Page images

The statement from the War Department to the Senate Military Affairs Committee concerning the bill which was enacted into law and approved on June 18, 1930. follows:


Washington, April 1, 1930. Hon, David A, REED,

United States Senate. DEAR SENATOR REED: Careful consideration has been given to the bill (S. 3810) to provide for the commemoration of the termination of the War between the States at Appomattox Court House, Va., which you transmitted to the War Department under date of March 17, 1930, with a request for information and the views of the Department relative thereto.

The applicable provision of existing law on this subject appears in Pub'ic, No. 372, Sixty-ninth Congress, entitled "An act to provide for the study and investigation of battlefields in the United States for commemorative purposes”, approved June 11, 1926.

In the report of progress made in the study and investigation of battlefields, submitted to Congress on December 6, 1928, and published as Senate Document No. 187, Seventieth Congress, second session, it was recommended that Congress approve the general classification of battlefields as set forth in House of Representatives Report No. 1071, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session; that it indicate which battlefields, if any, it desires to commemorate or survey; and that it authorize the necessary appropriations to carry its wishes into effect. No action has been taken by Congress on this recommendation,

The method of commemoration of the historic events named in this bill is in accordance with the recommendations as to classification as set forth in the report of the War Department. The amount authorized to be appropriated for this commemoration, however, is not in accordance with the recommendations of said report.

The bill authorizes the appropriation of $150,000, and further authorizes an annual maintenance appropriation not to exceed $250.

The War Department recommends against enactment of the bill for the reason that it does not conform to the report submitted to Congress on this battlefield.

If the bill were amended by striking out "$150,000” on page 2, line 5, and substituting therefor “$100,000", it would then conform to the report on this battlefield submitted to Congress by the War Department.

The question as to whether or not any historical place and event shall be commemorated is a matter of public policy which Congress must decide. When a bill is submitted which conforms to the report on that place and event, the War Department consistently withholds any definite recommendation as to whether or not the place and event should be commemorated. Sincerely yours,

PATRICK J. HURLEY, Secretary of War. In compliance with the provisions of clause 2a of rule XIII there appears in parallel columns the act of June 18, 1930, and those portions of the present bill amending that act.


ACT OF JUNE 18, 1930 (PUBLIC—No. 379—71st CONGRESS) That when title to all the land,

structures, and other property within a (8. 3810)

distance of five miles from the AppoAN ACT To provide for the commemoration of the mattox Court House site, Virginia, as terminatio

War between the States at shall be designated by the Secretary of Appomattox Court House, Virginia

the Interior in the exercise of his disBe it enacted by the Senate and House cretion as necessary or desirable for of Representatives of the United States of national-park purposes, shall have been America in Congress assembled, That for

vested in the United States in fee simple the purpose of commemorating the ter

such area or areas shall be, and they are mination of the War between the States hereby, established, dedicated, and set which was brought about by the sur

apart as a public park for the benefit render of the army under General

and enjoyment of the people and shall Robert E. Lee to Lieutenant General be known as the 'Appomattox Court U. S. Grant at Appomattox Court

House National Historical Park.' House, in the State of Virginia, on

“Sec. 2. That there is hereby auApril 9, 1865, and for the further pur

thorized to be appropriated the sum of pose of honoring those who engaged in $100,000, or so much thereof as may be this tremendous conflict, the Secretary necessary, to carry out the provisions of War is authorized and directed to

of section 1 of this Act as amended acquire at the scene of said surrender hereby. approximately one acre of land, free of

“Sec. 3. That the Secretary of the cost to the United States, at the above

Interior be, and he is hereby, authornamed place, fence the parcel of land ized to accept donations of land and/or so acquired or demarcate its limits, and buildings, structures, and so forth, erect a monument thereon.

within the boundaries of said park as Sec. 2. There is hereby authorized

determined and fixed hereunder and to be appropriated the sum of $100,000, donations of funds for the purchase or so much thereof as may be necessary,

and/or maintenance thereof: Provided, to carry out the provisions of section i That he may acquire on behalf of the of this Act.

