Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

SEC. 8. That said corporation shall have the right to confine the waters of Cordova Creek to one channel and to straighten and deepen the same in such manner as may be prescribed by the Secretary of War. SEC. 9. That the Alaska Terminal and Navigation Company shall be permitted to purchase, at the price of $2.50 per acre, not to exceed 640 acres of such nonmineral lands of the United States as may be selected by said corporation and approved by the Secretary of the Interior, including the tide and mud hats, situated on the southerly end of Kanak Island, in the district of Alaska, with a front of not to exceed 1 mile on the wharfage and dock area on Controller Bay, to be reserved by the Secretary of War as provided in section 10 of this

aet.

SEC. 10. That the Secretary of War, as soon as practicable after the passage of this act, shall establish a wharfage and dock area extending along the entire water front of the land proposed to be bought by said corporation, and 1,000 feet in width, thereby fixing the seaward line of said wharfage and dock area, and the area thus established is hereby reserved and shall remain under the control of the United States, in trust, however, for the future State which may be created, includ ing the same or any part thereof within its boundaries: Provided, That wharves, docks, slips, and waterways may be constructed and maintained within such wharfage and dock area in accordance with plans approved and terms and conditions prescribed from time to time by the Secretary of War: but the public at all times shall have the use of all such wharves, docks, slips, and waterways upon the payment of such reasonable charges, and under such regulations, as may from time to time be fixed and prescribed by the Secretary of War.

SEC. 11. That the corporation named in section 9 of this act shall, within six months after the approval hereof, file with the register and receiver of the land district within which the lands applied for are situated an application to purchase under this act, which application shall particularly describe the lands applied for, including the tide or mud fiats, and be accompanied by a certified copy of the field notes and plat of the survey of the boundaries of such lands made under the direction and supervision of the surveyor-general of the district of Alaska.

SEC. 12. That the corporation named in section 9 of this act shall, within one year from the approval hereof, subject to the approval and under the direction of the Secretary of War, file with the Secretary of the Interior a detailed plan of such wharves, decks, slips, and waterways as may be necessary and suitable for shipping purposes; and shall within two years from the approval of the plan mentioned in this section construct within such wharfage and dock area a public dock, wharf, or pier with not less than 30 feet of water at mean low tide leading to and surrounding the same, so as to enable ocean steamers to approach, dock, discharge, and take on cargoes thercat: Provided, however, That within four years from such approval the water approaching and surrounding said public deck, pier, or wharf shall be deepened by said corporation to a depth of not less than 35 feet.

SEC. 13. That patents for said land shall recite that they are issued under the provisions of this act, and are subject to cancellation and the land therein granted to forfeiture as herein provided; that if said corporation shall fail to comply with any of the terms and conditions of this act or shall fail to do and perform any of the things required of it in this act, either before or after the issuance of patent, all interests, right, or title which may have accrued or vested under this act shall be forfeited to the United States, and the application under which they accrued or the patent under which they vested shall be canceled: Protided, That the Secretary of War may, on satisfactory showing, reasonably extend the time within which any of the acts enumerated in this act may be performed.

SEC. 14. That this act may be amended, modified, or repealed. Mr. ROBINSON. Mr. Speaker, I demand a second. The SPEAKER. Under the rule a second is ordered. The gentleman from New York is entitled to twenty minutes and the gentleman from Arkansas is entitled to twenty minutes.

Mr. PARSONS. Mr. Speaker, this motion is to strike out everything in the Senate bill after the enacting clause and to insert two bills relating to Alaska reported by the Committee on Public Lands. The numbers of the bills are H. R. 19914, in regard to Cordova Bay, and H. R. 21218, in regard to Controller Bay. The first part of the amendment grauts to the Cordova Bay Harbor Improvement and Town Site Company, as soon as it shall be incorporated, not exceeding 2,000 acres. So far as the committee could ascertain these acres are almost entirely made up of mud flats, and to be useful they would have to be filled in. Both these bills have the approval of the Department of the Interior. The committee, however, imposed further restrictions than did the Department of the Interior. In the first bill, as approved by the Department, the company was entitled to take 5,000 acres. We cut it down to 2,000 acres, and then provided that surrounding this town site 3,000 acres should be withdrawn by the Department from location or entry, so that the forests and the water rights would remain under the control of the Government.

Each one of the bills provides that along the water front there shall be reserved by and remain under the control of the Government a strip 1,000 feet broad. In that strip there shall be constructed the wharves and docks. In each case the land to be taken is to be paid for at the rate of $2.50 an acre. Within six months the corporation is to file its application to purchase and within twelve months after that has been approved it is to file its plans. In the case of the Cordova Bay Company within two years after its plans have been filed it must within this wharfage and dock area construct a public wharf or dock or pier, the water approach to which and water surrounding which shall have a depth of not less than 34 feet at mean low water. In New York Harbor, Ambrose Channel, which is the main channel that we are now dredging, is only to have a depth of 35 feet. This Cordova Harbor is to have a depth of 34 feet. I

mention this to show that if this corporation dredges out and gets a depth there of 34 feet, which is one requirement it must comply with, then you may be sure its promoters are acting in good faith. If they do not fulfill the conditions, then all the grant is subject to forfeiture, and that will all be set out in the patent. There are other details which I have not mentioned

Mr. COLE. Is this a railroad proposition?

