TITLE TO LANDS BENEATH TIDAL AND NAVIGABLE WATERS WEDNESDAY, JUNE 20, 1945 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D. C. The committee met at 10:30 a. m., Hon. Hatton W. Sumners (chairman) presiding. The CHAIRMAN. The committee will be in order. I would like to ask the proponents of this legislation if they are not about through; have you anything additional you think will contribute to the education of the committee? Mr. CLARY, We have nothing further, Mr. Chairman, that I know of. We called all of the attorneys general and assistants and port authorities who were here I think we had some 30 of them altogether and as I said yesterday, that completed the presentation, so far as I knew, of the proponents of the measure. There may be others who have come in without my knowledge, who wish to speak in favor of it, but so far as I know we have nothing more, except, before you close the hearing, I would like to file a couple of papers. The CHAIRMAN. We have asked the Department of Justice, the Navy Department and the Interior Department if they had anything they could contribute toward the enlightenment of the committee, and if there are any persons here representing either of those departments, or any of the other departments, that are interested in this proposed legislation, and would like to make some statement before the hearing is concluded, we would be very glad to hear them. Mr. WOOD. Mr. Chairman, I represent a private interest that is favorable to the bill. The CHAIRMAN. Will you identify yourself? STATEMENT OF HARLAN WOOD, WASHINGTON, D. C. Mr. WOOD. My name is Harlan Wood; I represent, as I said, a private interest The CHAIRMAN. Are you familiar with the record made before the committee? Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir; I am familiar with what has transpired before the committee. The CHAIRMAN. Have you anything to contribute to the information of the committee that will help them on this question? Mr. WOOD. Mr. Chairman, I represent Dr. Olin Proctor, to whom the Secretary of Interior wrote, in 1933, and the letter is quoted in full of the brief of the attorneys general heretofore filed with the com 121 mittee. Dr. Proctor spent a number of years in devising and inventing, with improvements, a drilling boat-he and his associates-to drill for the oil, gas, and minerals found under the submerged areas involved in this legislation. The CHAIRMAN. How does that become important to a determination of this issue? Mr. WOOD. It may not, but I would like to file a statement with the committee, in support of the contention that he has raised, that his rights and the rights of others similarly situated should be quieted by the passage of some legislation of this character. The CHAIRMAN. Very well; we will be glad to have your statement. Mr. WOOD. As I said, my name is Harlan Wood; I am an attorney at law, practicing here in Washington, D. C. I represent certain interested parties whose rights to submerged lands offshore of California are and will be affected by the action of Congress in respect to the resolutions now being considered by the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives. I want to thank the committee in their behalf for permitting me to make this statement. My representation includes that of one individual who is perfecting a device for the extraction of oil and gas and possibly other mineral products beneath these submerged lands, not only within the present 3-mile boundary line in question, but also beyond the area which is the subject matter of the pending resolutions. For quite some time I have entertained the thought, and this affords me the opportunity to give expression to it, that the wellestablished line of demarcation separating State power and sovereignty established by international law, custom, as well as usage in the United States, too, as it extends 3 miles from shore during mean tide, should belong, exclusively, to the States, and that the Federal Government, exercising its over-all sovereignty and as defined by powers granted to it by the Constitution of the United States, should well extend its sovereignty to a much further line than the present obsolete, archaic, and nominal 3-mile boundary. My thought in this connection, gentlemen, has been reinforced by the experiences we have so lately had in the present world conflict, when it has been demonstrated that to properly protect a country from the expulsion and loosening of missiles, bombs, and so forth, a country becomes in danger even to the extent of 150 miles. National or Federal sovereignty could thus be well extended leaving to the States the jurisdiction over the first 3 miles from shore. Should Congress, in the exercise of its plenary power, in providing for the national defense, extend national sovereignty thus stated, the conflict as between State and Federal power becomes easily soluble. It seems to me that the desire for the extension of power and authority on the part of the Federal Government and its several departments could be easily satisfied not by compromise on the question, because I take it, if precedent is