Interior's statement, and it is the view of the Secretary of the Navy as well. Mr. CELLER. Has the Department of the Navy, if you know, ever expressed any opinion heretofore that militates against that point of view? Admiral NUNN. Yes, sir. A good many years ago the Navy Department together with the Department of the Interior urged Federal ownership of all the marginal sea. That was a good many years ago, beginning in 1938, I believe, sir. Mr. CELLER. In other words, the Department then held that the Federal Government would have title from low-water mark clear out to the Continental Shelf? Admiral NUNN. Yes, sir, that is right. It was a point of view, Mr. Celler, as I remember, which was first expressed in 1938 or 1937 on the part of the Department of the Interior and the Department of the Navy, which I believe resulted in the decisions of the Supreme Court with respect to California, Louisiana, and Texas. It was the contention at that time that whatever proprietary rights existed in that area belonged to the Federal Government. The Supreme Court later decided in the three cases to which I refer that such was the case. Now, Congress has before it the question of a disposition of this Government property which, I believe, is within the power of Congress, and appropriate for the Congress to operate upon. Mr. WILSON. I would like to ask one question. These installations you talk about the Navy having along the coast line, certainly I do not think anybody would take the position that the States ought to take those over. Do you know of your own knowledge of any along the coast of Louisiana, California, or Texas that would be affected, and how extensive are they? Admiral NUNN. I can, sir. I can submit for the record a list of such things which I cannot guarantee at the moment to be complete. Mr. GRAHAM. Do you desire to submit those at a later date after you have had an opportunity to check them? Admiral NUNN. Yes, sir, if I may later on. Mr. WILSON. Are not those installations handled on a deed basis whereby they get a deed from the States or certain rights? Admiral NUNN. Sir, they should have been so handled. I fear however, that due to negligence or laches or something that there are occasions when we filled land or built piers or seawalls along the coastline between high-water mark and low-water mark, which was State property, and that in some cases we did not take means to perfect our title. Mr. WILSON. I would say as far as I am personally concerned, I would certainly favor a provision clarifying the Federal Government's ownership of those installations, whatever they might be, if they are in active use. Admiral NUNN. Yes, sir. Mr. WILSON. Of course, I do not know how extensive they are. You know sometimes an Army camp will take in hundreds of thousands of acres. But certainly the property that is being used by the Navy as an installation belongs to the Federal Government, whether they got a deed or not, and should be excepted from this bill. That would be my opinion. Admiral NUNN. That is all we ask, sir. We are a little bit embarrassed about having to bring it up, because it seems to me that we were not very alert when we did not perfect title when these things occurred. But I fear we did not. I have a list, sir. The individual items are not very big each in itself, but there is about a page and a half of them here, and almost every coastal State has a few. Mr. GRAHAM. Will you submit it for the record, Admiral? Admiral NUNN. I submit it for the record, sir. (The document is as follows:) PARTIAL LIST OF NAVAL ACTIVITIES IN TIDAL WATER AREAS WHERE TITLE OF RECORD HAS NOT BEEN ACQUIRED FOR ANY IMPROVEMENTS BEYOND THE HIGH WATER LINE Naval Industrial Shipyard, Hingham, Naval Industrial Shipyard, Quincy, Naval Submarine Base, New London, Naval Shipyard, Brooklyn, N. Y. Naval Industrial Shipyard, Kearny, Naval Base, Philadelphia, Pa. (Portion) Naval Academy, Annapolis, Md. Naval Shipyard (Norfolk), Ports- Naval Shipyard, Charleston, S. C. Naval Station, New Orleans, La. Reserve Fleet Facilities, Orange, Tex. Naval Air Station, Patuxent, Md. Naval Air Station, Alameda, Calif. Naval Supply Depot, Bayonne, N. J. Naval Supply Depot, Seattle, Wash. Marine Corps Recruit Depot, San Diego, Naval Shipyard (Hunters Point), San Naval Mine Depot, Yorktown, Va. Naval Shipyard (Risdon) San Francis- Naval Shipyard (Bethlehem), San Naval Air Station, New York, N. Y. Marine Corps Base, Quantico, Va. Naval Powder Factory, Indian Head, Naval Ammunition Depot, Seal Beach, Naval Ammunition Depot, Port Chicago, Naval Ammunition Depot, Bangor, Naval Receiving Station, South Boston, Naval Amphibious Base, Little Creek, Naval Amphibious Base, Coronada, Naval Training Center, Treasure Is- Naval Hospital, Portsmouth, Va. Naval Air Station, Quonset Point, R. I. Yards & Docks Supply Depot, Davis ville, R. I. Mr. GRAHAM. Is that all, Admiral? Mr. GRAHAM. Captain Meade? Admiral NUNN. His appearance is made unnecessary by that document. Mr. GRAHAM. If that is all, I might say that we are uncertain when we will reconvene for two reasons. Mr. Brownell wants to be heard. The date is not definite. There are some 40 bills, and we have to give opponents and proponents an opportunity to be heard at a later date, and then a day open to the opposition. Witnesses will be given ample opportunity and prompt notice as to when they will appear. The meeting now stands adjourned. (Thereupon at 11:55 a. m., the hearings were recessed subject to call of the Chair.) SUBMERGED LANDS LEGISLATION TUESDAY, MARCH 3, 1953 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE No. 1 OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, Washington, D. C. Subcommittee No. 1 of the Committee on the Judiciary met, pursuant to call, at 2:30 p. m., in room 346, Old House Office Building, Hon. Louis E. Graham, chairman of Subcommittee No. 1, presiding. Present: Representatives Louis E. Graham (presiding), Ruth Thompson, Patrick J. Hillings, and Emanuel Celler. Also present: William E. Miller, George Meader, Laurence Curtis, John M. Robsion, Jr., DeWitt S. Hyde, Michael A. Feighan, J. Frank Wilson, Edwin E. Willis, Woodrow W. Jones, and E. L. Forrester. Mr. GRAHAM. The meeting will come to order. A quorum is present. Mr. Brownell is present, and we will now proceed to hear his testimony. STATEMENT OF HON. HERBERT BROWNELL, JR., ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES, ACCOMPANIED BY J. LEE RANKIN, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL Attorney General BROWNELL. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, in order to save your time, I have developed here a brief written statement setting forth my views in the matter that the subcommittee has under consideration, and if it meets with your approval, I would like to read that statement first. Mr. GRAHAM. That will be perfectly all right. May I make a word of explanation? At the moment they are tendering an ovation to Mr. Celler on the House floor. He has completed 30 years of service in the House. He will be here in a few moments, and also Mr. Walter. That accounts for their absence, and we will submit the statement to them when they come. So will you proceed, please. Attorney General BROWNELL. The Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of the Navy, appearing before committees last week, expressed their views concerning the nature of legislation which they favor regarding the disposition of the submerged-lands issue. In general I concur in the following policies suggested by them: The States should have the right to administer the development and removal of natural resources landward of a line running along their historic boundaries and to retain the income therefrom. The lands beyond that line should be developed under the exclusive supervision and control of the Federal Government with all income therefrom going to the benefit of the entire country. 30869-53--15 |