Mr. PARSONS. No.

Mr. COLE. Is not this corporation subsidiary to some railroad corporation?

Mr. PARSONS. No. I will say to the gentleman that so far as I could learn the railroad which is going from Cordova Bay now has a harbor at a different point on Cordova Bay, and so far as I know this is a different proposition. I have been informed that that railroad has built there a harbor at its own point on this bay. Now, in regard to the other bill, the Controller Bay bill, I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. CRAIG] who reported the bill for the committee. Mr. CRAIG. Mr. Speaker, I am in favor of this bill as it is amended, consolidating the two bills for harbors in Alaska. The Controller Bay bill is the proposition to which I will In Controller Bay there is an specially address my remarks. island or sand bar-on some maps it is given as Kanak Island, and on others it is given as a sand bar across this bay, and other maps do not show it at all. It is on this island or sand bar that the land described in the bill is situated. This island is uninhabited and has neither animal nor vegetable life on it. It has never been used for any purpose, and it is situated in this bay in such a manner that on the southeasterly corner, or near that point, a harbor may be constructed, according to the This harbor will be dredged about opinion of some engineers. 2,000,000 cubic yards in order to make a channel, and that does not include the dock which the corporation must build for the use of the public.

Mr. CUSHMAN. Two million yards.

Mr. CRAIG. Two million cubic yards must be dredged. This bill provides that this corporation shall be allowed to purchase from the Government 640 acres of land, or mud flats, whichever they may select on this island, but these 640 acres of land must not be on the water front, but must front on the harbor area, which is to be reserved by the Secretary of War. In other words, the Government will reserve a strip of land 1,000 feet wide between the water front and the land which is sold; and that strip must be reserved for the future State. It must be held in trust by the Government. This company must present plans and specifications for the dredging, and they must be approved by the Secretary of War. Then they must construct within a given length of time-two years, I believeafter the approval of the plans a dock or wharf, around which there shall be a depth of water 34 feet. That is, at the end of two years. At the end of three years they must have deepened their channel to 35 feet.

The reason for that was that it is expected that coal, which is to be dug from the coal mines which we hope to see opened up there, will be brought down to this part of the country. It can be barged over from the land to this island on the same kind of barges that they now use in New York Harbor, except that they will not have the great depth that they have in New York.

Now, when the channel is completed, the vessels of our Navy We are can land, even the largest vessels, right at this dock. now paying on the Pacific $8.30 a ton for the coal our fleet is burning. Some of that coal is American coal, but even most of that is carried in foreign bottoms; whereas, when we get this harbor complete, with these slips and docks constructed, it is thought that ultimately they can land coal on these docks for our fleet at $4.50 a ton, which undoubtedly will be very greatly to the benefit of this country.

Mr. GAINES of Tennessee. We are paying now about $10 a ton?

Mr. CRAIG. We are paying $8.30 a ton for coal now. The question has just been asked by the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. HUMPHREYS] whether or not this company will charge for the use of these docks. That can not be so, because the land upon which the docks are to be built is reserved by the Government, and anybody who will come to the Secretary of War and comply with the terms that he may prescribe from time to time may get the privilege of leasing or having a dock made there, or getting a place where they can make a dock, and then they can charge for ships coming in. This company does not make that charge except as prescribed by the Secretary of War. This company expects to make its money by owning the terminal facilities back of the docks and running barges from the land over to these docks. It is not expected to build a

town at this point, because it is not expected it will at any time be habitable, but it is expected that they can use these barges, bring over the produce from the land, and get the best harbor facilities possible. This place is very well protected from all points, according to all the evidence introduced in the committee.

Mr. HAMLIN. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. CRAIG. Certainly.
Mr. HAMLIN.
now?

What business is this company engaged in

Mr. CRAIG. This company, as I understand it, is not engaged in any business now, but is trying to get engaged in the business of opening this harbor.

Mr. HAMLIN. I thought perhaps they might own certain coal mines.

The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. ROBINSON. I yield to the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. CRAIG] three minutes more.

Mr. CRAIG. The testimony before the committee does not develop that these gentlemen have any interests, railroad or otherwise. But they expect to make their money out of owning these terminal facilities for handling the cargoes that come in and go out of this port.

the Pacific coast shall get this coal from the fields of Alaska, but at the same time, Mr. Speaker, we want to preserve the rights of the United States Government when it comes to granting franchises for the construction of railways in Alaska. We do not intend to grant any railway corporation exclusive rights to harbor facilities. That is the proposition I contend for, and I hope that this House may defeat this bill and let the Committee on Territories, which has jurisdiction of this proposition, bring in a report upon the question of the general construction of railways in Alaska. [Applause.]

