MARCH 4 (calendar day, MARCH 11), 1935.-Ordered to be printed

Mr. KING, from the Committee on the District of Columbia,
submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany H. J. Res. 134].

The Committee on the District of Columbia, to whom was referred the joint resolution (H. J. Res. 134), after consideration report the same favorably to the Senate with the recommendation that the resolution be adopted.

The Virginia-District of Columbia Boundary Commission, appointed pursuant to an act of the last Congress, approved March 21, 1934 (Public, 125, 73d Cong., 48 Stat. 453), reports that it will be unable to complete its work by March 1, 1935, the time limit set by the act. This joint resolution extends the life of the Commission until it shall have completed its work and made its report, but not later than December 1, 1935, and authorizes an additional appropriation of $10,000 to defray expenses of the Commission and pay salaries and compensation under the act.

The Commissioners are required to survey, agree upon, and mark a boundary line between the District of Columbia and the State of Virginia. In locating the line they are directed to take into consideration the several decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States in relation thereto, the findings and reports of the Maryland and Virginia Boundary Commission of 1877, the compact of 1785 between the State of Maryland and the Commonwealth of Virginia, the claims of ownership of the United States and all private persons and corporations along the Virginia shore line, and the equitable and prescriptive rights, if any, of the United States and private claimants growing out of long, continued, and uninterrupted possession. The Commissioners are to report their findings and recommendations to the Congress and to the Legislature of Virginia, and the boundary line recommended by the Commission shall become binding only when and if ratified both by the Congress and by the Legislature of Virginia.

S. Repts., 74-1, vol. 1-22

At the hearings before the Committee on the Judiciary of the House the Commissioners stated that it is impossible for them to complete their work by March 1. The following excerpt from the testimony before the committee of Commissioner Gloth is indicative of the amount of work which has been done by the Commission and the amount of work which yet remains to be done:

Up to the present time the transcript of the record comprised 1,956 pages not including exhibits heretofore referred to, a copy of all of which transcript will be presented to the Congress when full report is made by this Commission.

The Commission is proceeding day by day holding four sessions per week beginning on Tuesday, Tuesday being the day fixed for the day of the week for the beginning of testimony (instead of Monday) at the request of counsel representing all of the parties appearing before the Commission.

As stated above, Arlington County has notified the Commission that it will require not less than 3 weeks longer to complete its testimony.

The city of Alexandria has notified the Commission that it will require not less than 2 to 4 weeks longer to complete the taking of its testimony.

At the conclusion of this time, of course, the intervening private property owners have expressed a desire to present their claims respecting the boundaryline dispute of the respective sovereigns. At the conclusion of this time, of course, the Government of the United States will require considerable time for the refutation of the evidence in support of the claims of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Arlington County, the city of Alexandria, and the private property owners on the Virginia shore of the Potomac River.

As I said, Mr. Chairman, 1,956 pages of testimony have been taken already. The Government, in the presentation of its case in chief, which was only its prima facie case, submitted 20 exhibits. I have not a list of those with me. I got this information up hurriedly last night, because I did not know we were going to appear before the committee until yesterday.

I will say, however, up until yesterday Alexandria city had offered 48 exhibits, and the county of Arlington had offered 74 exhibits. Among these exhibits we find abstracts of titles. One of those abstracts contains 126 pages. If you gentlemen care to, you can take a look at the type of exhibits that have been accepted by the Commission. I haven't any idea how long it is going to take to study these exhibits and form a conclusion as to their value or worth, nor how long it is going to take to digest this testimony after it has been taken.

MARCH 4 (calendar day, MARCH 11), 1935.-Ordered to be printed

Mr. REYNOLDS, from the Committee on the District of Columbia, submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany H. R. 3477]

The Committee on the District of Columbia, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 3477) supplementary to and amendatory of the incorporation of Trinity College of Washington, D. C., organized under and by virtue of a certificate of incorporation pursuant to the incorporation laws of the District of Columbia, as provided in subchapter 1 of chapter 18 of the Code of Laws of the District of Columbia, having considered the same, report favorably thereon and recommend that the bill do pass.

