FEBRUARY 1 (calendar day, FEBRUARY 2), 1932.-Ordered to be printed Mr. GEORGE, from the Committee on Finance, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany S. J. Res. 76] The Committee on Finance to whom was referred the Senate Joint Resolution (S. J. Res. 76), authorizing the President to reorganize the executive agencies of the Government, having considered the same, report it back to the Senate with an amendment, and as amended recommend that the bill do pass. The committee amendment is as follows: On page 3, line 24, strike out the period and insert a semicolon and the following: "and such action shall be final unless Congress by concurrent resolution shall disapprove it within sixty days.' O 72D CONGRESS 1st Session } SENATE { No. 159 REPORT RELATING TO THE TAKING OF DEPOSITIONS IN CERTAIN VETERANS' CASES FEBRUARY 1 (calendar day, FEBRUARY 2), 1932.-Ordered to be printed Mr. ROBINSON of Indiana, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany S. 929] The Committee on the Judiciary, having had under consideration the bill (S. 929) relating to the taking of depositions in cases arising under section 19 of the World War veterans' act, 1924, as amended, reports the same favorably to the Senate and recommends that the bill do pass. The statute sought to be amended applies to suits by World War veterans against the United States arising from claims for compensation and treatment, insurance, and vocational rehabilitation. The purpose of the amendment is to correct some of the abuses and injustices resulting from the present practice in these cases, and also to avoid incurring the expense of taking unnecessary depositions. If both parties to the suit knew what facts were intended to be established by a deposition, the parties frequently could and would stipulate those facts, thus making the taking of the deposition unnecessary. Under the present practice, the adverse party is not given notice as to the facts intended to be established. Consequently, there is no attempt to stipulate the facts; and moreover, the adverse party does not know whether or not it will be necessary or advisable for him to be represented by counsel at the taking of the deposition. This amendment aims to overcome these difficulties. Then there is the additional difficulty that many veterans who institute these suits are financially unable to obtain counsel to represent them at the taking of depositions, even though the taking of the depositions be necessary and even though it be necessary that the veteran be represented in order to safeguard his interests. This difficulty is met by this proposed amendment by requiring the United States to deposit $25 for the use of the veteran in obtaining representation, in cases where he is suing as a poor person. O FEBRUARY 1 (calendar day, FEBRUARY 2), 1932.-Ordered to be printed Mr. CAPPER, from the Committee on the District of Columbia, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany S. 14] The Committee on the District of Columbia, to whom was referred the bill (S. 14) to amend chapter 15 of the Code of Law for the District of Columbia, relating to the condemnation of land for public use, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon, with the recommendation that the bill do pass. PURPOSE OF THE BILL The purpose of the bill is to give to the District of Columbia the same powers which the United States Government now enjoys in condemnation of land in the District for public use. The bill would permit the District Commissioners, through action in the District Supreme Court, to obtain immediate possession of and title to lands needed for public purposes, upon depositing with the court an amount deemed to be just compensation to the property owners. This action does not shut off litigation in any way, but allows the District to proceed with its plans and the property owner to collect the money deposited by the District with the court. If, in the subsequent court action, it should be determined that a fair compensation exceeds the amount of the District's deposit, the court will enter judgment against the District for the difference. The committee believes the rights of property owners are fully safeguarded by the bill, and knows of no objection to its enactment. The commissioners' letters, urging enactment of the legislation, are attached hereto as part of this report. A bill of similar import was passed by the Senate in the Seventy-first Congress. SR-72-1-VOL 1-17 OFFICE COMMISSIONERS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Hon. ARTHUR Capper, United States Senate. DEAR SIR: The Commissioners of the District of Columbia have the honor to inclose herewith draft of a bill entitled "A bill to amend chapter 15 of the Code of Law for the District of Columbia, relating to the condemnation of land for public use," and to request its introduction and enactment. This bill follows nearly word for word section 10 of an act to provide for the acquisition of land in the District of Columbia for the use of the United States. which was approved by Congress March 1, 1929 (Public, No. 867, 70th Cong.) There have been instances in the past and there will undoubtedly be instances in the future, where the immediate acquisition of land for public purposes is imperative. A public project of vast importance may be delayed for many many months under existing law while technical points are being litigated through the various courts, and during that litigation the District is powerless to proceed because of its inability to obtain possession of the desired land. This same situation confronted the United States in its present building program and the act of March 1, 1929, was passed. It is felt that the District of Columbia will have but few occasions to make use of the provisions of this act, but that it is of utmost importance to have available the benefits of its provisions in the case of necessity. Very truly yours L. H. REICHELDERFER, President Board of Commissioners. OFFICE COMMISSIONERS OF the District of Columbia, Hon. ARTHUR CAPPER, This bill was introduced at the request of the commissioners, and the necessity for its passage is indicated in the letter of December 10, 1931, in which the draft of the bill was forwarded. Very truly yours, O L. H. Reichelderfer, President Board of Commissioners. 72D CONGRESS 1st Session } SENATE { REPORT No. 161 TEMPORARY RELIEF FOR WATER USERS ON IRRIGATION PROJECTS OPERATED UNDER RECLAMATION LAW FEBRUARY 1 (calendar day, FEBRUARY 2), 1932-Ordered to be printed Mr. CAREY, from the Committee on Irrigation and Reclamation, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany S. 3422] The Committee on Irrigation and Reclamation, to which was referred the bill (S. 3422) for the temporary relief of water users on irrigation projects constructed and operated under the reclamation law, having considered the same, report favorably thereon, with the recommendation that the bill do pass. The committee conducted extensive hearings, and was addressed by the Commissioner of Reclamation, Dr. Elwood Mead, and by representatives from the various reclamation projects in the West, and has unanimously reached the conclusion that this legislation is imperative in order to relieve the settlers on many of the projects, who are unable to meet their annual construction charges because of water shortage, due to unusual drought conditions throughout the arid States, and the low price of farm products such as: Receipts on the Rio Grande project, where the crop is principally cotton, were reduced over 60 per cent, cotton being worth but little more than 5 cents per pound. There is really no market for potatoes produced on many of the projects in the Northwest. Butterfat at the present time is bringing only 18 cents per pound, eggs 8 cents per dozen, wool 14 cents per pound, lambs 4 cents per pound, hogs 4 cents per pound, and beef cattle 4 cents per pound, and wheat sold as low as 30 cents per bushel. As a matter of fact, everything that the farmer grows is selling for only about one-third of the cost of production. The pending bill does not involve any appropriation. The payments on reclamation projects have been quite satisfactory to the Reclamation Service up to the year 1930, but the extremely low prices of farm products for the past two years has caused the farmers to operate at heavy losses, both in 1930 and 1931. |