United States, by purchase when purSEC. 3. The land acquired under sec

chasable at prices deemed by him reation 1 of this Act shall be under the sonable, otherwise by condemnation jurisdiction and control of the Secretary under the provisions of the Act of of War, and there is authorized to be August 1, 1888, such tracts of land appropriated for the maintenance of

within the said park as may be necessuch tract of land and monument a sum

sary for the completion thereof." not to exceed $250 per annum.

Approved, June 18, 1930.

[ocr errors]


May 9, 1935.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state

of the Union and ordered to be printed

Mr. Smith of West Virginia, from the Committee on Mines and

Mining, submitted the following


(To accompany H. R. 7958)

The Committee on Mines and Mining, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 7958) to relieve unemployment in mining districts, increase the monetary gold and silver reserve of the United States, and to develop strategic, deficiency, and noncompetitive mineral resources of the Nation, and for other purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon and recommend that the bill do pass.

It is recognized that the relief of the unemployed in mining districts has been regarded as exceptionally difficult because these districts are usually isolated and are almost wholly supported by mining. Agricultural lands suitable for subsistence farming are seldom available in the vicinity of the mines and most of the workers are highly specialized in their training, so they know little of other trades than that of mining.

Many who were formerly prospectors are now owners of claims discovered long ago, which they try to develop in the belief that though hey could not formerly be worked at a profit, the possibilities in egard to them have been improved by the development of cheaper nethods of mining and milling. In many cases the better develop, nent of communications will now permit the shipment of ore and upplies at a small fraction of the former cost. In many such instances : would undoubtedly be more desirable in the national interest to give hoderate support to such operations in preference to supporting the aim owners on unproductive relief.

Some properties deemed merely marginal, if once equipped, are sely to prove self-sustaining. A few out of many would probably urn really substantial profits and the development of such properties should be an exceedingly effective means of reemployment, because in mining, the largest number of people are employed at the stage of development and equipment. Such operations require the construction of camps and roads, and, in many cases, the building of mills. If the mining population now receiving subsistence were so employed, valuable facilities for future production would be created from labor that would otherwise be permanently lost.

The program will not interfere with private business in competitive manner, and cannot be the target of attacks on the grounds that it constitutes an invalid exercise of administrative power under the law or Federal Constitution.

That the discovery of mineral deposits serves a public purpose is too well recognized to submit to argument. For decades the public mineral rights have been dedicated to the locator and discoverer of mineral on the public domain. The law allows the discoverer or his assignee to hold the claim as long as $100 of assessment work is performed annually.

As long as the program is confined to noncompetitive minerals, it is difficult to conceive of any meritorious objections to the proposed plan.

Where discoveries are consummated under the plan, the Govern. ment will derive the following benefits:

(1) Increased employment during the exploratory program.

(2) Stimulated trade in supplies, materials, and machinery during the exploratory program.

(3) Where discoveries are made, either a royalty based on gross income from production or a profit for each dollar expended.

(4) A right to income taxes ranging from 18 percent to 75 percent on all profits derived from subsequent exploitation, a right which would not exist in the absence of discovery.

(5) Creation of new sources of employment during exploitation period.

(6) Creation of new markets for mine and mill machinery and supplies.

The most essential feature of this plan for relief of unemployed miners is to stimulate the mining of ores of too low grade or too small quantity to profitably ship to existing mills and smelters.

In areas where a sufficient tonnage of ore is indicated, the Bureau of Mines is expected to erect sampling plants near selected mill sites. Each sampling plant would consist of a platform scales, crushing plant, and automatic sampling equipment, with the necessary conveying machinery, etc. As the ores were brought in to the sampler they would be paid for after deducting a reasonable sampling and milling charge and other handling charges. Prior to taking any ores, metallurgical tests would be run to determine what percentage of extraction can be obtained. Each sampling plant would be operated by one man of mature judgment and known integrity, and preferably one who knew the various ores in the district. As the ores were bought they would be stockpiled. The control samples would be run by a central laboratory and the sampling plant operator would have nothing to do with the assaying, although it might be desirable to take moisture samples as soon as the ores were received. Assay limits would be agreed upon as is done at custom smelting plants.

« PreviousContinue »