Funds expended by the Territory of Hawaii that would have received Federal aid, years 1917-1925-Continued

[Compiled for Delegate Victor S. K. Houston by Territorial Highway Department, November 8, 1929]

Although a total of $3,541,000 was spent in such roads, the second proviso of this bill only provides for the payment of aid as to roads which were:

(a) First advertised within the proper period.

(b) Are located upon the 7 per cent Federal-aid system as approved. (c) Were constructed at prices obtained from competitive bidding. (d) And are believed to be constructed upon plans and specifications which would have met the approval of the Bureau of Public Roads.

The Federal aid sums now appropriated, allocated to Hawaii and unobligated are as follows, as shown on page 20 of the hearings before the subcommittee of House Committee on Appropriations on the emergency construction appropriation bill for 1931:

Federal aid earned on active program (estimated) _

Balance of Federal aid unearned on active program (esti-
mated)..

Unobligated balance of Federal aid available for new work
Apportionment of $80,000,000 _ _ _

In view of the heavy oad program which the Territory of Hawaii undertook in good faith beginning in 1917, bonding herself, we now

HR-71-3-VOL 2- -4

find ourselves in the position of having practically exhausted our statutory bonding ability; we now have outstanding bonds to a total of $31,705,000. As a result we can not now absorb the sums that are standing and allocated to our credit. Consequently, $326,864.95 of the Federal-aid sums were lapsed on June 30, 1930, and there is danger of other sums being lost because of this situation. Such sums, of course, have been made up from general taxation to which Hawaii contributes in generous measure; last year we paid into the Federal Treasury more than each of 14 States. Now, when lapsed, such sums are redistributed to other States, and surely the States do not wish to benefit by Hawaii's misfortune which is due to the practical discrimination, resulting from the withholding of the aid between the years 1917 and 1925.

In accordance with the Ramseyer rule, section 1 of the act is herewith quoted, the amendment as proposed by this bill being shown in italics:

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That beginning with the fiscal year ending June 30, 1925, the Territory of Hawaii shall be entitled to share in appropriations now or which may hereafter become available for apportionment under the act entitled "An act to provide that the United States shall aid the States in the construction of rural post roads, and for other purposes," approved July 11, 1916, known as the Federal highway act, and any act amendatory thereof or supplementary thereto, upon the same terms and conditions as any of the several States, and such territory shall be included in the calculations to determine the basis of apportion-. ment of such funds: Provided, That in approving road projects in such Territory to receive Federal aid, the Secretary of Agriculture shall give preference to such projects as will expedite the completion of an adequate system of highways for the national defense or which will connect seaports with units of the national parks. Provided further, That the system of roads on which Federal-aid apportionments to the Territory of Hawaii shall be expended may be determined and agreed upon by the governor.of said Territory and the Secretary of Agriculture without regard to the limitations in section 6 of the Federal highway act respecting the selection and designation of such system of roads; and when the system first determined and agreed upon shall have been completed, additions thereto may be made in like manner as funds become available for the construction and maintenance of such additions: And provided further, That there is authorized to be paid from funds heretofore authorized, appropriated, allocated, and unobligated under the Federal highway act a sum not to exceed $880,000 for the purpose of road construction in the Territory of Hawaii, which sum equals the amount such Territory would have received for roads built and incorporated upon the 7 per centum system as approved, during the period from 1917 to 1925. The Secretary of the Treasury shall pay to the Territory of Hawaii, or to such official or depository as may be designated by it, on warrants drawn by the Secretary of Agriculture, such part of such sum as may from time to time be necessary for the construction or reconstruction of any highway in such Territory the project for which has been approved by the Secretary of Agriculture. The provisions of this act shall in no way impair the right of such Territory to receive the benefits of the Federal highway act.

O

FOREIGN SERVICE BUILDINGS

FEBRUARY 9, 1931.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union and ordered to be printed

Mr. TEMPLE, from the Committee on Foreign Affairs, submitted the

following

REPORT

[To accompany H. R. 15774]

The Committee on Foreign Affairs, to which was referred the bill (H. R. 15774) to provide additional funds for buildings for the use of the diplomatic and consular establishments of the United States, having had the same under consideration, reports it back with the following amendment, and recommends that the bill do pass.