Mr. PARSONS. Would the gentleman oblige me by pointing out in the bill a single thing that does not guarantee the interests of the United States?

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, that is just the trouble. I have not had time to investigate the report on the bill; but I do know something of the general proposition of railway construction in Alaska, and I do not like to vote for a bill involving this question without knowing exactly what I am supporting. [Applause.]

Mr. ROBINSON. Mr. Speaker, as a general proposition, I do not believe in granting lands to private corporations; but under the provisions of this bill the rights of the Government and the rights of the public are so carefully safeguarded that in my

Mr. HAMLIN. There is no railroad running down to the judgment, after a very detailed and careful consideration of the coast at this point at this time?

Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. CRAIG. Not now. Mr. BENNET of New York. Mr. CRAIG. Certainly. Mr. BENNET of New York. Do you think under the restrictions of this bill and what they have got to do they can make it pay?

If

Mr. CRAIG. That was not a part of our consideration. they are willing to take the bill and dig this channel to 35 feet and build this dock for the use of the public, I say it is a good proposition from a business standpoint for the Government, and we are not looking out for the other fellow particularly.

Mr. HUGHES of New Jersey. Will the gentleman yield for a question?

[blocks in formation]

Mr. HUGHES of New Jersey. Is it true that the Government retains the control or ownership of the water front?

Mr. CRAIG. The Government retains the control and reserves from every kind of entry or sale of any kind 1,000 feet in width of all the water front, which is to be held in trust for the future State.

I yield back the remainder of my time, Mr. Speaker. Mr. ROBINSON. I yield two minutes to the gentleman from Ohio.

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I am not familiar with the details of this measure. I chance to be a member of the Committee on Territories, and this proposition for the construction of railways in Alaska has been before the Committee on Territories for the last two or three years. We have had very extensive hearings upon that matter, and we had hoped that some general measure involving the construction of railways in Alaska might be submitted to this House at this or the coming session. It occurs to me that this is taking snap judgment upon a very serious proposition. Now, here is a matter granting a corporation about 2,000 acres.

Mr. PARSONS. Let me make a statement. Your committee in the Fifty-ninth Congress reported out a bill granting to these same people 4,500 acres at this same point.

Mr. COLE. I realize that our committee took favorable action upon this proposition at one time in connection with railroad legislation which was recommended by the President of the United States. But now here is a matter brought in in the closing hours of the session of Congress, brought in by the Committee on Public Lands, depriving, as I consider it, the Committee on Territories of jurisdiction of a proposition over which it has exercised control all this session, upon which we have had hearings, and upon which we expect to bring a report into this Congress. Now we are deprived of this privilege by this hasty action. I think it will be found upon investigation that this is not a private corporation, but that it comes in in connection with some railroad, because it is identical with the one on which we have acted in conjunction with railroad franchises. Tell me why it is that this corporation is interested in the construction of these wharves, unless they expect that the coal from the mines in the interior shall come there. The gentiemen who spoke in opposition to this proposition said they expected to transport the coal to the Pacific coast and sell it cheaper than they can the coal that comes from the mines of Pennsylvania.

The Committee on Territories is anxious to facilitate that result. We are anxious enough that the people living upon

matter, the Government I think has by far the best of the proposition. I believe the bill should pass.

Now, in reply to the statement made by the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. COLE], there is no proposition of railroad construction involved either directly or indirectly in this bill. So far as I know this proposition is not within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Territories. It relates solely to the public lands of the United States, and the Committee on Public Lands has exclusive jurisdiction of that subject.

Mr. COLE. Will the gentleman yield for a question?
Mr. ROBINSON. Certainly.

Mr. COLE. If there is no connection between this and the railroad proposition, why is it that the railroad has been advocating it for the last two years?

Mr. ROBINSON. I do not know what road the gentleman refers to, nor the advocacy he refers to; but I want to say that under this bill no exclusive right can be granted to any party or to any corporation to build a railroad. So far as the building of roads is concerned, I would be glad if that country should speedily have railroads, if the rights of the people are properly safeguarded. Alaska can not be developed without them. I do not stand here to advocate the interest of any particular railroad corporation which may approve or oppose this bill. The bill which I advocate guarantees to every corporation and to every individual equal rights as to rights of way and we propose that no exclusive privilege shall be acquired, and if any exclusive right is attempted to be granted it would probably work a forfeiture.