Trinity College is now attempting to operate under certification of incorporation filed in 1897 under the provisions of subchapter 1 of chapter 18 of the Code of Laws of the District of Columbia. The articles of incorporation were drawn with little view to the future development of the college and therefore they have become obsolete and unworkable. H. R. 3477 provides for an increase in the number of trustees and who shall be members of the board of trustees of Trinity College; by whom the board of trustees shall be elected and who shall be eligible for membership on the board of trustees and the powers and duties of the board of trustees; that Trinity College may enter into affiliated agreements with other institutions of learning; that Trinity College may receive, invest, and administer endowments and gifts of money and property absolute or subject to payments by way of annuities; that Trinity College shall adopt a common seal by which all acts of Trinity College shall be authenticated, and that no institution of learning hereafter incorporated in the District of Columbia shall use the words in whole or in part "Trinity College."

Similar legislation has been enacted for the benefit of Columbus, Georgetown, George Washington, National, and Catholic Universities.

The Board of Commissioners of the District of Columbia and the Board of Education of the District of Columbia have submitted favorable reports on this bill.

Trinity College, located at Michigan Avenue and Harewood Road NE., Washington, D. C., was founded in 1897 for the higher education of women. Since its foundation Trinity College has greatly developed not only with regard to size but in respect to academic achievement. With a student body drawn from all parts of the country, it has become a national rather than a purely local institution. In 1917 Trinity College was recognized on the Association of American Universities list; in 1921 it was accredited by the regional agency. Trinity College received a place on the American Council of Education's list of American colleges prepared for foreign institutions in 1921. The college was accredited in 1904 by the board of regents of the University of New York State and in 1914 it was ranked among colleges of the first grade by the United States Bureau of Education; is also a member of the Association of American Colleges, an institutional member of the American Council on Education, and a member of the American Association of University Women. Considering the importance of Trinity College as an institution of higher education for women, the inadequacy of the present articles of incorporation and the fact that similar legislation has been passed for the benefit of such institutions as Columbus, Georgetown, George Washington, National, and Catholic Universities, Trinity College is entitled to whatever advantage it may receive by the passage of this bill.

O

AUTHORIZING CERTAIN OFFICERS OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS TO ADMINISTER OATHS

MARCH 4 (calendar day, MARCH 12), 1935.-Ordered to be printed

Mr. TRAMMELL, from the Committee on Naval Affairs, submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany S. 93]

The Committee on Naval Affairs of the Senate, to whom was referred the bill (S. 93) to authorize certain officers of the Navy and Marine Corps to administer oaths, having considered the same, report favorably thereon and recommend that the bill do pass.

The purpose of the bill is to authorize certain officers of the Navy and Marine Corps to administer oaths outside the continental limits of the United States, for the purpose of naval administration and naval justice.

The following letter from the Secretary of the Navy addressed to the Chairman of the Committee on Naval Affairs of the Senate sets forth the views and recommendations of the Department thereon, and is hereby made a part of this report:

NAVY DEPARTMENT, Washington, October 30, 1934. Washington, D. C.

THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

MY DEAR MR. SPEAKER: There is transmitted herewith a draft of a proposed bill "To authorize certain officers of the Navy and Marine Corps to administer oaths."

The proposed legislation will meet the demand for general notarial services beyond the continental limits of the United States where the Navy or Marine Corps may be serving by conferring upon such officers as are authorized to administer oaths for the purposes of administration of naval justice and for other purposes of naval administration the general powers of a notary public or of a consul of the United States in the administration of oaths, the execution and acknowledgement of legal instruments, the attestation of documents, and of other forms of instruments to be executed by persons in the service of the Government in accordance with the laws of the United States or of any State of the United States requiring notarial services.