Santa Monica Bay, where the Supreme Court decided the famous gambling case, where they put a gambling ship out at sea-People v. Coriello-where the Supreme Court said it was unquestionably a bay and a harbor. They say the line should be drawn right along the beach to the last drop of water which laps the shores and from there out your child and my child who places a foot therein is a trespasser upon the property of the United States. Now these things are important to the consideration of this problem and I think it is important that this committee know the present stage of these proceedings which have been going on and which California in all earnestness has sought to bring attention to the highest tribunal in this land, to determine the issues that are involved. They are not only matters of concern to the States, they are matters of international importance, and why this great Government of ours can be so short-sighted—and I might almost employ the term "stupid"-as to try to fold up its boundaries and draw in its control over what is known as the territorial seas of every nation, so that enemies can bring right up to our shores their battleships and their submarines, is beyond my comprehension. That is all. Mr. FEIGHAN (presiding). Thank you, Mr. Mattoon. STATEMENT OF WALTER R. JOHNSON, SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF ATTORNEYS GENERAL Mr. JOHNSON. At this time, I would like to present to the committee, copies of resolutions passed by State legislatures of the States of Maine, Oregon, and North Carolina, and ask that they be printed in the record. Mr. FEIGHAN (presiding). Without objection, that will be done. (The resolutions referred to are as follows:) [From the Congressional Record, May 23, 1949] SEIZURE OF STATE LANDS BENEATH NAVIGABLE WATERS Mrs. SMITH of Maine. Mr. President, I present for appropriate reference a letter I have received from attorney general of the State of Maine, and a memorial adopted by the legislature of that State, relating to Federal seizure of State lands beneath navigable waters, and I ask unanimous consent that they be printed in the Record. There being no objection, the letter and memorial were referred to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs and ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows: Hon. MARGARET CHASE SMITH, STATE OF MAINE, DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, Augusta, May 18, 1949. Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR SMITH: On April 22 a joint resolution was passed by the ninetyfourth legislature, endorsing the legislation pending in Congress relating to the Federal Government's quitclaiming to the several coastal States' rights to the submerged lands within the 3-mile limit; and the Secretary of State informs me that he has sent you an authenticated copy with the great seal of the State thereon. I am wondering if you would be willing to have same placed in the Congressional Record. If you feel that you do not want to do this, would you suggest to Robert Hale, who is very much interested in the tidelands legislation, to do so? Walter R. Johnston, who represents the National Association of Attorneys General in Washington, wrote to me as a member of the executive committee of that association, on May 2 that he had not seen a copy in the Congressional Record and suggests that I contact you, asking you to put it in. There is more interest in this matter at the present time in Maine than there has been at any time since this controversial question has been pending before Congress and the United States Supreme Court. Richard Hallet, of the Gannett papers, was in my office this morning and spent considerable time going over this proposed legislation with me and over the background of the States' rights to the tidelands. It is a fact that our coastal States now fear that the title to their own tidelands may be clouded by the fate of those of California. As you know, the Federal Government has been granted leave by the United States Supreme Court to file actions against the States of Texas and Louisiana similar to that brought against the State of California, which was decided in June 1947; and there is no telling when an action may be filed against the State of Maine, claiming title to all our resources in the sea within the 3-mile belt, which would include lobsters, clams, and other fisheries along our Maine coast. The decree of the Supreme Court has encouraged opinions which may upset acquired titles and old procedures all along our coast. As you know, Maine citizens and corporations have invested their capital and energy not in one but in scores of phases of our national economy, and the necessity for some action by the Congress was intimated by the Court itself in its opinion in the California case, so that the adoption of the legislation now pending would not reflect in any way upon the prestige or authority of the Supreme Court of the United States, nor would it set up any new precedent. I feel that Raymond Moley's article in Newsweek, May 2, entitled "Fair Deal Under the Sea," is a fair presentation of his opinion of the 200 Supreme Court decisions and the recognition by the United States of Texas as a Republic when it was admitted to the Union in 1845. With best wishes and kindest personal regards, RALPH W. FARRIS, JOINT RESOLUTION Relating to Federal seizure of State lands beneath navigable waters To the Members of the Maine Delegation in Congress: Whereas the State of Maine owns and possesses more than 2,175 square miles of land beneath navigable waters within its boundaries, subject only to the Federal powers over navigation, commerce, and national defense; and Whereas State ownership of this property has been and will continue to be an important source of revenue for our State, the loss of which would be a great injury to the State and our people for whom it is held in trust; and Whereas after over 100 years of recognized State ownership without interference with the delegated Federal powers, certain Federal officials are now suing other States for similar property and advocating Federal seizure of the lands: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the House of Representatives of Maine (the Senate concurring): That the State of Maine favors continued State ownership and control, subject only to the delegated Federal powers, of lands and resources within and beneath navigable waters within the boundaries of the respective States, and requests Congress to pass suitable legislation to that end; That the members of our delegation in Congress are hereby requested to give their active opposition to all