On page 1, line 8, strike out the word "in" and insert in lieu thereof the word "for" so that the bill will read:

A BILL To provide additional funds for buildings for the use of the diplomatic and consular establishments of the United States

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That for the purpose of further carrying into effect the provisions of the Foreign Service buildings act, 1926, as amended, there is authorized to be appropriated, in addition to the amount authorized by such act, an amount not to exceed $10,000,000, of which not more than $2,000,000 shall be appropriated for any one year. Sums appropriated pursuant to this act shall be available for the purposes and be subject to the conditions and limitations of such act as amended.

The Foreign Service buildings act, 1926 (U. S. Code, title 22, sec. 292), provides:

That the Secretary of State is empowered, subject to the direction of the commission hereinafter established, to acquire by purchase or construction in the manner hereinafter provided, within the limits of appropriations made pursuant to this act, in foreign capitals and in other foreign cities, sites, and buildings, and to alter, repair, and furnish such buildings, for the use of the diplomatic and consular establishments of the United States, or for the purpose of consolidating to the extent deemed advisable by the commission, within one or more buildings, the embassies, legations, consulates, and other agencies, of the United States Government there maintained, which buildings shall be appropriately designated by the commission, and the space in which shall be allotted by the Secretary of State under the direction of the commission among the several agencies of the United States Government.

The act authorized the appropriation of $10,000,000, not more than $2,000,000 of which should be appropriated for any one year, but provided that "within the total authorization provided in this act, the Secretary of State, subject to the direction of the commission, may enter into contracts for the acquisition of the buildings and grounds authorized by this act."

Appropriations made under the authorization of the Foreign Service buildings act, 1926, from the date of its passage to the present time amount to $6,835,000. The appropriation bill for the State Department for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1932, as it passed the House carried an additional sum of $1,200,000 for the Foreign Service buildings fund, which was increased in the Senate to $2,000,000. The bill is now in conference. If the larger amount should be agreed to, the total appropriations since the passage of the act will then be $8,835,000. The total expenditures and obligations for this fund amounted, on January 20, 1931, to $6,245,718.33, as shown by the table at the end of this report.

Additional construction contracts contemplated to be entered into by the end of the fiscal year 1932 will bring the obligations near to the limit of the $10,000,000 authorized by the Foreign Service buildings act, 1926.

It appears from testimony given to your committee by Mr. Keith Merrill, of the State Department, executive secretary to the Foreign Service Buildings Commission, that when funds authorized by previous legislation and the Foreign Service buildings act shall have been expended, the Government will own embassies at the following posts:

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; Santiago, Chile; Paris, France; London, England (ambassador's residence); Habana, Cuba; Tokyo, Japan; Mexico City, Mexico; Istanbul, Turkey; Rome, Italy; Berlin, Germany; Buenos Aires, Argentina; Lima, Peru.

When funds authorized by previous legislation and the Foreign Service buildings act shall have been expended, the Government, in addition to these embassies, will own legations at the following posts: Tirana, Albania; Peiping, China; San Jose, Costa Rica; Prague, Czechoslovakia; Oslo, Norway; Managua, Nicaragua; San Salvador, El Salvador; Monrovia, Liberia; Ottawa, Canada (office building only).

In addition to the foregoing, from funds previously appropriated and funds appropriated under the Foreign Service buildings act, the Government will have or should have structures for office and residential quarters for the consular branch of the Foreign Service, where sites have already been acquired:

Tangier, Morocco; Amoy, China; Shanghai, China; Mukden, China; Nagasaki, Japan; Seoul, Chosen; Yokohama, Japan; Penang, Straits Settlements; Corinto, Nicaragua; Calcutta, India; Matanzas, Cuba; Santiago, Cuba; Ader., Arabia; Seville, Spain.

