made by the Central Pacific Railway Company and the Southern Pacific Company before the date of enactment of this Act.

(b) There is hereby reserved to the United States all oil, coal, or other minerals in the land referred to in the first section of this Act, together with the right to prospect for, mine, and remove the same under such rules and regulations as the Secretary of the Interior may prescribe.

[H.R. 7550, 87th Cong., 1st sess.]

A BILL To validate the conveyance of certain land in the State of California by the Central Pacific Railway Company to Edna Rhodes

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the conveyance hereinafter particularly described and heretofore executed by Central Pacific Railway Company (successor to "The Central Pacific Railroad Company of California", and "The Western Pacific Railroad Company" consolidated), a corporation, involving certain land near Antelope, in the county of Sacramento, State of California, and forming a part of the right-of-way of said Central Pacific Railway Company, granted by the Government of the United States of America by an Act of Congress approved July 1, 1862, entitled "An Act of aid in the construction of a railroad and telegraph line from the Missouri River to the Pacific Ocean, and to secure to the Government the use of the same for postal, military, and other purposes" (12 Stat. L. 489), and by said Act as amended by Act of Congress, approved July 2, 1864, entitled "An Act to amend an Act entitled 'An Act to aid in the construction of a railroad and telegraph line from the Missouri River to the Pacific Ocean, and to secure to the Government the use of the same for postal, military, and other purposes', approved July 1, 1862" (13 Stat. L. 356), is hereby legalized, validated, and confirmed with the same force and effect as if the land involved therein had been held at the time of such conveyance by the corporation making the same under absolute fee-simple title.

The conveyance, which is hereby legalized, validated, and confirmed, is dated April 19, 1871, executed to John Winter, and recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of Sacramento County, California, in book 62 of deeds, page 133: Provided, That such legalization, validation, and confirmation shall not in any instance diminish said right-of-way to a width less than fifty feet on either side of the center of the main track or tracks of said Central Pacific Railway Company as now established and maintained: Provided further, That nothing herein contained is intended or shall be construed to legalize, validate, or confirm any rights, titles, or interests based upon or arising out of adverse possession, prescription, or abandonment, and not confirmed by conveyance heretofore made by the Central Pacific Railway Company and its lessee, Southern Pacific Company: And provided further, That there shall be reserved to the United States all coal, phosphate, sodium, potassium, oil, oil shale, and gas in the land, and the right to prospect for, mine, and remove the same under applicable mineral land laws.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, Washington, D.C., June 28, 1961.

Hon. WAYNE N. ASPINALL,

Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. ASPINALL: This is in reply to your request for the views of this Department on H.R. 3229 and H.R. 3346, identical bills to provide for the disposition by the Secretary of the Interior of lands within abandoned and forfeited railroad rights-of-way, and for other purposes. Another identical bill, H.R. 5745, is pending before your committee.

You have also requested a report on H.R. 6630 which involves the same subject matter as dealt with in the H.R. 3229 group. H.R. 6630 is a bill to amend the act of May 25, 1920, relating to conveyances of certain parts of rights-of-way by railroad companies. H.R. 6945, a bill identical to H.R. 6630, is pending before your committee. These five bills represent the general legislation pending on the railroad rights-of-way problem.

In addition to this proposed general legislation, you have requested reports on or have pending before your committee the following private bills: H.R. 6161, a bill to validate a certain conveyance of land in Riverside County, Calif., made on September 28, 1885, by the Southern Pacific Railroad Co., and others; H.R. 7436, a bill to validate the conveyance of certain land in the State of California by the Central Pacific Railway Co., and the Southern Pacific Co.; and H.R. 7550, a bill to validate the conveyance of certain land in the State of California by the Central Pacific Railway Co., to Edna Rhodes.

We recommend that the H.R. 3229 group be enacted as amended below and that the other bills not be enacted.

The problem presented by these railroad right-of-way lands is complex and we have found it difficult to find a solution that will completely dispose of the controversies and at the same time do equity to all of the parties concerned. We are glad, however, to see the Congress moving toward a solution of this problem and we will be pleased to cooperate in any way we can in order to bring about the best solution possible. Before discussing the various bills individually, a brief background is set out.