pending and proposed measures which would create Federal ownership or control of lands, fish, or other resources beneath navigable waters within State boundaries; That the members of our delegation in Congress are hereby requested to give their active support to legislation which would recognize and confirm State ownership of such property; and That a copy of this resolution be mailed to each member of our delegation in Congress. House of representatives, read and adopted, April 21, 1949; sent up for concur rence. HARVEY R. PEASE, Clerk In senate chamber, April 22, 1949, read and adopted, in concurrence. Secretary. [From the Congressional Record, April 19, 1949] By Mr. Morse: A joint resolution of the Legislature of the State of Oregon; to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs: "SENATE JOINT MEMORIAL 3 "To the Honorable Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled: "We, your memorialists, the forty-fifth legislative assembly of the State of Oregon, in regular session assembled, respectfully represent as follows: "Whereas since the founding of our Nation, the States have exercised sovereignty over the tidelands, the submerged lands, including the soil under navigable inland waters, and soils under all navigable waters within their territorial jurisdiction, whether inland or not; and "Whereas under the common law and civil law the State's sovereignty and authority over and title to said lands has been long acknowledged, affirmed, and respected by the Federal Government whose only powers were expressly delegated to it by the States at the time of the formation of our Government; and "Whereas the States did not delegate unto the Federal Government authority or power over or title to said lands but retained same to and for the States; and "Whereas the recent decision of the United States Supreme Court in the case of United States v. California, while not deciding the question of ownership of the tidewater lands of California, casts a cloud on that State's title to said lands and the minerals and other natural resources beneath; and "Whereas this decision of the Supreme Court recognizes that the matter of ownership of said tidewater lands is still a question for the Congress to decide; and "Whereas the title to the tidelands and submerged lands of the States is clouded by this decision and the language therein is so broad as to be extendible to the soil under navigable inland waters and soils under the navigable waters within the territorial jurisdiction of the States, and even to the minerals and other natural resources or important elements on or beneath the soil of the States; and "Whereas this cloud of uncertainty affects minerals, fisheries, and all other natural resources and should be removed by the Congress, thereby acknowledging and reaffirming ownership to the States; and "Whereas the House of Representatives of the Eightieth Congress passed a bill, reaffirming and acknowledging ownership in the submerged lands and resources of the respective States and quitclaiming all right and title thereto to the respective States, reserving only a paramount right to the Government in case of national defense, by a vote of 198 for to 26 against but the measure died in the Senate by the adjournment of the Eightieth Congress: Now, therefore, be it "Resolved by the senate of the State of Oregon (the house of representatives jointly concurring therein), That the Eighty-first Congress of the United States be and the same hereby is memorialized to further consider and enact suitable legislation for the purpose of acknowledging and affirming ownership of submerged lands and resources thereof to the respective States in accordance with the heretofore long-recognized constitutional rights of the States; be it further "Resolved, That a copy of this memorial be forwarded to each House of the Congress and to each Member of the House of Representatives from the State of Oregon and to each of the United States Senators from this State, and urge that they individually and collectively give wholehearted support to bring about the enactment of such legislation. "Adopted by senate March 7, 1949. "WM. E. WALSH, "Concurred in by House March 28, 1949. "FRANK J. VAN DYKE, [From Congressional Record, April 19, 1949] TITLE TO CERTAIN SUBMERGED LANDS-JOINT RESOLUTION OF NORTH CAROLINA LEGISLATURE Mr. HOEY. Mr. President, I have received from W. Kerr Scott, Governor of the State of North Carolina, a certified copy of a joint resolution adopted by the Legislature of that State, favoring legislation confirming the title of the several States of the Union to submerged lands within their borders and protecting the title, ownership, and rights of the several States therein, and I request that the joint resolution be appropriately referred and printed in the Record. There being no objection, the joint resolution was referred to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, and, under the rule, ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows: "JOINT RESOLUTION Requesting United States Senators from North Carolina and Members of the House of Representatives in Congress from North Carolina to give their support to Federal legislation confirming the title of the several States of the Union to submerged lands within their borders and protecting the title, ownership, and rights of the several States therein "Whereas by chapter 1031 of the session laws of 1947, the General Assembly of North Carolina enacted a statute which declared that the eastern limit and boundary of the State of North Carolina on the Atlantic seaboard, having always been, since the Treaty of Peace with Great Britain in 1783 and the Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776, one marine league eastward from the Atlantic seashore, measured from the extreme low-water mark, and declaring that the said boundary should remain fixed as it always had been, one marine league eastward from the seashore of the Atlantic Ocean bordering the State of North Carolina, measured from the extreme low-water mark of the Atlantic Ocean seashore aforesaid, and declaring that this State shall continue, as it always had, to exercise jurisdiction over the territory within the littoral waters and ownership of the lands under the same within the boundaries of the State, subject only to the jurisdiction of the Federal Government over navigation within such territorial waters, and said act further called upon the Governor and the attorney general to take all such action as might be found appropriate to defend the jurisdiction of the State over its littoral waters and the ownership of the lands