JURISDICTION OVER LANDS IN MOUNT RAINIER FEBRUARY 8, 1913.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union and ordered to be printed. Mr. PRAY, from the Committee on the Public Lands, submitted the following REPORT. [To accompany S. 4958.] The Committee on the Public Lands, having had under consideration the bill (S. 4958) to accept the cession by the State of Washington of exclusive jurisdiction over the lands embraced within the Mount Rainier National Park, and for other purposes, recommend the following amendments: Line 14, page 2, section 2, after the words "judicial district," insert the words "for the western district." Page 2, section 3, line 20, change the word "specially" to the word "specifically." Page 2, section 3, lines 21 and 22, strike out, beginning in line 21 and ending in line 22, the following words: "or by any regulation of the Secretary of the Interior." Page 3, section 4, line 4, after the words "of any," insert the word "wild." Page 3, section 4, line 5, after the word "is," insert the word "apparently." Page 3, section 4, line 6, strike out the seventh word, "an," and insert in lieu thereof the words "a personal." Page 3, section 4, lines 8, 9, and 10. Beginning with the ninth word in line 8 and ending with the second word in line 10, strike out the following words: "by means of seines, nets, traps, or by the use of drugs or any explosive substances or compounds, or.' Page 4, section 4, line 2. After the words "or any part thereof, of any, insert the word "wild." Page 4, section 4, lines 4 to 9, inclusive. Beginning after the word "act," in line 4, and ending with the word "dollars," line 9, transpose the following sentence as a new paragraph at the bottom of page 4, transposing also, within the sentence as it now stands on line 7, the words "taken" and "caught," so that as the new paragraph at the bottom of page 4 it will read as follows: Any person or persons, or stage or express company, or railway company receiving for transportation any of the said animals, birds, or fish so killed, caught, or taken, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be fined for every such offense not exceeding $300. Page 4, section 4, lines 10 and 11. Strike out beginning with the word "any" in line 10 and ending with the word "or" in line 11, the following words: "any of the provisions of this act or. Page 4, section 4, lines 22 and 23. In line 22, change the first two words "one thousand" to read "three hundred." In line 22 change the last word "two" to read "three" and in line 23 change the first word "years," to read "months." Change the word "engaging" to read Page 5, section 5, line 3. engaged." After the word Page 5, section 5, line 5. Page 5, section 5, line 11. insert in lieu thereof the word "may." Page 5, section 5, line 25. Beginning with the last word in line 25, "one," strike out the remainder of section 5, as follows: "one hundred dollars and be adjudged to pay all costs of the proceedings," and insert in lieu thereof the following words: "five hundred dollars or imprisonment for not more than twelve months, or both, in the discretion of the court." Page 6, section 7, line 4. After the last word in line 4, "commissioner," insert the words "for a term of four years." Page 8, section 10. Strike out the whole of section 10 and insert in lieu thereof the following: SEC. 10. That the commissioner provided for in this act shall be paid an annual salary of one thousand five hundred dollars, payable quarterly: Provided, That the said commissioner shall reside within the exterior boundaries of said Rainier National Park, at a place to be designated by the court making such appointment: And provided further, That all fees, costs, and expenses collected by the commissioner shall be disposed of as provided in sections 11 and 12 of this act. Page 8, after the close of section 12, insert the following section: SEC. 13. That the Secretary of the Interior shall notify, in writing, the governor of the State of Washington of the passage and approval of this act. And that as so amended the bill do pass. By an act of Congress approved March 2, 1899, a tract of land in the State of Washington, consisting of about eight townships, was set aside from the public domain and designated as Mount Rainier National Park. With the exception of 160 acres the entire tract is Government land. On the 16th of March, 1901, the Legislature of the State of Washington passed an act ceding to the United States exclusive jurisdiction over all the territory included within Rainier National Park, reserving to the State the right to serve civil or criminal process in matters arising within the State but outside of the park, and to tax persons and corporations, their franchises and property. It was further provided that jurisdiction should not vest in the United States until the proper officer of the Government had notified the governor of Washington that police or military jurisdiction had been assumed over the park. In the act creating the park authority is given the Secretary of the Interior to adopt rules and regulations for its care and management, but it is held that they can not be enforced while the State of Washington retains jurisdiction. over the territory embraced within the boundaries of the park. S. 4958, in terms, accepts the conditions imposed by the Legislature of Washington in ceding jurisdiction over this territory, and, furthermore, there are incorporated