1912, copy herewith.

W. H. BIXBY, Chief of Engineers, United States Army.

The War Department sent to the committee the foregoing letter from the Chief of Engineers approving the bill, but the Secretary of War transmitted a report proposing some changes in the bill which we are unable to approve, for the reason that every suggestion he makes is already provided for in the general dam act. The great diversity of circumstances and conditions presented in the multitude of projects seeking authorization by Congress renders it difficult and cumbersome to enact extended legislation to prescribe and provide detailed regulations and specific requirements in the bill authorizing each project. Therefore Congress wisely standardized the form of the bills granting the consent of Congress and enacted the general dam act conferring upon the Secretary of War and the Chief of Engineers full power and authority to consider all the questions now raised by the Secretary of War and dispose of them absolutely in each case as conditions of the approval of the plans and specifications presented to him without which no dam can be lawfully constructed. Having by the general dam act conferred absolute power upon the Secretary of War to dispose of all these subjects, to the full protection of the public and the promotion of navigation, we deem it unwise to nullify a beneficial purpose of the general dam act by returning to the suggested old method of incorporating in each bill all legislation upon the subject.

In the report upon this bill the Secretary of War has suggested amendments in two respects: First, for additional compensation to the United States because of the use of its rights in the generation of the power and the consequent profit from such use; secondly, some reservation for the control by Congress of the rates to be charged to con

sumers.

The committee has carefully considered these suggested amendments, and is of the opinion that the substance of them is fully covered by the provisions of the general dam act of 1910. The second proviso to section 1 of this act reads as follows:

That in acting upon said plans as aforesaid the Chief of Engineers and the Secretary of War shall consider the bearing of said structure upon a comprehensive plan for the improvement of the waterway over which it is to be constructed, with a view to the promotion of its navigable quality and for the full development of water power; and as a part of the conditions and stipulations imposed by them, shall provide for improving and developing navigation, and fix such charge or charges for the privilege granted as may be sufficient to restore conditions with respect to navigability as existing at the time such privilege be granted or reimburse the United States for doing the same, and for such additional or further expense as may be incurred by the United States with reference to such project, including the cost of any investigations necessary for approval of plans and of such supervision of construction as may be necessary in the interest of the United States.

This requires the Secretary of War to consider a comprehensive plan for the improvement of the whole waterway effected by the proposed dam, both for navigation and water power, and as a part of his approval of the plans to provide for the improvement of navigation and

to fix such charge for the privilege granted as may be sufficient to restore condition in respect to navigability as existed at the time such privilege be granted.

In case where the United States has not made improvements and has no property rights in connection with the waterway, this proviso authorizes the Secretary of War to fix charges for whatever rights of the United States which now or can exist with respect to navigability

H R-62-2-vol 5-22

of this waterway in any way effected by this project. The Secretary of War may impose such proper charge as he may see fit upon this basis and within this limit. So the committee does not believe that any further extension of authority is necessary, and a construction of this language in the existing law can secure all the Secretary of War desires within the limits of the constitutional powers of Congress.

Second. The suggestion that Congress reserve the right to supervise the price charged to consumers is guarded by the general dam act by the right to "alter, amend, or repeal this act" and by the expiration of the franchise at the end of 50 years. The proper authority to control the charge to consumers are the several States, in the exercise of their police powers, while the United States can only act subordinate to them, by conditions made a part of its grant authorizing the construction of the dam. This subordinate right of control should only be exercised in flagrant cases where the State is unable and unwilling to properly perform its functions. Such cases should not be assumed. But if any shall arise in the future Congress may amend its grant by fixing conditions as to proper charges for the consumers, if it shall be shown to be necessary for their protection. But now it does not seem wise to presume that the several States will be derelict in their responsibility to their own people.

DAM ACROSS THE COOSA RIVER, ALA.

JULY 30, 1912.-Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed.

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

REPORT.

[To accompany H. R. 26007.]

The Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 26007) to authorize the building of a dam across the Coosa River, in Alabama, at a place suitable to the interests of navigation about 7 miles above the city of Wetumpka, having considered the same, report thereon with a recommendation that it

pass.

This bill has not been reported on to our committee at all by the War Department. It is not usual for us to report bills of this kind until some sort of a report has been made for us to consider and report to the House; but in this case the committee has been informed reliably that the project can not fail to be favorably reported by the War Department, because it is proposed to erect a dam on a site already selected and approved by the engineers of the War Department for the erection of Dam 18 on the Coosa River, and the proposition offered in this project is that private capital will relieve the Government of that expense, if this consent is granted, and erect that dam in which a lock may subsequently be placed, on such terms as the Secretary of War sees proper to impose. Of course, we expect from the Secretary of War the same letter, in substance, which he has adopted as to the eight bills in which we can not concur, and therefore we deem it unnecessary to wait for his letter.

О