beneath the same; and "Whereas the large area of land beneath the inland sounds and tributary streams in eastern North Carolina and the large area of land beneath the ocean and within one marine league of the Atlantic seaboard of the North Carolina coast forms an integral and important part of the landed area of this State which is held in trust for the benefit of all the people of the State; and "Whereas the protection of the State's jurisdiction and authority over said land and waters is vital and necessary to the economy of the State, in particular regard to the large fishing interests of the State; and "Whereas the fishing interests of the State could be destroyed by failure to protect the entrance of migratory fish through the several inlets entering into North Carolina waters from the Atlantic Ocean, which the State has always protected by laws against practices which would destroy the entrance of migratory fish into our inland sounds and tributary waters; and "Whereas a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States entitled 'Toomer v. Whitsell' (334 U. S. 385) decided in 1948, the Supreme Court of the United States held that the power of the State to regulate fishing in the marginal sea area within its boundaries may be exercised only 'in absence of conflicting Federal claims, basing its decision upon the former case of United States v. California (332 U .S. 19); and "Whereas the President of the United States has heretofore issued an Executive order, authorizing the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Interior to recommend the establishment of zones for Federal regulation and control of fishery resources and fishing activities in those areas of the high seas contiguous to the coast of the United States, and the Department of State, in December 1948, notified coastal State officials that it will begin to put this program into effect; and "Whereas the Federal executive agencies have introduced in Congress and are attempting to speed the passage of legislation declaring Federal ownership and control of the marginal seas on all the coastal States; and "Whereas such legislation presents a serious challenge to the time-honored jurisdiction and control of the State of North Carolina over its inland and coastline tidelands, overthrowing more than 150 years of established precedent and legislation enacted by this and other States protecting said waters and exercising jurisdiction thereover: Now, therefore, be it "Resolved by the house of representatives (the senate concurring): "SECTION 1. That the United States Senators from North Carolina and Members of the House of Representatives from North Carolina be and they hereby are memorialized and requested to lend their active support to legislation which will be considered by the Eighty-first Congress to protect the continued owner ship and control by the several States of the lands and resources within and beneath the navigable waters thereof and within the boundaries of the respective States, subject only to constitutionally delegated Federal powers with respect to such areas, and to oppose all pending and proposed legislation in Congress which would create Federal ownership or control of land, fish, or other resources beneath the navigable waters within the State boundaries. That the members of the North Carolina delegation in Congress be requested to give their active support to Federal legislation which would recognize and confirm State ownership and jurisdiction over lands and waters within their territorial jurisdiction as heretofore recognized and acknowledged by State and Federal authorities. "SEC. 2. That copy of this resolution shall be transmitted by the Governor to each Senator and Representative from North Carolina in the Congress of the United States. "SEC. 3. That this resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its ratification. "H. P. TAYLOR, "Speaker of the House of Representatives." Mr. JOHNSON. I would also like to present to the committee this resolution of the Assembly and the Senate of the State of California, relative to the tidelands and submerged lands adjacent to the coast of California. Mr. FEIGHAN (presiding). Without objection, the resolution referred to will appear at this point in the record. (The resolution referred to is as follows:) ASSEMBLY JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 15 CHAPTER 50 Assembly Joint Resolution No. 15-Relative to the tidelands and submerged lands adjacent to the coast of California [Filed with Secretary of State January 26, 1949] Whereas the United States has recognized that all the States since July 4, 1776, or since their admission to the Union, have exercised full powers of ownership over all lands beneath navigable waters within their boundaries and of all natural resources within these lands and waters; and Whereas each State has maintained full control of its natural resources with the acquiescence and approval of the United States and in accordance with numerous decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States and the executive departments of the United States that these lands and resources were vested in the respective States as an incident to State sovoreignty and that the exercise of these powers of ownership and control did not and will not impair or interfere with the exercise by the Federal Government of its constitutional powers in relation to the control and regulation of commerce, navigation, national defense, and international relations; and Whereas large sums of money have been expended by the several States, their subdivisions, and persons lawfully acting pursuant to State authority in improving and reclaiming lands, and in developing the natural resources in the lands and waters relying upon the recognized rule of State ownership; and Whereas the Supreme Court of the United States has recently held that the Federal Government has certain paramount powers in respect to a portion of these lands and natural resources without reaffirming or settling the ultimate question of their ownership and control; and Whereas this decision of the Supreme Court recognizes that the question of the ownership and control of these lands and natural resources is within the "congressional area of national power" and that Congress will not execute its powers "in such way as to bring about injustices to the States, their subdivisions, or persons acting pursuant to their permission": Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Assembly and the Senate of the State of California, jointly, That it is in the public interest that title and ownership of the lands beneath |