[blocks in formation]

Mr. THOMAS, from the Committee on Public Lands, submitted the



[To accompany S. 6854.]

The Committee on Public Lands, to whom was referred the bill (S. 6854) to repeal the last proviso of section 4 of an act to establish the Rocky Mountain National Park, in the State of Colorado, and for other purposes, approved January 26, 1915, having had the same under consideration, respectfully recommend that it do pass.

The bill was referred to the Interior Department, and the Secretary of that department furnished the committee with the following report thereon:

Washington, August 23, 1916.

MY DEAR SENATOR: I have your request for report on S. 6854, "A bill to repeal the last proviso of section 4 of an act to establish the Rocky Mountain National Park, in the State of Colorado, and for other purposes, approved January 26, 1915.”

Rocky Mountain National Park incloses an area of over 229,000 acres, or approximately 360 square miles, of the Rocky Mountains, lying in the north central section of Colorado. It is the scenic national park most accessible from the centers of population of the United States. It is possible to reach this park from St. Louis or Chicago in 30 hours. It contains mountain scenery of unsurpassed grandeur, and is visited yearly by approximately 50,000 tourists from all sections of the Nation. The territory embraced within the boundaries of the park is practically undeveloped. A few trails reach some of the most beautiful sections, and it is principally by trail transportation that the park is visited by the many tourists that come to its borders. This trail development, however, has not been extensive, and there are practically no roads in the park.

Section 4 of the organic act establishing the park, which this bill is designed to repeal, specifically inhibits the appropriation of more than $10,000 for its improvement, protection, and administration. Appropriations for this park, therefore, since its creation have been small, and it has been clearly demonstrated they will little more than

cover the actual cost of administering the park. The balance remaining is hardly sufficient to maintain the existing trails and telephone lines. There should be authority for making larger appropriations for this park. I therefore recommend the enactment of this legislation, because the repeal of the inhibition which it contemplates would be in the interests of reasonable and proper development of the park.

Cordially, yours,


FRANKLIN K. LANE, Secretary.

Chairman Committee on Public Lands, United States Senate.


[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]


JANUARY 9, 1917.—Ordered to be printed.

Mr. OWEN, from the Committee on Indian Affairs, submitted the



[To accompany S. 7757.]

The Committee on Indian Affairs, to which was referred the bill (S. 7757) "Authorizing a further extension of time to purchasers of lands in the former Cheyenne and Arapahoe Indian Reservation, Okla., within which to make payment," respectfully recommend that the bill pass without amendment.

The bill itself was prepared in the office of the Secretary of the Interior, and the justification for this proposed legislation is contained in the letter of the Assistant Secretary of the Interior, as follows: DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, Washington, December 21, 1916.


Chairman Committee on Public Lands,

House of Representatives.

MY DEAR MR. FERRIS: My attention has been directed to House joint resolution 306, which authorizes the extension of time for payment of the deferred installments due on the purchase of tracts of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes in Oklahoma. Said joint resolution passed the House of Representatives on the 19th instant.

Conditions which appear to call for legislative relief exist with reference to Cheyenne and Arapahoe lands in Oklahoma. Said lands were sold at public auction in Novem ber, 1910, under the act of June 17, 1910 (36 Stat., 533). The purchasers at said sale are required to comply with the homestead laws in addition to paying one-fifth of the purchase price at the time of sale, and the balance in six equal annual installments. There were 131 tracts sold at said sale, 60 tracts being sold at an average price of $33.60 per acre, 43 tracts at an average price of $48 per acre, 16 tracts at an average price of $66 per acre, and 10 tracts at an average price of $67.20 per acre. The prices brought at such sale are the highest at which lands were ever disposed of under the homestead laws.

By act of August 22, 1911 (37 Stat., 33), an extension for one year for the payment of the annual installments due was made, the payment of interest at the rate of 5 per cent per annum on the deferred payments being required. The act of August 24, 1912 (37 Stat., 530), authorizes an extension of time for one year for the payment of any annual installment due, or thereafter to become due, on the purchase price of said lands, upon the payment of interest for one year in advance, at 5 per cent per annum, upon the amount due, with a provision for a further extension of time for a

S R-64-2-vol 1-13

period of one year in the same manner, the last payment and all other payments to be made within a period not exceeding one year after the last payment becomes due, by the terms of the act under which the entry was made. Under the terms of the sale, the last payment was due in November, 1916, and under the provisions of the act of August 24, 1912, the last payment is due in November, 1917.

An examination of the records of the General Land Office shows that there are 66 entries on which final payment has not yet been made. Of these 66 entries, 14 have paid one or more yearly installments, and 52 have made only the payment required at the time of entry. Thirty of the 66 purchasers have paid yearly interest up to date, but 36 of them are in default in the payment of interest.

Statements have been made to the department showing that because of hard times which prevailed in the years 1910, 1911, and 1912, settlers incurred indebtedness and that the payment of interest thereon during the years subsequent to 1912 has left them very little with which to pay the principal debt due the Government.

In view thereof, it is the opinion of the department that said purchasers of Cheyenne and Arapahoe lands are entitled to relief. Therefore, I have drafted a proposed section 2 to said House joint resolution 306, and have to recommend its enactment into law.

There has been attached a forfeiture clause somewhat similar to that found in the act of 1910, under which the land was sold, and also in the act of 1912, granting an extension of time to make payment.

Cordially, yours,

Acting Secretary.




No. 910.


JANUARY 11, 1917.-Ordered to be printed.

Mr. CHILTON, from the Committee on Printing, submitted the



[Pursuant to S. Res. 290 and to accompany S. 7795.]

The Committee on Printing, pursuant to the following resolution (S. Res. 290), which was agreed to by the Senate on December 15,


Whereas the cost of print paper has so enormously increased; and
Whereas the demand for such paper is constantly increasing; and

Whereas great quantities of print paper are used by the Government in printing useless bulletins, pamphlets, books, etc.; and

Whereas in the present emergency regarding print paper the supply should be conserved: Therefore be it

Resolved, That the Committee on Printing be, and is hereby, directed to investigate and report to the Senate within 30 days as to what Government publications, if any, now being issued, may be temporarily suspended, and as to what economies should be practiced by the Government in the use of print paper in the various departments

submits its report herewith:

By direction of the committee, the chairman sent a letter, under date of December 22, 1916, to all the executive departments and establishments of the Government inviting their attention to the foregoing resolution and requesting that each submit a statement at as early a date as practicable, in response to the following inquiries, for the consideration of the committee in preparing its report to the Senate: First. What Government publications, if any, now being issued by your department may be temporarily suspended or permanently abolished?

Second. What economies, if any, have already been effected by your department in the issuance of Government publications and the use of print paper?

Third. What additional economies may be practiced by your department in the use of print paper?

Nearly all of the departments and other establishments of the Government have made prompt answers to the inquiries of the committee, and their replies are attached hereto as part of this report. (See page 26.) In practically every instance the replies state that

« ForrigeFortsett »