During the last century, statutes were enacted making liberal grants of rightsof-way across public lands to encourage the construction of railroads and the development of large public land areas. Court and departmental decisions have provided certain interpretations of these grants. Decisions meriting particular attention with respect to the earlier right-of-way grants, referred to as the special grants, are noted as follows:

A railroad may not alienate or abandon any part of a right-of-way granted, and no one can acquire the right-of-way through adverse possession (Northern Pacific Railway v. Townsend, 190 U.S. 267 (1903)). Even where the right-ofway crosses a section granted in fee to the railroad, it has been held that there is no merger of the railroad's rights under the two grants (Holland v. Northern Pacific Railway Company, 214 Fed. 920 (9th Cir. 1914)). The right-of-way takes effect at the time of the enactment of a statute, even though the definite location of the line of the railroad may not be made until later (Railroad Company v. Baldwin, 103 U.S. 426 (1880)). The issuance of a patent to lands crossed by a railroad right-of-way grant does not convey any interest in the lands included within the right-of-way (E. A. Crandall, 43 L. D. 556 (1915)). Oil and gas deposits in the right-of-way are subject to leasing by the United States under the act of May 21, 1930 (30 U.S.C. 301-306) (United States v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, 353 U.S. 112 (1957)).

Two statutes of a general nature have been passed which affect the alienation of rights-of-way. The act of May 25, 1920 (c. 197, 41 Stat. 621; 43 U.S.C. 913), authorized any railroad company which had received a right-of-way grant from the Congress, or its successor in interest or assignee, to convey any portion of that right-of-way to a State, county, or municipality to be used as a public highway or street. Conveyances are not authorized under the 1920 act which would reduce the width of the right-of-way to less than 50 feet on each side of the main track as established and maintained on May 25, 1920.

The act of March 8, 1922 (42 Stat. 414; 43 U.S.C. 912), was concerned with a different aspect of this matter for it provided that, whenever public lands have been or may be granted to a railroad company for use as a right-of-way or as sites for railroad structures, and the use and occupancy of those lands for such purposes has ceased or shall cease, whether by forfeiture or abandonment de creed or declared by a court of competent jurisdiction or by act of Congress, all the right, title, and interest of the United States in the lands included in that right-of-way shall pass to the party, or its successor in interest, to which title of the United States to the whole of the legal subdivision or subdivisions traversed or occupied by the railroad or railroad structures has been granted. An exception is made of lands within a municipality; in such a case the right, title, and interest of the United States pass to the municipality.

The first proviso in the 1922 act excepts from such a transfer of title any conveyance made by a railroad company of a portion of its right-of-way, if, before the declaration or decree of forfeiture or abandonment, the conveyance is validated or confirmed by an act of Congress. The proviso recognizes previous validations under such terms as those of the act of April 28, 1904 (33 Stat. 538), which involved the Northern Pacific Railroad, and those of the act of June 24, 1912 (37 Stat. 138), which involved the Union Pacific Railroad. Since the enactment of the 1922 act numerous private bills validating conveyances by rail

road companies of lands within rights-of-way have been introduced and many of them have been enacted.

In order to relieve Congress of the many private bills and also to provide a uniform procedure for handling such claims, it would appear desirable that general legislation be enacted. Accordingly, we have recommended that the private bills noted above not be enacted, and suggest that they be handled administratively pursuant to the general legislation enacted.

With regard to general legislation as well as special legislation, however, this Department takes the position that the United States should be properly compensated for any interest it conveys. H.R. 6630 violates this position by making no provision for compensation to the United States for its interests in these rightof-way lands. Moreover, it would appear difficult to satisfactorily amend H.R. 6630 to correct the deficiency as the bill is tailored to give the railroad company control over not only the conveyance of its own interest in the land, but also to give the company control over the conveyance of the nonmineral interest of the United States in the lands. We believe that even with amendment this arrangement would not result in adequate compensation for the Government's interest and have accordingly recommended that H.R. 6630 not be enacted.

H.R. 3229 coincides with our position of requiring that compensation be paid and with our philosophy that a conveyance of the United States' interest in such lands should be under the control of the United States. We find, however, that at this time we are unable to gauge the operating impacts that might be encountered from the lease provisions, occupancy provisions, and the Interstate Commerce provisions that are included in H.R. 3229. For this reason, we restrict our recommendation in favor of H.R. 3229 to cases where there is a conveyance of the railroad interests in the lands. These are the situations that have given rise to private legislation. Admittedly, this limited legislation would not clear up the whole problem. If the Congress, however, should see fit to adopt this approach, the Department would immediately take action to acquire the facts needed to arrive at a departmental position with respect to the other phases of H.R. 3229. We believe this information could be assembled within the period of 1 year.

