Although the field work of the commissions will be practically completed during the coming season, there necessarily remains much office work to be done in the computation of the triangulation and the preparation of the boundary maps and reports required by the treaties. Before the maps can be published, the final computation of the triangulation must be made. Up to the present time the final positions of 4,500 points have been computed, and there yet remains to be computed the geographic positions of approximately 8,000 points; in addition to which the geographic positions of 1,500 turning points in the water boundary must be computed.

MATERIALS AND TRANSPORTATION.

The monuments, reference marks, tile, and cement for the monument foundations weighed 700 tons, all of which had to be transported in the field from the nearest railroad station or boat landing from 1 to 300 miles to the monument sites by canoes, wagons, or pack trains, and occasionally part of the distance by men. Also, 3,000 tons of sand had to be transported from 1 to 10 miles for use in the construction of the monument foundations.

In addition to the above, the instruments, camp equipment, food for members of the parties, and feed for the animals had also to be transported long distances.

MAPS.

As the treaty requires that the boundary line shall be drawn on accurate, modern maps, it will require 295 maps, approximately 24 by 36 inches each, for the laying down of the boundary line. Of these maps, on January 1, 1920, 60 are printed and signed, 11 others are printed and ready for signature, 20 others are engraved and ready for printing, 189 others will be ready for engraving as soon as the triangulation is finally computed and plotted thereon, and 15 others are yet to be drawn.

REPORTS.

Of the seven joint reports required by the treaties or conventions, one report, that of the establishment of the boundary line from the Arctic Ocean to Mount St. Elias, was completed and transmitted to the State Department in December, 1919, and considerable work has been done on the preparation of the remaining six reports.

The maps and reports of the commissions will be of great value to other bureaus of the Government, as they furnish a belt of accurate topography extending along the whole boundary line between the United States and Canada, which will furnish a base for the extension of additional surveys. The triangulation executed will furnish a base for the extension of triangulation in the future, and the elevations of the bench marks for the extension of future levels. This information is already being made use of by the office of the Chief of Engineers, United States Army, in the preparation of a map of the United States, and advance information is frequently called for and furnished to other bureaus of the Government, such as the General Land Office, the Forest Service, and the Geological Survey.

COMPLETION OF THE WORK.

To complete the work required by the treaties and conventions, that is the final computation of the triangulation, the preparation and printing of the reports, the preparation, engraving, and printing of the maps will probably take from five to six years.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any further questions?

Mr. HUDDLESTON. Mr. Chairman, I want to ask some questions. I do not know where you were, as I could not hear very well down here.

The CHAIRMAN. Why didn't you mention it, Mr. Huddleston?

Mr. HUDDLESTON. Is this work with regard to the boundary being done, with a view to having it final?

Mr. BARNARD. Absolutely.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. I notice you want to do some additional field work, you say, on the Alaskan border, and I am wondering whether the same situation is not likely to arise at any time at some other place.

Mr. BARNARD. Not so much as they are likely to arise in the boundary line between Alaska and British Columbia, and Yukon territory, because in that locality it is almost impossible to erect permanent markers.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. Now, this new work does not have to be done because of the obliteration of the markers?

Mr. BARNARD. At the time this work was done, on account of the inaccessibility of the country and the very bad weather conditions, the boundary party did what they supposed would be necessary for the definition of the boundary line, and that would have served the purpose for a very long time had not the mining activities developed along the boundary line, making it necessary for a more precise definition.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. Well, is all of this work being done with a view to future development along the border?

Mr. BARNARD. In the settled country across the Great Plains I see very little reason for the erection of additional boundary markers, except where cities may grow up. But when the boundary line west of the summit of the Rocky Mounains was located by the commissioners in 1859-1863 it was on account of the great difficulty and expense that would have to have been incurred that they erected permanent marks only in the valleys of the main streams at points which were readily accessible, leaving intervals as great as 25 miles between these marks. At that time there was no thought of their having to do anything more. It was deemed by the present commissioners, on account of the great expense of setting the marks, that the marks established would define the Alaskan coast boundary sufficiently for the time being.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. Isn't it a very uneconomical way to do this work, to have to go over it a second or a third time? Can not these marks be placed with much greater economy if they are all placed at one time than to go back and do it a second or third time?

