Page images
PDF
EPUB

Col. Sumpter Smith, Civil Aeronautics Authority, accompanied by Mr. J. H. Wanner, attorney.

Messrs. Nolen, Rider, and Settle represented the Commission.

Some valuable suggestions were made, and there was enclosed a copy of the proposed bill as revised to date. We would greatly appreciate your advice. The bill attempts to do two things:

(1) Set a boundary line for convenience for policing the court jurisdiction following the existing high water mark on the Virginia shore as it now exists or may be changed by artificial fills or excavations down to the pierhead line to Alexandria, and follow the pierhead line of Alexandria to the southern boundary of the District of Columbia;

(2) Reserve all rights, title, and interest of the United States between the new line and the old boundary line of 1791, and reserve the right to settle disputed claims either by the Compromise Act of 1904, or by equity suits under the act of 1912.

All conferees seemed in general agreement with these two main purposes of the bill.

I am sending copies of this latest draft to each of the above, inviting further suggestion.

We had a reply from each one of these agencies, and got a reply from the Bureau of the Budget that they were taking up the question of jurisdiction with the Department of Justice by reason of the interest of the Attorney General, and after getting the reply from the Department of Justice endorsing the proposed legislation with the changes included in the revised draft which were taken up with the National Park and Planning Commission, and those changes are acceptable to us.

Mr. NICHOLS. Why not file that for the record and let us just agree that all departments of the Government agree?

Mr. SETTLE. Yes.

Mr. NICHOLS. In other words, that they are agreed to H. R. 9976 in the form it was introduced.

Mr. SETTLE. Yes; including the redraft which was substituted and submitted to the Speaker of the House and to the President of the Senate, and that was referred to the chairman of this committee; that is how it got here.

Mr. NICHOLS. I understand.

Mr. SETTLE. That covers my statement, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. NICHOLS. You will agree, will you not, that the amendment proposed by me alters in no way the bill except to move the red line which you have here up to the black line.

Mr. SETTLE. That is right.

Mr. NICHOLS. And throws into the District of Columbia this airport?

Mr. SETTLE. That is right.

Mr. NICHOLS. That is the only change it makes; otherwise the bill has been agreed to by all the Government Departments?

Mr. SETTLE. That is correct.

Mr. NICHOLS. Now, let me just follow this up for a moment.
Mr. SETTLE. Yes.

Mr. NICHOLS. Will you be so nice as to tell this committee how this so completely disrupts the well laid out, or throws out of line, this plan of yours and the various Departments of the Government that have approved the bill in the first place; will you tell us how the amendment is so entirely disruptive?

Mr. SETTLE. Did I say it was disruptive?

Mr. NICHOLS. That is what I inferred from your statement.

Mr. SETTLE. No; I was explaining just how the bill came up here. Mr. NICHOLS. Well, let us understand each other; maybe in some way I have misunderstood you and if so I will apologize to you. Do you agree with my amendment?

Mr. SETTLE. No; I do not.

Mr. NICHOLS. Do you oppose it?

Mr. SETTLE. I will explain that; I do not think I can answer that "yes" or "no."

Mr. NICHOLS. You can whether you oppose it or not, can you not? Mr. SETTLE. You cannot say "yes" or "no"; it is like asking a man if he has quit beating his wife.

Mr. NICHOLS. Well, what is the explanation?

Mr. SETTLE. The explanation is this, that we tried to draft this bill so as to put this area under one jurisdiction and that jurisdiction was the State of Virginia, since this area here [indicating] was in the State of Virginia.

Mr. NICHOLS. Why did you not put Columbia Island in the State of Virginia?

Mr. SETTLE. Because it was decidedly in the District of Columbia and we did not feel that was logical.

Mr. NICHOLS. Well, this was decidedly in the District.

Mr. SETTLE. Not the same as the other. And, from this point they would be back in the District and from here in Virginia. That is point number one.

Number two is that I think the committee knows that the Park and Planning Commission has always taken a practical, realistic view of any legislation that we have drawn.

I do not think there is any more chance of getting the Legislature of the State of Virginia to agree to that hillside being placed in the District of Columbia than you would have of getting a slice of the moon.

Mr. NICHOLS. But suppose the State of Virginia does want to do that?