Mr. Speaker, this is one of the most meritorious provisions in the bill. Another proposition to which the distinguished gentleman from Ohio [Mr. COLE] referred was this: He said he wanted to guard the rights of the States. A provision is found in this bill requiring that the Government of the United States shall reserve control of the harbor areas in trust for the future State that may be created within the Territory of Alaska. So that, in my judgment, this feature is well cared for. There are a great many provisions, but I will not take time now to refer to them all.

There are two general propositions in this bill. One of them relates to Cordova Bay and the other to Controller Bay. The requirements made of these corporations will, in my judgment, result in time in the establishment of at least one great city in Alaska, and at the same time the rights of the public will be carefully safeguarded and the development of Alaska facilitated. I fear I am consuming too much time, and I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Wyoming [Mr. MONDELL].

Mr. OLMSTED. I should like to ask how it is that the time on both sides is controlled in favor of the bill.

Mr. ROBINSON. Mr. Speaker, I will yield to any gentleman opposed to the bill, even though I have already allotted the time. The only gentleman who requested to be heard in opposition to the bill was the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. COLE], and I yielded him all the time he desired.

If the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. OLMSTED] wants recognition, I will yield to him.

Mr. OLMSTED. We have already used up most of the time on both sides in favor of the bill. We are unable to find out whether it ought to be passed or not.

Mr. ROBINSON. How much time is remaining?

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Arkansas has thirteen minutes remaining.

Mr. ROBINSON. I will yield to the gentleman from Penn- cording to newspaper reports, your grand jury here indicted sylvania if he wants time.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. How much time did the gentleman yield to the gentleman from Wyoming [Mr. MONDELL]? Mr. ROBINSON. Five minutes.

Mr. MONDELL. Mr. Speaker, on the question of jurisdiction, I want to say to the gentleman from Ohio that the committee of which I have the honor of being chairman is very careful not to invade the jurisdiction of any other committee, and we refused to take jurisdiction of these matters until there was eliminated from the bill every question except those relating exclusively to the public lands of the United States, which are under the jurisdiction of our committee. Now, the necessity for this legislation arises from three conditions existing in Alaska, two of them conditions established by legislation, one of them a natural condition.

In the first place the Government restrains every alternate 80 rods along the shore line of all the navigable waters of Alaska under the general law. Therefore persons acquiring land in Alaska under the general law can only acquire SO rods in length along navigable waters, with a break of 80 rods, and then another SO rods of shore line can be obtained. Now, this land proposed to be sold could be acquired in 80-rod front tracts for no greater cost under the general laws, but who can build a harbor in an uninhabited wilderness, with 80-rod stretches of vacant Government land alternating along the harbor front? Who is going to improve a harbor in that Territory under those conditions.

Mr. HAMLIN rose.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Wyoming yield?

Mr. MONDELL. I can not yield; I have only five minutes. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman declines to yield.

Mr. MONDELL. In the next place, the general law reserves a 60-foot roadway along the water front of all navigable waterways, so that those who acquire water fronts are cut off from high tide by that 60-foot roadway; that adds to the difficulties of constructing a harbor. Those are conditions fixed by legis lation.

Now, the natural condition that makes this legislation necessary lies in the fact that this particular region has a long stretch of mud flats extending seaward from the point of high tide, and as under the general-law title can only be obtained to the point of high tide, it is impossible to excavate through the long stretch of mud flats to the line of high tide, and so we provide that the Secretary of War may fix the harbor line, and that shall be the point from which these parties own landward.

Under the terms of the bill the grantees are required to dredge out the mud flats in the public harbor area lying in front of their holdings, in order to fill up their own lands, and this harbor area, a thousand feet wide, stretching along the entire front of their holdings, is free to all comers, and all wharves and docks built within that area must grant the privilege of loading and unloading to every vessel that comes, at a rate to be fixed by the Secretary of War. So that there is at all times free access to the harbor area. Now, this is a carefully guarded bill, necessary to the building up of these ports in Alaska, in order to make it possible to take out the products of the Alaskan coal fields and take them to market. I hope that railroads will build to these towns, to at least one of them. The port on Kanak Island is needed, as I understand it, particularly for the purpose of unloading coal from barges coming from the Katalla coal fields. The coal is to be brought from the mines to this proposed port in barges and may there be loaded on the largest vessels afloat.

Mr. ROBINSON. Mr. Speaker, I yield one minute to the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. HEFLIN].

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. Speaker, on yesterday, when this bill was called up, I objected, not because I had any objection to the contents of the bill, but because I could not get consideration of a bill that I have introduced-a bill of great importance to the men who grow grain and cotton. It is now on the Calendar. It seeks to prevent falsifications in the collection and compilation of agricultural statistics and the unauthorized issuance and publication of the same. I have been insisting here for three or four days, Mr. Speaker, whenever I could get the opportunity, that you permit us to pass this bill. There is no law, as I have told you repeatedly, to punish a clerk or Government official for selling this information. The law requires the farmer to give this statistical information, but there is absolutely not one line on the statute books to punish anybody for selling it to the grain gamblers of Chicago, New York, or New Orleans, or the cotton gamblers of any one of these three places. On yesterday, ac

[ocr errors]

Theodore Price and others for tampering with and disposing of agricultural statistics.