Mr. BARNARD. Gentlemen, I think it would be an unjustifiable expense to erect a monument at short intervals all along the Alaskan coast boundary, because a large portion of it is inaccessible. There is no need for it, and will be no need for it unless minerals should be discovered in that immediate vicinity, and this could be readily done from the marks already established. It is a very expensive piece of business,

Mr. HUDDLESTON. Well, now, if this work is done with a view of a necessity at some future time of going back and doing it all over again, it will make it necessary to keep this commission a going concern perpetually, and to keep it up with all of the overhead, and that would be wholly unnecessary if we should do the work all at one time. I have a thought which was embraced by the question asked by the chairman of the committee, that there should be a time when this work would come to an end-we could stop it.

Mr. BARNARD. Gentlemen, there will never be a time that there will not have to be some future work done to maintain an effective border line.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. You have in your mind that this commission is really of necessity permanent?

Mr. BARNARD. I leave that to the judgment of the committee.
Mr. HUDDLESTON. You really think that it is necessary?

Mr. BARNARD. I simply want to state the fact. Monuments will be destroyed by natural causes and will be destroyed-for instance, river banks wash away and the monument goes into the river; landslides occur, and the monuments are carried away; snowslides move them; and then in the vistas the timber will grow up and the borderline is obliterated.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. Do you have in mind that the vistas should be maintained?

Mr. BARNARD. I think that the vistas should be maintained on the international boundary in order that there should be no uncertainty as to the position as to the boundary line or ground.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. Now, with the triangulations and other monuments you are putting up is it not possible for any fairly credible surveyor to go there and locate that boundary without the interference of the commission?

Mr. BARNARD. I think it is possible in most sections for a surveyor to run a line and to locate any intermediate point. I question whether such work would be recognized in a court of law unless that was done by some joint action of the two Governments.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. There are constantly disputes arising between private owners of land as to the State boundaries, and of course that may occur on this international boundary even with these monuments, no matter how perfect they may be, because there is always a variation of the compass, and of course allowances must be made for errors. I suppose there are some errors in this work, are there not?

Mr. BARNARD. Well, we have tried to eliminate them.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. But, of course, we know as a practical matter you can not eliminate errors from a big piece of work like this.

Mr. BARNARD. The desires of the commission have been that when the reports are made that it will be possible to locate any point on the boundary line from the notes that will be published in the reports. Mr. GOODWIN. On the streams, what is done in the way of marking the boundary lines in order to define it in the stream?

Mr. BARNARD. The boundary lines in the streams consist of a series of straight lines, the intersection of which are called turning points. Now, each turning point is referred to two or more permanent marks on land, and by setting up a transit at these marks a point can be accurately located out in the water.

Mr. GOODWIN. Is that done from time to time or is that a part of the work of this commission?

Mr. BARNARD. That was done-that is, this information was furnished to the International Joint Commission in order that a company might construct some log booms very close to the boundary line. The CHAIRMAN. Are there any further questions?

Mr. BARNARD. Mr. Chairman, may I ask the committee some questions?

The CHAIRMAN. Certainly; ask anything you want to.

Mr. BARNARD. Gentlemen, you have all seen the report and atlases of the establishment of the international boundary between the

United States and Canada from the Arctic Ocean to Mount St. Elias. It will be very beneficial to this commission as a guidance for future reports to be published on the other sections of the boundary lines if you will make criticisms and suggestions. Are there too many illustrations in the report; is the arrangement right; is there information lacking? It is the desire of this commission to do its work efficiently and to make the future reports more complete, or if we are not doing it right then we want to know it.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. May I ask how numerous is the edition of the report that you desire to issue?

Mr. BARNARD. One thousand five hundred copies for the United States and 1,000 copies for Canada.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. How are they distributed?

Mr. BARNARD. These reports have been sent to the depository libraries, as it was believed they would be safeguarded there for all time in the future. They have been sent to the members of this committee, the members of the Appropriation Committee in the House, the Canadian Relations Committee in the Senate, and the Appropriations Committee in the Senate, and the Foreign Relations Committee in the Senate.