Mr. SETTLE. If the county of Arlington and the city of Alexandria and the representatives of the State of Virginia want to do that, why, all right. I do not think it would be satisfactory to them. I think they would be satisfied to have a boundary line of conveni

ence.

Mr. NICHOLS. You do not, individually at the moment, seriously oppose the proposition that this airport be left or put in the District of Columbia?

Mr. SETTLE. I do; I do from the standpoint of policing it.
Mr. NICHOLS. Forget the policing question for the moment.
Mr. SETTLE. That is why this bill was drawn up.

Mr. NICHOLS. No; this airport and, incidentally, you did a tremendous amount of work and did some very fine work in securing it. Mr. SETTLE. With your help.

Mr. NICHOLS. And finally the National Park and Planning Commission selected the Gravelly Point site.

Mr. SETTLE. Yes.

Mr. NICHOLS. And was finally successful in getting construction there. You, of course, know that it was designed as an airport for the Nation's Capital.

Mr. SETTLE. I think a great deal of work was done by the committee in deciding on this point.

Mr. NICHOLS. Yes; but the very reason why Gravelly Point was selected, as you know, was because of its immediate accessibility to Washington, D. C.

Mr. SETTLE. Including the White House and the Capitol.

Mr. NICHOLS. That is right.

Mr. SETTLE. The Nation's Capital.

Mr. NICHOLS. You agree with me there?

Mr. SETTLE. Certainly.

Mr. NICHOLS. And it was built for the Nation's Capital?

Mr. SETTLE. Certainly, as an airport for the Nation's Capital. Mr. NICHOLS. That is right.

Mr. SETTLE. And the Nation's Capital belongs to the people of the United States?

Mr. NICHOLS. That is right; and it is literally correct that the District of Columbia also belongs to all the people of the United States.

Mr. SETTLE. Yes.

Mr. NICHOLS. And presumably all have an equal interest?
Mr. SETTLE. That is right.

Mr. NICHOLS. Now, since it is built or was built for the Nation's Capital do you not think that it should be within the jurisdiction of and controlled by the Nation's Capital?

Mr. SETTLE. It is controlled by the Federal laws of the Nation's Capital; this area and this airport on either side of the river would be under Federal jurisdiction, under Federal law.

Mr. NICHOLS. In policing the area within the red line, if that became the boundary, any airplane that came in there and violated any laws would be violating the laws of the State of Virginia, would they not?

Mr. SETTLE. No.

Mr. NICHOLS. Certainly they would be.

Mr. SETTLE. Not necessarily; Congress has passed the amendment putting the control of this airport in the Civil Aeronautics Authority.

Mr. NICHOLS. I understand, but this area would be in the State of Virginia, would it not?

Mr. SETTLE. That is right.

Mr. NICHOLS. And would be subject to its jurisdiction.

Mr. SETTLE. And this would be under the courts of the District of Columbia, which derive its laws from the common laws of Maryland.

Mr. NICHOLS. Just what is there to indicate that it is so important for Congress to partially surrender control of this airport? If the Government is going to have a part of this airport for its use what is there to indicate it should not have jurisdiction over it all?

Mr. SETTLE. May I just make this statement: The Congress is not surrendering any right, title, or interest to any piece of land on this side of this blue line [indicating] nor to any improvements that have been made. We supplied the Civil Aeronautics Authority with a map and showed them just where the new buildings were put up. They knew this would be on the State of Virginia's side; they put that up with their eyes wide open.

Now, Congress cannot take this piece of land over simply by passing this bill; and the State of Virginia, in my opinion, wii never ratify transferring that area to the District of Columbia.

Our thought was that the Congress could cede this area here to the State of Virginia and not have the two jurisdictions which I think everyone will concede is very bad.

Mr. NICHOLS. You would not have two jurisdictions, would you; you would only have the one.

Mr. SETTLE. Yes.

Mr. NICHOLS. The difference between you and me is this, and I do not know about the rest of the members of the committee, but I think that it should be under the jurisdiction of the District of Columbia and your thought is that it should be under the jurisdiction of the State of Virginia.

Mr. SECCOMBE. Why should it not be under the jurisdiction of Virginia?