It is believed that all the places mentioned in the above lists can be provided for within the $10,000,000 authorized by the Public Service buildings act of 1926 and appropriations previously made. It is nevertheless a tentative list, for the buildings are to be constructed in foreign countries and every factor of cost entering into the estimates is variable. The price of land, the cost of labor, the cost of material, and the cost of foreign currency purchased to pay for acquisition and construction are all subject to fluctuation. It is the policy of the

commission, however, to purchase American materials and furniture whenever conditions permit. For example, in one instance $23,000 worth of American materials were used in a building for which the total cost of all materials and labor amounted to $83,000.

If the above tentative list should prove correct, there would remain a considerable number of places not provided for. The following diplomatic posts have been mentioned to your committee as places for future consideration:

Embassies at: Madrid, Spain; Warsaw, Poland; London, England (an office building); Habana, Cuba (the exchange of the present property).

Legations at: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia; Helsingfors, Finland; Athens, Greece; Guatemala City, Guatemala; Tegucigalpa, Honduras; Budapest, Hungary; Dublin, Ireland; Riga, Latvia; The Hague, Netherlands; Asuncion, Paraguay; Lisbon, Portugal; Bucharest, Rumania; Stockholm, Sweden; Berne, Switzerland; Cape Town, Union of South Africa; Caracas, Venezuela; Belgrade, Yugoslavia; Vienna, Austria; Brussels, Belgium; La Paz, Bolivia; Sofia, Bulgaria; Ottawa, Canada; Bogota, Colombia; Quito, Ecuador; Copenhagen, Denmark; Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic.

The following have been suggested to your committee as places in addition to the foregoing, where quarters are needed in the Orient: Canton, China; Changsha, China; Chefoo, China; Foochow, China; Hankow, China; Harbin, China; Swatow, China; Tientsin, China; Tsinan, China; Tsingtao, China; Yunnanfu, China; Dairien, Manchuria; Kobe, Japan; Taihoku, Formosa; Hong Kong; Nagoya, Japan.

Consular buildings are needed at the following unhealthful posts: Acapulco, Mexico; Bahia, Brazil; Barranquilla, Colombia; Batavia, Java; Belize, British Honduras; Bluefields, Nicaragua; Bombay, India; Buenaventura, Colombia; Cartagena, Colombia; Ceiba, Honduras; Colombo, Ceylon; Dakar, Senegal; Georgetown, British Guiana; Guayaquil, Ecuador; Guaymas, Mexico; Karachi, India; La Guaira, Venezuela; La Paz, Bolivia; Lourenco Marques, East Africa; Madras, India; Manaos, Brazil; Manzanillo, Mexico; Maracaibo, Venezuela; Mazatlan, Mexico; Medan, Sumatra; Para, Brazil; Pernambuco, Brazil; Port Limon, Costa Rica; Progreso, Mexico; Puerto Barrios, Guatemala; Puerto Cabello, Venezuela; Puerto Castilla, Honduras; Puerto Cottes, Honduras; Rangoon, India; Saigon, Franch Indo-China; Santa Marta, Colombia; Singapore, Straits Settlements; Surabaya, Java; Tampico, Mexico; Tela, Honduras; Vera Cruz, Mexico.

Although the climate of the following posts does not justify their being classed as unhealthful, buildings available for rent would be considered inappropriate by an American:

Antilla, Cuba; Baghdad, Iraq; Barbados, British West Indies; Beirut, Syria; Cape Haitien, Haiti; Casablanca, Morocco; Cienfuegos, Cuba; Curacao, Dutch West Indies; Ensenada, Mexico; Martinique, French West Indies; Mexicali, Mexico; Nairobi, Kenya; Nuevitas, Cuba; Patras, Greece; Portio Alegre, Brazil; Punta Arenas, Chile; Saloniki, Greece; Santos, Brazil; Izmir, Turkey; Tabriz, Persia.

The bill contemplates no additional actual appropriations until the fiscal year 1934, to be available July 1, 1933. But since the tentative plans of the Foreign Service Buildings Commission have prac