Mr. MOORES. When were they sent?

Mr. BARNARD. They were mailed in December. If any of you gentlemen have not received them, we can furnish you another. Mr. ROGERS. Where is the signed original retained?

Mr. BARNARD. The duplicate signed original report and duplicate atlases of signed maps have been filed with the Secretary of State and are retained in the archives of the State Department.

Mr. ROGERS. And that will be done from time to time as the work progresses?

Mr. BARNARD. That will be done from time to time. The reports and atlases were very well bound, so they ought to last for a very long time. Our idea, gentlemen, has been that this thing should be permanent for all time, practically.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any further questions?
We thank you, Mr. Barnard.

STATEMENT BY MR. WHITEHEAD KLUTTZ, SECRETARY INTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISSION, UNITED STATES AND CANADA.

The CHAIRMAN. Give your name and official position to the stenographer, please.

Mr. KLUTTZ. Whitehead Kluttz, secretary International Joint Commission, United States and Canada.

As it has been some time since we have had the pleasure of coming before the committee and the personnel of the committee has changed quite a good deal during that time, it might be worth while, Mr. Chairman, to state the nature of the treaty under which the International Joint Commission was constituted and its purposes.

The CHAIRMAN. Before you do that will you give the names of the commissioners?

Mr. KLUTTZ. The names of the commissioners on the part of the United States are: Obadiah Gardner, Rockland, Me., former Senator from the State of Maine; Robert B. Glenn, Winston-Salem, N. C., former governor of the State of North Carolina; Clarence D. Clark,

of Evanston, Wyo., former United States Senator from the State of Wyoming.

And the commissioners on the part of Canada

The CHAIRMAN (interposing). What salary do the commissioners receive?

Mr. KLUTTZ. They receive a salary of $7,500. The salary of the Canadian members of the commission is the same. The names of the Canadian members of the commission are as follows: Charles A. Magrath, of Ottawa, Canada; Henry Powell, King's counsel, of St. John, New Brunswick; and Sir William Hearst, recently premier of the Province of Ontario, who was appointed only a few days ago. He succeeded P. B. Mignault, who resigned on account of his appointment as a member of the supreme court.

This treaty was signed at Washington, January 11, 1909, and proclaimed May 13, 1910, by President Taft. Its avowed purposes in the preamble are:

To prevent disputes regarding the use of boundary waters and to settle all questions which are now pending between the United States and the Dominion of Canada involving the rights, obligations, or interests of either in relation to the other or to the inhabitants of the other, along the common frontier, and to make provision for the adjustment and settlement of all such questions as may hereafter arise.

Now, there are just a few articles that are most vital that I might call to the attention of the committee in connection with the jurisdiction of the International Joint Commission.

Articles III and IV confide to the care of this commission the boundary waters between the United States and Canada. Under the provisions of those articles no uses, obstructions, or diversions of those waters which have the effect of changing the level or flow of the water on the other side of the line can be made without the approval of this commission.

Now, another article of great importance is Article IX, under which the jurisdiction of the commission is investigative. Under that article the decisions of the commission are recommendatory only to the two Governments, and it is under that article that the commission has conducted the Lake of the Woods and the pollution of boundary water investigation.

Either Government can invoke Article IX. I might add that under Article IX the questions involved are questions involving the rights, obligations, or interests of either in relation to the other or to the inhabitants of the other along the common frontier between the United States and the Dominion of Canada. That is the only restriction, and either Government can invoke that jurisdiction.

Now, under Article X of the treaty there is no limitation upon the jurisdiction of the commission, provided the provisions of the article are complied with in the terms of the reference. The consent of the Senate is required to that article. But under that article, both parties concurring, any question in dispute between the United States and the Dominion of Canada, a question involving national honor or of vital interest, may be referred to the commission and its decision when made is final and unappealable.

The CHAIRMAN. Has there ever been a question of that kind referred?

Mr. KLUTTZ. No, sir; no question has ever arisen, as you know, Mr. Chairman, which involved the necessity of invoking that order.