Mr. NICHOLS. Because it is an airport for the Nation's Capital. Mr. SECCOMBE. I can see some reason why you are correct, Mr. Nichols, but does it not also involve the question of tax, gasoline tax, to the State of Virginia?

Mr. NICHOLS. I do not think there is any question about that, but insofar as taxes are concerned, I am simply in this position: Gasoline taxes are collected for the reason that they are supposed to be put back in the maintenance and construction of roads which are destroyed by automobiles.

Mr. SETTLE. Yes.

Mr. NICHOLS. And motorboats using gasoline as well as airplanes, where taxes are collected, the gasoline tax is refunded. I think that is the situation in Virginia, if am correct.

Mr. HUNTER. I believe there are some points that possibly can be argued better after we have heard from the other gentlemen.

Mr. NICHOLS. Yes.

Mr. HUNTER. We have with us the assistant attorney general for the State of Virginia and several other officials. I believe it well to bring out these points but I believe we could better decide them after we have heard from these gentlemen. Suppose we give them a chance to make a statement, and get their statements in the record, as the time is running away rapidly.

Mr. SECCOMBE. I simply want to make this statement: They are talking about police jurisdiction when the fundamental thing involved a question of taxation.

Mr. DIRKSEN. The purpose of this bill was to determine police jurisdiction.

Mr. SETTLE. Yes.

Mr. DIRKSEN. That is the primary purpose of the bill before us.. Mr. SETTLE. Yes.

Mr. HUNTER. That was the purpose of the bill; the question of taxation comes up in connection with adopting the amendment to the bill.

Mr. DIRKSEN. I am thinking of section 6 of this bill.

Mr. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. SECCOMBE. Could I talk for about a minute?

Mr. NICHOLS. Mr. Seccombe after all is a member of this committee and he has raised a very pertinent question.

Mr. HUNTER. My only suggestion was to hear these gentlemen in order to complete the record.

Mr. NICHOLS. I would like to ask him a question. If the bill is passed as it is, and the blue line remains here, it leaves two jurisdictions.

Mr. SECCOMBE. Yes.

Mr. NICHOLS. The gasoline, if taxing is the problem, and if gasoline were sold below the blue line that gasoline would be sold in the District of Columbia and would come under the taxing laws and jurisdiction of the District of Columbia; and if it were sold and delivered above this imaginary blue line it would be sold in the State of Virginia; that is as it exists today.

Mr. SECCOMBE. That is a very fine, arbitrary line as to whether it should belong to the Federal Government or come under the jurisdiction of the District of Columbia.

However, I am merely raising the point because not so many weeks ago we had a debate here about the differential in gas taxes between Virginia and the District of Columbia; that is why I raised the point. I think it is a question of the tax, fundamentally.

Mr. NICHOLS. Surely; and nobody is trying to duck it.

Mr. SETTLE. If you will permit me, Mr. Chairman, I can conclude in a couple of minutes. I just want to say this: If this red line [indicating on map] becomes the boundary line, the entire airport will be a Federal agency, located in Virginia, just as much as the Arlington National Cemetery, or Fort Myer, is a Federal agency located in Virginia. It will have the same legal status.

We have had an agreement with the different people interested in this matter. I doubt very much if the State of Virginia and the county of Arlington would have ratified this boundary line where we did. But they are here to speak for themselves.

On the question of settling titles, after 1934 we settled with the railroad, settled the matter so far as Four Mile Run and Roachs Run are concerned, and as far as Arlington County is concerned, the only remaining area where the question of title is concerned

Mr. NICHOLS. There is nothing here in reference to trying to settle title.

Mr. SETTLE. That, of course, is another angle.

I say, if any attempt is made to include these major amendments, either to take the airport and put it all in the District, or to strike out the reference in section 3 to the settling of claims, I think either one would doom the bill for this session.

I therefore recommend that the bill, without the amendments, be reported out and put on the Calendar.

Mr. HUNTER. Thank you for your statement, Mr. Settle.
Judge Smith, would you like to make a statement at this time?

STATEMENT OF HON. HOWARD W. SMITH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF VIRGINIA

Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to make a very brief statement. But, in view of several questions which have been raised, I would like to say that the assistant attorney general of Virginia is here, and also the auditor of the Motor Vehicle Divi

« PreviousContinue »