An additional suggested change in H.R. 3229 would limit its application to rights-of-way bordered by legal subdivisions which are not owned by the United States as it would be contrary to good administration to convey out a narrow strip of land that would divide into two parts the surrounding public lands. One other suggested change in H.R. 3229 would effect a reservation to the United States of the leasable minerals but contemplates that the other minerals would be conveyed except when their reservation would be in the public interest. It has been found with respect to lands on which intensive surface development is planned that a reservation of the locatable minerals tends to be a serious detriment to such surface development.

A draft bill which reflects these suggested changes in H.R. 3229 is enclosed and we recommend that it be enacted.

While we have recommended that the private bills not be enacted, it may be that Congress will wish to consider these bills separately from the general legislation. In order to cover this contingency the additional information set out below is submitted.

H.R. 6161 would validate a certain conveyance of land in Riverside County, Calif., made on September 28, 1885, by the Southern Pacific Railroad and others as it relates to lands in lot 1, block 8, N1⁄2 sec. 11, T. 3 S., R. 1 W., San Bernardino medidian, California. The interior section description lot 1, block 8, is not a public land survey designation and appears to be a private survey description. The land to be benefited by this proposal is in the north one-half of section 11 and we understand that the present owner is a Mrs. John S. Coleman of Post Office Box 222, Beaumont, Calif., and that there are other private owners in this same area who are similarly situated.

The facts involved are illustrative of the basic problem involved in railroads' rights-of-way and point up the need for general legislation to resolve the many existing land title problems. Our records disclose that all of section 11 was patented as a railroad section on January 9, 1885. On September 28, 1885, the Southern Pacific Railroad Company and D. O. Mills and Gerrit L. Lansing, trustees, conveyed to William Smith for $4,192 the north one-half of section 11 and reserved a strip of land 100 feet wide lying equally on each side of the tract for railroad purposes. The land which was granted to the railroad was subject to a right-of-way 200 feet in width which was granted to the railroad by the act of July 27, 1866 (14 Stat. 292).

We do not have any detailed information as to the mesne conveyances which may have been made in this portion of section 11, but it is reported that the beneficiary under this bill purchased lot 1, block 8, containing 9.18 acres in 1957 at $1,634 per acre. Although the grantee may have assumed it was acquiring the 50-foot strip now under consideration, the deed contained an exception as follows: "Also excepting therefrom any portion included in the original grant to the Southern Pacific Railroad Co. for a railroad right-of-way 200 feet wide.” Apparently the reason for clearing the title is that the State of California is constructing a freeway to bypass the town of Beaumont which crosses the back end of the beneficiary's property. The State Highway Department bought and paid for the freeway right-of-way except for the portion involved in the 50-foot strip. Upon the clearance of title to this portion, the State would acquire this portion and have set a deadline as of June 30, 1961. We understand the consideration involved in this transaction would be $1,600 per acre.

H.R. 7436 would validate the conveyance of certain land, described in section 2 of the bill, by the Central Pacific Railway Co. and the Southern Pacific Co. The bill indicates the lands are a part of the right-of-way granted by the United States to the Central Pacific Railway Co. under the act of July 1, 1862 (12 Stat. 489), as amended by the act of July 2, 1864 (13 Stat. 356), being 200 feet on either side of the railroad line. The issue presented by this bill is similar to that presented in H.R. 6161.

H.R. 7436 is identical with H.R. 6721, 86th Congress, and upon which the Department reported on May 6, 1960. It was this latter bill that gave rise to the specific comments on the floor of the House, which were recorded in the June 24, 1960, Congressional Record, page 13187, relating to the requirement for compensation to the United States. In this connection it is noted that none of these three private bills provide for compensation for the interests of the United States and would thereby be contrary to our position of requiring that proper compensation be paid for such interests.

The House report on H.R. 6721 indicated that a total of 6,117 acres of public land in two parcels is involved. Both parcels have been substantially improved and were conveyed by the railroads on September 27, 1945, and April 9, 1959, respectively.

Congressman McFall in his testimony on H.R. 6721 described the 6.117 acres as follows: "Being all that portion of the east 150 feet of the 400-foot congressional grant in the NW4 sec. 1, T. 2 N., R. 6 E., Mount Diablo meridian, California, lying north of the north line of Bear Creek."

The title of these lands is complex and additional title examination is necessary to establish the status of the same. Although the first conveyance involved nominal consideration to the railroad company, the second conveyance indicated a purchase price of $3,500. In neither instance did the United States receive any consideration for its interests in the lands.