Here is the newspaper article:

COTTON LEAK FINDING-FOUR INDICTMENTS RETURNED BY GRAND JURY HERE CONSPIRACY IS CHARGED T. II. PRICE, MOSES HAAS, F. A. PECKHAM, AND E. S. HOLMES ACCUSED ALLEGED PROFIT OF $750,000—— STATISTICIAN OF AGRICULTURAL DEPARTMENT SAID TO HAVE BEEN PAID $1,000 IN ONE INSTANCE.

Four indictments were returned late this afternoon by the grand jury growing out of the cotton-leak scandal of 1905 in the Department of Agriculture. Theodore H. Price, of New York, the cotton king, is alleged in the indictments to have conspired with Moses Haas and Frederick A. Peckham, of New York, and Edwin S. Holmes, jr., of this city, the latter then associate statistician of the Department of Agriculture, to furnish advance information in anticipation of cotton reports.

The three New York men are also charged with conspiring to bribe Holmes to shape the reports to suit their interests.

for December, 1904, it is alleged in one of the indictments. Price made $750,000 out of the advance information of the report Of this sum it is declared he paid Moses Haas $125,000. The indictments do not estimate how much Holmes is believed to have received as his share of the profits, but it is charged that for information on the June report of 1905 he was paid $1,000 by Haas.

FORMER PROCEEDINGS.

Holmes, Peckham, and Hass were indicted here in October, 1905. After a long legal fight Peckham and Haas succeeded in preventing their extradition to this district. Holmes was tried in June, 1907, and the jury disagreed. He has not been retried.

Indictments of similar import and against the defendants were returned in New York City to-day.

One indictment charges that on May 31, 1905, Theodore H. Price and Moses Haas unlawfully conspired to commit an offense against the United States of promising, offering, and giving to an official of the United States a sum of money, the amount to the grand jurors unknown, to induce Holmes unlawfully and in violation of his duty as associate statistician-which was honestly and carefully to keep secret all statistics and statistical matter-to furnish advance information to them concerning the contents of the forthcoming crop report.

SEVEN OVERT ACTS.

The indictment sets out seven overt acts. It is charged that a conference was held in New York City May 31, 1905, between Price_and Haas; that June 1, in furtherance of the alleged conspiracy. Haas journeyed to Washington, where, it is alleged, he met Holmes and promised to pay Holmes for the alleged violation of his duty of secrecy by giving out advance information concerning the cotton crop. The next overt act charged is that June 1, 1905, Haas received from Holmes information of what was to be contained in the cottoncrop report to be issued in June. The next day, and before the report was made public, it is alleged, Haas received information from Holmes. On both rates mentioned, it is declared, Price, in New York, received the information alleged to have been imparted by Holmes to Haas. The last overt act charged is that Haas, June 2, 1905, gave Holmes $1,000.

conspired to bribe Holmes to shape the June report so as to show a The second count of this indictment charges that Haas and Price greater cotton crop than the information in the hands of Holmes justified.

PECKHAM IS INVOLVED.

[blocks in formation]

NEW YORK, May 29, 1908. Four indictments were returned by the Federal grand jury to-day. It was reported that Theodore H. Price, the prominent cotton operator, was charged with improper transactions in connection with the leak of Government cotton statistics of several years ago.

Mr. Price was arraigned before Judge Hough in the criminal branch of the United States circuit court later in the afternoon, and through his counsel, John D. Lindsay, entered a plea of not guilty to the charge of conspiracy against the United States Government. Assistant United States District Attorney Dorr said that two indictments have been found, but only one would be presscd. He asked for $20,000 bail in

the case.

It is true there is an amendment in the code that is now hanging up on the shelf and will not be acted upon until the fall session. In the meantime this crop must be at the mercy of the speculators of this country, and I want to appeal to the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. CALDERHEAD] to go with others to the gentleman from New York [Mr. PAYNE], who comes from a State where the worst gambling exchange on the earth exists, to beg him in the closing hours of this Congress to grant this relief to the toiling masses of this country, the farmers of America. Mr. Speaker, I have pleaded with him. I have addressed a letter to him setting out the reasons why this should become a law, but he persists in asking the Speaker not to recognize me for the purpose of asking unanimous consent or for the purpose of moving to suspend the rules. The gentleman's party will have to explain it on the stump this fall in the agricultural districts of the country. You know there is no law covering this case, and why do you not give me one minute of time to consider it. I promise you that if you will

let me pass it through the House I will put it through the Senate. It will become a law in a little while. The President is in favor of it. The President will sign the bill as soon as we can get it to him.

Mr. CALDERHEAD rose.

The SPEAKER. Does the gentleman from Alabama yield to the gentleman from Kansas.

