The act of Congress approved April 28, 1904, limited its operation to the expiration of the Fifty-eighth Congress. Since that time there has been no act of Congress in terms authorizing the President to govern the Canal Zone, or otherwise providing for the government of the Canal Zone, except in so far as the matter may be affected by the appropriation acts. Upon the expiration of the Fifty-eighth Congress the President was confronted with a situation which either required him to exercise authority to carry on or provide civil government on the Canal Zone or else to permit governmental chaos to exist there. The President, with a high degree of statesmanship, undertook to continue the civil government on the Canal Zone, and continued to exercise the authority theretofore specifically granted to him for a limited period after that period had expired, on the proper assumption that Congress did not intend by the expiration of the limit set in the act of April 28, 1904, to dispense with proper government on the zone or to wipe out the government which had been created by the act of Congress and leave nothing in its place. Section 3. Section 3 of the act entitled "An act to provide for the construction of a canal connecting the waters of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans,' approved June 28, 1902, usually known as the "canal act," directs the President to cause the canal to be constructed through the Isthmian Canal Commission. The bill recommended provides that the President shall cause the canal to be excavated and completed through one of the executive departments of the Government, to be designated by him, or otherwise, in his discretion, and authorizes him to appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, one director and one chief engineer of the Panama Canal and one governor of the Canal Zone, with the further provision that the same person may be appointed to any two of such offices. The bill recommended leaves to the President not only the choice of agents or of officers in the construction of the canal and the government of the Canal Zone, but the choice of methods by which such agents shall operate. The responsibility is placed directly upon the President, and he is given wide latitude of authority in doing the work of construction thus imposed upon him. While the bill recommended does away with the Isthmian Canal Commission, consisting of seven members, as provided in the original canal act, yet it is in no sense revolutionary so far as the present methods of actual operation and construction are concerned. The letter of the law concerning the commission has been strictly observed, but it has been found impossible to properly proceed with the work of construction under the control of a commission meeting in Washington. In executive and administrative work responsibility should be centered as far as possible and not divided. The bill authorizes the President to divide the engineering work from the administrative work, if that should become necessary; but since the present administration of Colonel Goethals is so highly satisfactory and so worthy of great praise, the bill provides that the President may consolidate two of the principal offices named in any one person, in order to permit the President to appoint Colonel Goethals as both director and chief engineer, if that should be considered desirable. Sections 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 relate to the judicial system in the Canal Zone, and provide for a circuit court, to be presided over by one judge, and such inferior courts as the President may constitute. Trial by jury in cases of felony is provided for. Appeal is granted to the circuit court of appeals of the fifth circuit, and judges may be designated to go to the Canal Zone each year to hold there a term of the circuit court of appeals. Appeals are granted to the Supreme Court of the United States in cases involving questions arising under the Constitution or treaties, or involving a death sentence or imprisonment for life, and the Supreme Court may in any case by writ of certiorari cause the case to be certified to the Supreme Court. Section 10 of the bill authorizes the leasing of lands in the Canal Zone for a term of twenty-five years, reserving in all cases mineral, oil, and gas rights, and providing that agricultural leases shall not exceed 50 hectares (about 125 acres) to any one person, nor unless the application for lease is made in good faith for the purpose of actual settlement and cultivation. Section 11 makes provision for reserving to the United States any land which may be needed for canal purposes, regardless of any lease which may be asked for or made. Section 12 makes proper provision for extradition and extends the laws and treaties now in force in the United States concerning extra dition to the Canal Zone. GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE BILL. The general purpose of the bill is to give congressional sanction to a form of civil government on the Canal Zone and provide for a simple method of administration in the construction of the canal. One of the necessities for legislation is in order to provide a system by which appeals may be taken from judicial decisions in the Canal Zone to the proper courts in the United States. There are now three judges of a supreme court of the Canal Zone. There is but little litigation in the zone. There is no necessity for three judges, or for a supreme court there, if appeals be otherwise provided. The method provided in the bill could not be put in operation by the President, because he can not confer upon the courts in the United States authority to hear appeals from the courts in the zone. Under the operation of the plan proposed by the bill the expense of the courts will be less than they now are and the security of justice will be far greater. 60TH CONGRESS, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. REPORT 2d Session. No. 1976. OF REPRESENTATIVES TO EXTEND TIME FOR DISPOSING OF LANDS ON HUNTLEY PROJECT WITHIN CEDED CROW INDIAN RESERVATION, MONT. JANUARY 28, 1909.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union and ordered to be printed. Mr. HOWELL, of Utah, from the Committee on Indian Affairs, submitted the following REPORT. [To accompany S. 8357.] The Committee on Indian Affairs, having had under consideration Senate bill No. 8357, report the same back with the recommendation that it pass without amendment. The bill has the approval of the Secretary of the Interior and Commissioner of Indian Affairs, and a unanimous report from the Committee on Indian Affairs. The Senate report fully explains the objects of the bill, is adopted by your committee, and appended hereto: [Senate Report No. 762, Sixtieth Congress, second session.] The Committee on Indian Affairs, to whom Senate bill 8357 was referred, having examined the same, make favorable report thereon. Under the provisions of the act of Congress approved April 27, 1904, entitled "An act to ratify and amend an agreement with the Indians of the Crow Reservation in Montana, and making appropriations to carry the same into effect," all lands which were not disposed of within five years from the date of the passage of said act remained subject to disposal under the provisions of the reclamation act. Acting under the provisions of said law, the Reclamation Service immediately proceeded to the construction of a large irrigation project known as the "Huntley project.' About 30,000 acres of land were reclaimed, at a cost of about $1,000,000. About three-fourths of these lands lying under the Huntley ditch have been entered under the homestead act subject to the provisions of the reclamation law. In addition to the payment of $4 per acre to the Crow Indians, the settlers under the said Huntley ditch repay into the reclamation fund the assessed price of about $30 per acre for the irrigation ditches covering their lands. Under the terms of the original act of 1904 opening these Crow lands to settlement, all lands not entered under the provisions of the homestead laws during the subsequent five years are sold to the highest bidders for cash. The five-year period will expire April 27, 1909, and unless the remedial legislation called for in this bill shall have become a law before that time the remaining irrigated lands under the Huntley ditch will be subject to purchase by speculators at such price as they may command, and the homesteader will be practically eliminated from making settlement thereon. Your committee is of the unanimous opinion that the proposed amendment to the original Crow act is most meritorious and that the situation calls for immediate action. } 60TH CONGRESS, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. REPORT 2d Session. No. 1979. { PORT OF DELIVERY, CORRY, PA. JANUARY 28, 1909.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union and ordered to be printed. Mr. DALZELL, from the Committee on Ways and Means, submitted the following REPORT. [To accompany H. R. 24327.] The Committee on Ways and Means, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 24327) to make Corry, Pa., a port of delivery in the district of Erie, Pa., and extending to it the privileges of section 7 of the act of June 10, 1880, having had the same under consideration, report it back to the House without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass. The measure has the approval of the Treasury Department, as attested by the letter herewith attached and made a part of this report. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, SIR: Referring to H. R. 24327, to make Corry, Pa., a port of delivery in the district of Erie, I have the honor to state that under date of the 14th ultimo the department, in compliance with a request therefor from Hon. Arthur L. Bates, forwarded him a draft of said bill and informed him that in order that a bonded customs warehouse might be established at that place it would be necessary to have the same designated by Congress as a port of delivery. The bill, therefore, meets with the department's approval. Respectfully, CHAIRMAN COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, BEEKMAN WINTHROP, |