H.R. 7550 would validate a conveyance to John Winter dated April 19, 1871, from the Central Pacific Railway Co. and the Western Pacific Railroad Co. involving certain lands near Antelope, Sacramento County, Calif. Apparently the land involved is within a 400-foot right-of-way granted to the Central Pacific Railway Co. under the act of July 1, 1862 (12 Stat. 489), as amended July 2, 1864 (13 Stat. 356). As the description is not given in the bill, we are unable to determine from our records the status of the land. Furthermore, we have no information on the mesne conveyance which may be involved. We not the bill's title refers to an Edna Rhodes as being the railroad's grantee whereas the bill describes a Mr. John Winter.

The Bureau of the Budget has advised that there is no objection to the presentation of this report from the standpoint of the administration's program. Sincerely yours,

JAMES K. CARR, Under Secretary of the Interior.

A BILL To provide for the disposition by the Secretary of the Interior of the interest of the United States in certain lands within railroad rights-of-way, and for other purposes Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That (a) in the event of a conveyance or purported conveyance heretofore or hereafter made by a railroad company of all of its interest in any land within a right-of-way granted to it or a predecessor in interest by the United States for railroad purposes, insofar as the lands described in the instrument of conveyance or purported conveyance are concerned,

the person or successor in interest to whom the conveyance or purported conveyance has been made may, within three months from the date thereof or one year from the date of this Act, whichever is later, apply to the Secretary of the Interior for the sale to him of the United States right, title, and interest in and to said lands and the Secretary may, in his discretion, sell the interest of the United States at the fair market value thereof but excepting therefrom the value of any improvements placed thereon by the applicant or his predecessors in interest: Provided, That the Secretary's right to sell under this Act shall be restricted to rights-of-way bordered by legal subdivisions which are not owned by the United States.

(b) If timely application is not made for sale as provided in subsection (a) of this section, the Secretary of the Interior shall require the occupant of the land to show cause why he should not be dispossessed and, unless cause be shown or unless the Secretary finds that possession of the land by the United States is in the public interest, he shall advertise the same for sale and shall sell the same to the highest qualified bidder. If the Secretary determines that the occupant has shown cause why he should not be dispossessed, the Secretary may convey the interests of the United States to the same extent as is provided for in subsection (a) of this section.

SEC. 2. Every sale made under this Act may in the discretion of the Secretary convey the minerals owned by the United States in the lands, except that reservation shall be made of all deposits of coal, native asphalt, solid and semisolid bitumen, and bituminous rock (including oil-impregnated rock or sands from which oil is recoverable only by special treatment after the deposit is mined or quarried), oil, gas, oil shale, phosphate, sodium, potassium, and for lands in the States of Louisiana and New Mexico sulfur also.

SEC. 3. (a) Nothing contained in this Act shall be construed as a waiver by the United States of its right to recover rents, profits, or damages heretofore accrued or hereafter accruing from or to seek and secure other appropriate relief against, any person who does not make timely application for sale as hereinbefore provided or to whom the sale is not made. Nor shall anything contained in this Act be construed as a waiver by the United States of its right to recover from any railroad company the consideration which it has received for land conveyed, leased, or otherwise disposed of by it.

(b) Nothing contained in this Act shall affect any conveyance heretofore made by a railroad company which has heretofore been validated and confirmed by or pursuant to any Act of Congress.

(Subsequently the committee received comments from the Department of the Interior on a proposed amendment to H.R. 6630. The report and the proposed amendment follow :)

Hon. WAYNE N. ASPINALL,

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, Washington, D.C., August 17, 1961.

Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. ASPINALL: This responds to a request from the chairman of the Subcommittee on Public Lands, for a report on the proposed amendment to H.R. 6630 (Revised August 16, 1961), a bill to amend the act of May 25, 1920, relating to conveyances of certain parts of rights-of-way by railroad companies. We do not object to enactment of this bill if it is amended as proposed. In our report of June 28, 1961, this Department expressed its views with respect to several bills relating to conveyances of the interest of the United States in certain railroad rights-of-way. H.R. 3229 and H.R. 6630 represented two different approaches to the overall problem arising in connection with these rightsof-way. Our report expressed two objections to the approach taken by H.R. 6630. One of our objections was that H.R. 6630 had not provided for control in the United States of its interests in such lands, but rather left control of such conveyances solely in the hands of the railroad companies. The proposed amended version of the bill requires the concurrence of the Secretary of the Interior in all conveyances and removes this objection. The Secretary's right to withhold concurrence from any such conveyances would allow the Secretary to also prevent conveyances in which he determined that the United States should be compensated for its interests in the lands. This would remove our other objection to the approach taken in the original version of H.R. 6630.