Mr. CALDERHEAD. Mr. Speaker, I think I have a right to require that the gentleman from Alabama shall speak to the bill and not discuss some other question.

The SPEAKER. Oh, the gentleman did not rise to ask the gentleman to yield, but rather to make a point of order that the gentleman from Alabama must confine himself to discussing the bill. The Chair was not paying attention to what the gentleman stated. [Laughter.] The Chair will say to the gentleman that he should proceed in order.

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. Speaker, I shall, and I am very grateful to the Chair for his candor and his honesty. He has paid but very little attention to me, not only now, but when I have gone to him and asked him to recognize me [laughter and applause], and I find it quite difficult to get anyone on that side to pay attention to us when we are advocating things in the interest of the people. [Applause on Democratic side.]

Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I want to say to the gentleman from Kansas that I favor his bill. I propose to vote for his bill. I do not think that those three old soldiers ought to suffer for the many sins that belong to the gentleman from New York [Mr. PAYNE]. [Applause.]

Mr. Speaker, Holmes was indicted and tried for some offense, and why was he not convicted? You all know why. It was because we had no law covering his case, and you have no law now. What is the purpose of these last indictments? Why have you waited so long to indict them? The offense was committed in 1905 and this is 1908. Again I ask, Why have these men not been indicted before now?

My bill to prevent falsifications in the collection and compilation of agricultural statistics and the unauthorized issuance and publication of the same was placed upon the Calendar for consideration by this House on May 12, 1908. I have constantly and persistently tried to get the Speaker to recognize me to call up this bill and pass it, or at least to give the House an opportunity to vote on it. I knew that the Democrats were all for it, and that if a few Republicans would join us that we could pass it.

The Speaker would not recognize me to move to suspend the rules and pass the bill, but would only recognize me to ask unanimous consent, and that left it in the power of one man to defeat it, and the gentleman from New York-the Republican floor leader [Mr. PAYNE]-objected, as he usually does to measures that are for the common good.

Mr. Speaker, I have told the gentleman from New York [Mr. PAYNE] that the Republicans in this House would have to answer to the farmers of the country for your failure to pass this important measure.

Day after day I have begged you to give me one minute in which to consider and pass this bill, but you would not. I do not believe that the indictments returned while my bill was being urged in this House will deceive the farmers and others who know that there is no law to punish the offenders. It would not surprise me, when you are questioned in the next campaign as to why you did not pass my bill, to hear you say, Why, we have had Price, Haws, and others indicted," and so forth. Then some thoughtful farmer will ask you what objection you had to HEFLIN'S bill, and why did you not indict Price and his gang in 1906, or in 1907, or before this bill was on the Calendar for consideration in 1908. What will be your answer? If you tell the truth, you will say the grain gamblers and the cotton gamblers did not want HEFLIN's bill to become a law. Mr. Speaker, if the masses of the people knew how their interests were trampled upon and how their demands are denied by this Republican Congress, there would be indignation meetings held from now until you are driven from power in No

vember.

Mr. ROBINSON. Mr. Speaker, I yield three minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. GAINES].

Mr. GAINES of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I want to comment on section 3, which is one of the most important sections of this bill. All of the rights that the public, it seems to me, should retain, unless it retain all of them and give nothing, have been reserved and protected in this bill. This company, to get its patent and so forth, is required to do certain things, among others to improve the means of getting into the harbor from the adjoining land. It is to make "slips"-that is, a way to get in and out of water. Anyone can use these slips upon paying a certain charge to be fixed by the Secretary of

War, so that the slips are not exclusive, and all of the harbor rights that the State would own if Alaska were turned into a State are expressly reserved by the section of the bill from which I quote, as follows:

That the Secretary of War, as soon as practicable after the passage of this act, shall establish a wharfage and dock area extending along the entire water front of the land proposed to be bought by said corporation, and 1,000 feet in width, thereby fixing the seaward line of said wharfage and dock area, and the area thus established is hereby reserved and shall remain under the control of the United States, in trust, however, for the future State which may be created, including the same or any part thereof within its boundaries.

Mr. PADGETT. Will the gentleman allow me to interrupt him there?

Mr. GAINES of Tennessee. Yes.

Mr. PADGETT. This land purports to be swamp or muck land.

Mr. GAINES of Tennessee. Yes.

Mr. PADGETT. And the parties are proposing to pay $2.50 an acre, to dredge it and make a wharf, and so forth? Mr. GAINES of Tennessee. Yes.

Mr. PADGETT. What is it about this muck land that makes it so valuable that the parties are willing to dredge all this out and build this wharf and these slips, and then pay $2.50 an acre for what purports to be swamp, muck land? What is it that makes it so valuable?

Mr. CUSHMAN. Will the gentleman yield to me?
Mr. GAINES of Tennessee. Yes.