to be followed, the Federal Government, by judicial action, is estopped to validly assert title within the 3-mile limit, except to the extent that confusion confounded results by the constant threat of interposition of a claim of right. To quiet the title and forestall this constant threat of usurpation from the States on the part of the Federal Government, I believe that the Secretary of Interior and the Attorney General should again be willing to follow the salutory opinion expressed by the present Secretary of the Interior to one of my clients, Dr. Olin S. Proctor, when on December 22, 1933, he quoted with such force and effect what the Supreme Court of the United States had said on the subject in the case of Harden v. Jordan (140 U. S. 371), and quoted in full in the brief of the attorneys general of the several States who have endorsed in principle the pending resolutions. Dr. Proctor has spent many years and vast sums of money in the development of drilling apparatus, boats, et cetra, for the purpose of salvaging and making available many of earth's natural resources, for the enrichment of the States and Nation as a whole. In the advancement of that field of science in which he is one of the pioneers, I feel that the Congress should afford him a modicum of protection for his labors by firmly and without equivocation settling the question of sovereignty so that there shall not be these recurring actions depending upon the changing viccissitudes and desires of the Federal departments of the Government and those who are privileged to occupy them, even such occupancy extend beyond the ordinary and accepted span of 8 years. On behalf of the private interests whose rights I respectfully submit should be respected and settled, I recommend that one of the resolutions favorable in principle should be reported out favorably. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. I think that about concludes the presentation to be made. If you have additional material you want to file, you may file them now. Mr. CLARY. Mr. Chairman, may I file now as a part of the record, a copy of the complaint which has been mentioned here by numerous speakers, entitled "United States of America v. Pacific Western Oil Corporation"? The CHAIRMAN. You mean the petition or complaint filed in the case? Mr. CLARY. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. We would be glad to have that in the record, if it is brief. (The paper referred to is as follows:) IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, CENTRAL DIVISION No. 4493b Civil COMPLAINT (Action to recover possession and for an injunction) United States of America, plaintiff, v. Pacific Western Oil Corporation, a Corporation, defendant Comes now the United States of America by Charles H. Carr, United States attorney for the southern district of California, and Francis B. Critchlow, special assistant to the Attorney General, who appear by specific direction and authority of the Attorney General of the United States, and for its complaint alleges: FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF I That the defendant, Pacific Western Oil Corporation, is a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Delaware and having an office and transacting business within the southern district of California. II That the United States of America now is, and at all times material to this action has been, the owner and entitled to the possession of that certain real property situate in the county of Santa Barbara, State of California, within the southern district of California, consisting of that certain submerged area in the Pacific Ocean, particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point where the mesne low-water mark of the Pacific Ocean is intersected by a prolongation of the eastern boundary line of S. M. Spaulding Tocolote ranch property, which point is S. 0°11′ E. 503.92', then southerly from the steel end of post of the galvanized steel fence on the easterly side boundary line of said S. M. Spaulding Tocolote ranch property which end post correctly locates the point designated "end of fence" in the westerly boundary line of lot C as shown on map entitled "Map of Catherine M. Bell, Property Near Elwood Station, Santa Barbara County, Calif." by O. H. O'Neil, licensed surveyor, June 1918, filed July 21, 1919, book 12, page 39, Records of Santa Barbara County; thence along said ordinary low-water mark N. 64°37'20', W. 236.03', N. 53°48'30", W. 200.04', N. 54°5'30", W. 200.02', No. 53°13'50", W. 200.09', N. 52°22'20', W. 200.20', N. 52°5'10", W. 200.25', N. 54°22'40", W. 200.01', N. 55°48'30", W. 175.82', thence out into the Pacific Ocean S. 36°23', W. 4021.35' more or less; thence S. 55°22', E. 1528.99'; thence N. 37°31' E. 4021.35' more or less to a point of beginning, containing 144.07 acres more or less. III That defendant is unlawfully in possession of the lands and withholds the possession thereof from plaintiff. Wherefore, plaintiff demands judgment against defendant for the possession of the lands and for its costs herein. SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF I That the defendant, Pacific Western Oil Corp., is a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Delaware and having an office and transacting business within the southern district of California. II That the United States of America now is, and at all times material to this action has been, the owner of the minerals contained in the lands described in paragraph No. II of the first claim for relief. III That the defendant now is, and for a long time past has been, extracting petroleum and other hydrocarbon substances from the lands unlawfully and in violation of the rights of the plaintiff and, unless enjoined, will continue to do so, to the irreparable damage of the plaintiff. Wherefore, the plaintiff demands judgment enjoining the defendant from extracting or removing petroleum or other hydrocarbon substances or any other minerals contained in the land, and for its costs. THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF I That the defendant, Pacific Western Oil Corp., is a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Delaware and having an office and transacting business within the southern district of California. II That the United States of America now has, and at all times material to this action has had, the paramount right to extract, remove, and use the minerals contained in the lands described in paragraph No. II of the first claim for relief. III That the defendant now is, and for a long time past has been extracting petroleum and other hydrocarbon substances from these lands without the permission of the plaintiff and, unless enjoined, will continue to do so, to the irreparable damage of the plaintiff. Wherefore, the plaintiff demands judgment enjoining the defendant from extracting or removing petroleum or other hydrocarbon substances or any other minerals contained in the lands without the prior permission of the plaintiff and for its costs. CHAS. H. CARR, United States Attorney, Special Assistant to the Attorney General, Attorneys for the United States of America. Mr. CLARY. And I would ask permission also to file with that a copy of a typewritten statement marked "For release, 12:30 p. m.; May 29, 1945," headed "Department of Justice." This is a copy of the typewritten release which was handed out to members of the press, by the Department of Justice, on the date stated, and which contains explanatory matter about this complaints That has also been mentioned by some of the speakers. The CHAIRMAN. We will be very glad to have it. Mr. CLARY. I think it would be well to have it in the record; thank you. (The release referred to is as follows:) [For release: 12:30 p. m., Tuesday, May 29, 19451 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Attorney General Francis Biddle announces the filing today, in the United States district court at Los Angeles, of a test suit to establish any rights the United States may have in petroleum deposits in coastal submerged lands lying between the low-water line and the 3-mile limit. The suit would enjoin operations of the Pacific Western Oil Corp. which is extracting oil in the Elwood Oil Field, off the California coast near Santa Barbara, under a lease issued by the State of California. In announcing the injunction suit, the Attorney General said: "For many years the question of ownership of submerged oil deposits off the coast of the United States has been a subject of controversy. The problem is particularly acute with respect to deposits off the shore of California where drilling operations were begun on a limited scale more than 40 years ago and have since progressed at an increasing rate. In 1921 California enacted a leasing statute under which leases have been issued by the State and royalties have been paid to it. These "The suit filed today at Los Angeles involves a submerged area near Santa Barbara, Calif., from which oil is being taken by the Pacific Western Oil Corp. under lease from the State of Califorina. Pacific Western Oil Corp. is operating oil wells extending beyond low tide about one-third of a mile into the sea. operations are, therefore, within the so-called marginal sea which is the area from the ordinary low-water mark to the 3-mile limit. This suit is being brought to determine not only the legal rights of the United States and the State of California, but also the respective rights of the United States and the other coastal States where there are oil deposits. "The theory of the Government's claim in the present case is that the United States acquired all submerged deposits in the marginal sea by the treaty of cession with Mexico in 1848 and that these deposits did not thereafter pass to the State by virtue of its admission to the Union. "The suit is designed to settle a problem which has been the subject of genuine controversy and which has overhung titles in the marginal sea. The suit does not involve tidelands or lands under inland waters, though the status of these will no doubt be clarified to some extent by the decision. The suit does not involve lands under the high seas, as to which no drilling operations have been found to exist. 75296-45 |