Mr. CUSHMAN. It is not the value of the land. It is because harbors in Alaska are scarce, and the people in Alaska have never been able to induce the Government to make appropriations for improving their harbors. They are not like the gentleman and myself and his and my districts. Mr. PADGETT. highland terrapin.

Oh, I do not get it in mine because I am a

Mr. CUSHMAN. At any rate, after years of effort to get the Government to improve the harbors, they have met with no success, and numerous people have said that if the Government will give them a chance to improve the harbors they will improve them themselves.

Mr. PADGETT. They are doing it from an altruistic point of view?

Mr. CUSHMAN. Not entirely. The value of this land to-day what they make it worth. is nothing. What it will be worth in the future depends upon

Mr. PADGETT. If it is worth nothing, why is it they are willing to give $2.50 an acre for it and dredge it out and make slips and wharves?

from Tennessee has expired. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman Mr. ROBINSON. I yield two minutes more to the gentleman

from Tennessee. Mr. GAINES of Tennessee. The land as it is now is practically worthless, because unusable and no people there to use it.

Mr. PADGETT. Why is it they are willing to give so much for it?

Mr. GAINES of Tennessee. It is paying for a possibility. harbor. As it is it is not a raw or unimproved or natural harAfter they have improved the harbor, it will be a very fine bor. After they have put the slips in there so that the people can go in and out, it will be a valuable franchise-when enough people go there to use it.

Mr. NICHOLLS. Will this corporation have the right forever to impose such charges as the Secretary of War fixes for these slips?

Mr. GAINES of Tennessee. They can be changed, of course, by the Secretary or Congress. Now, to proceed with this pro

vision:

Provided, That wharves, docks, slips, and waterways may be constructed and maintained within such wharfage and dock area in accordance with plans approved and terms and conditions prescribed from time to time by the Secretary of War; but the public at all times shall have the use of all such wharves, docks, slips, and waterways upon the payment of such reasonable charges, and under such regulations, as may from time to time be fixed and prescribed by the Secretary of War.

Now, this company is going to go there and improve a wholly unimproved country. They are going to put in these slips and the public can use these slips by paying this charge, and this company of course has the use of the property that it puts there. We know, Mr. Speaker, in our own country that natural harbors are not as valuable as they are when improved, and there are enough people to use and give it a value. Alaska is practically uninhabited, and none of the harbors are improved. There are few railroads there, and, so far as I know, no railroad is connected with this. No railroad man appeared before the committee when I was there, although I was not present at all the meetings. Now, I know the committee, Mr. Speaker, as

carefully as it can, so far as I think the committee can, preserved the rights of the public. I know while I was present I undertook to do so, and suggested the amendment about preserving these water rights for the future State, and we even went so far as to take an aye-and-no vote upon the proposition; so I think the bill ought to pass.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.

Mr. PARSONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield four minutes to the gentleman from Washington [Mr. CUSHMAN].

Mr. CUSHMAN. Mr. Speaker, I think in the few years I have been in the House I have demonstrated, or at least tried to demonstrate, that I have been a true friend to Alaska, to the people and the interests of that region. I would not lift my voice in favor of this bill here if I did not believe it was entirely worthy and that the motives in asking this legislation are entirely honest. Now, as a matter of fact, I regret the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. COLE] should have thought there was an effort, in reporting this bill from the Committee on Public Lands, to invade the rights of his committee-the Committee on Territories. I am under many obligations to the members of the Committee on Territories for assisting in reporting the Alaska Delegate bill and many other bills relating to Alaskan matters generally, but this bill relates exclusively to public lands and therefore is within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Public Lands.

Now, then, the necessity for this legislation arises simply from lack of harbor facilities in Alaska. The people there are not only willing that the Government of the United States should make the harbor improvements but they are anxious that the Government should improve the harbors in Alaska. But the Government has failed to do so, and all along that vast stretch of coast line good harbors are scarce. This particular harbor of Cordova is a good, safe harbor in one waythat is, it is protected by islands that lie along the mouth of the harbor, protecting it from the winds and storms that blow in from the sea, and there is good anchorage but no wharfage facilities. There is no place where a ship can get up to land to load and unload a cargo because the mud flats lying out at the head of the harbor make the water too shallow to float a ship close to shore. Now, the gentleman wants to know what makes this land so valuable. I have here pictures showing the character of this land-nothing but a broad stretch of mud flats, with some brush grown up on the flats just above the line of high tide, which lands are absolutely of no value now, and they never will be of any value unless the harbor is improved. The bill has been modified by the Secretary of the Interior and the Public Lands Committee of Congress with all manner of restrictions, among other things holding in trust for the people a strip of land 1,000 feet wide along the entire water front after the harbor has been improved, and the people who make these improvements and put their money into improving this harbor will have to go to the Secretary of War and get a permit the same as other people to do business on this water front. Why, there has been no bill introduced here in years of which I know that contains so many restrictions.

Mr. PADGETT. The Government retains the riparian rights. Mr. CUSHMAN. The Government retains a strip 1,000 feet wide along the entire water front. Now, the necessity for this was explained by the gentleman from Wyoming [Mr. MONDELL]. The Secretary of the Interior could not, without legislation by Congress, grant these people any rights to the public land that would enable them to make these additional improvements, because the Secretary might grant them a right to file on the land down to the line of high tide, but these improvements must be made between the line of high tide and low tide, where these great mud flats exist, and they propose to do dredging on the mud flats and take the material dredged out and dump it behind a sea wall, raising that area where the mud flats lie, and thereby accomplish two things-first, make a good, deep harbor by dredging; second, make solid, high ground out of the mud flats by dumping the dredged material thereon. This bill requires them to make a depth there of 30 feet, to permit the deepest-draft vessels to get into the wharves.

I want to assure the membership of the House that there is, in my judgment, not only no "nigger in the wood pile" concealed in this bill, but that it is an honest bill; one that will enable the improvements to be made in this harbor at the head of Cordova Bay. Now, there is need for harbor facilities in that region. There is a good harbor there, but no ship can effect a landing now, because there is an insufficient depth of water, and because there are no docks and no slips, and no opportunity to build them unless some man with capital and energy will go there and do this dredging.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman's time has expired.

Mr. ROBINSON. Mr. Speaker, how much time have I remaining?

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Three minutes.

Mr. ROBINSON. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. COLE] two minutes.

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to make one further observation upon this proposition. I did not care to charge anybody with having fathered a measure that was not honorable in every respect. I did think that I saw a connection between this proposition and the one before the Committee on the Territories, from the simple fact that they are asking for exactly the same thing that the company before the Committee on the Territories is asking for. Now, I have talked with a number of the members of that committee. They are all intensely and deeply interested in the construction of railways in Alaska, and I think the gentleman from Washington [Mr. CUSHMAN] will bear me out in that statement. I have recommended the identical proposition that the gentleman advances here to-day, but we thought that there were two great railway interests trying to get control of conditions in Alaska, and that it was better to make an investigation first and ascertain the facts in the matter before any of the rights of the Government were given away. That is my position, and, I think, the position of the Committee on the Territories, as far as I have been able to learn. They are in favor of railway construction there, but they want to begin upon a sound basisascertain the facts first, and then go forward with the construc tion of the railways.

Mr. OLMSTED. Will the gentleman yield to an inquiry? I simply wish to ask whether it is or is not a fact that through these two bays the entire Alaskan coal fields are controlled? Would the coal come out between these two bays?

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, my understanding is that these are the only two bays suitable for wharves and for dockage on the shores of Alaska in this region, and my observation is that the railways that are contemplated extending down from the gold and the coal fields will of necessity center at these two points.

Mr. OLMSTED. These bills give these two companies the monopoly of these two bays?

Mr. COLE. I have not read the bill, because I did not have a copy, and I can not answer the question.

Mr. CUSHMAN. The railroad company already have their harbor on this same bay, 6 miles farther down on the bay. Mr. ROBINSON. I want to read section 4 of this bill. It is as follows:

SEC. 4. That the right of eminent domain may, after the issuance of patent hereunder, be exercised over any lands purchased under this act, whether such lands may have been included within streets and alleys or otherwise, under any law applicable to lands held in private ownership in the district of Alaska, and no exclusive right of way shall be granted to any person, company, or corporation over the lands purchased under this act.

Mr. OLMSTED. That prevents anybody else getting an exclusive right of way over their land after they had purchased it. Mr. ROBINSON. Mr. Speaker, the act expressly provides that no exclusive right of way shall be granted, and it also gives the right of eminent domain, so that any number of railroads may be built, and no monopoly in transportation can be created. There is no railroad proposition here. I repeat again, I hope somebody will build a railroad into Alaska and develop that great country. But this is not a proposition of controversy between railroads. This will not interfere with railroad building. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.

Mr. PARSONS. Mr. Speaker, there are two coal fields in Alaska. The Controller Bay field, which is in the vicinity of both of these harbors, and near which the so-called "Guggenheim road," I believe, is built, and the Matanuska field, which is farther west, and is to be reached by a railroad from Cook Inlet, several hundred miles west of this. The two harbors referred to in this bill have nothing to do with the outlet of coal from the Matanuska field. So far as the Controller Bay field is concerned, my information is that the so-called “Guggenheim railroad" already has, in another part of this Cordova Bay, its own harbor erected, and whether this Cordova town-site proposition will ever have any connection with that or not I do not know; but this proposition is purely a town-site and wharf proposition. Any railroad that is going to make use of it will have no special privilege as a result of this bill. The wharves that will be constructed will be for public use. The charges must be reasonable, and the wharves are to be under

« AnteriorContinuar »