in this bill substantially the same provisions as are included in the act of May 7, 1894, for the government of the Yellowstone National Park. A favorable report (No. 1978) was made by the House Committee on the Public Lands on H. R. 29164, Sixty-first Congress, third session. This measure was similar to the one now under consideration. The following letter from Hon. Carmi A. Thompson, Assistant Secretary of the Interior, dated February 7, 1912, giving reasons for the favorable consideration of the bill, is made a part of this report: DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, Washington, February 7, 1912. Hon. REED SMOOT, Chairman Committee on Public Lands, United States Senate. MY DEAR SENATOR: This department is in receipt, by reference from the Senate Committee on Public Lands, of Senate bill 4958, entitled "A bill to accept cession by the State of Washington of exclusive jurisdiction over the lands embraced within the Mount Rainier National Park, and for other purposes," with request for information as to the law and facts in relation thereto, and for such suggestions as this department may see fit to offer. In response thereto I have to state that by the act of the Legislature of the State of Washington, approved March 16, 1901, copy herewith, exclusive jurisdiction was ceded to the United States over and within all the territory which is now or may hereafter be included in that tract of land in the State of Washington set aside for the purposes of a national park under the act of March 2, 1899 (30 Stat., 993), and known as the Mount Rainier National Park, upon the condition that jurisdiction should not vest until the United States, through the proper officers, notifies the governor of the State that they assume police or military jurisdiction over said park. The department now has a superintendent in charge of this national park, and for administrative reasons it is highly desirable that legislation be enacted accepting the cession by the State of Washington of jurisdiction over the park lands and that provision be made therein enforceable in the courts for the protection of the animals, birds, and so forth, in the reservation. The measure under consideration, if enacted into law, will effect this purpose, but it is suggested for administrative reasons that it be amended as follows: Strike out all of section 7, reading: "SEC. 7. That any United States commissioner duly appointed by the United States court for the western district of Washington and residing in said district shall have power and jurisdiction to hear and act upon all complaints made of any and all violations of this act or of the rules and regulations made by the Secretary of the Interior for the government of the park and for the protection of the animals, birds, and fish, and objects of interest therein, and for other purposes authorized by this act. That any such commissioner shall have power, upon sworn complaint, to issue process in the name of the United States for the arrest of any person charged with a violation of this act or of the rules and regulations made by the Secretary of the Interior, as aforesaid, or with any misdemeanor or other like offense the punishment provided for which does not exceed a fine of $100, and to try the person thus charged and, if found guilty, to impose the punishment and adjudge the forfeiture prescribed. In all cases of conviction an appeal shall lie from the judgment of any such commissioner to the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. The said United States district court shall prescribe rules of procedure and practice for said commissioner in the trial of cases and with reference to said appeals.' And insert in lieu thereof: "SEC. 7. That the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington shall appoint a commissioner who shall reside in the park and who shall have jurisdiction to hear and act upon all complaints made of any violation of law or of the rules and regulations made by the Secretary of the Interior for the government of the park and for the protection of the animals, birds, and fish, and objects of interest therein, and for other purposes authorized by this act. Such commissioner shall have power, upon sworn information, to issue process in the name of the United States for the arrest of any person charged with the commission of any misdemeanor, or charged with a violation of the rules and regulations, or with a violation of any provision of this act prescribed for the government of said park, and for the protection of the animals, birds, and fish in said park, and to try the person so charged and, if found guilty, to impose the punishment and adjudge the forfeiture prescribed. In all cases of conviction an appeal shall lie from the judgment of said commissioner to the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, and the United States district court in said district shall prescribe rules of procedure and practice for said commissioner in the trial of cases and for appeal to said United States district court.” Strike out all of section 10, reading: "SEC. 10. That such commissioner and the marshal of the United States and his deputies in the western district of Washington shall be paid the same fees and compensation as are now provided by law for like services in said district." And insert in lieu thereof: "SEC. 10. That the commissioner provided for in this act shall, in addition to the fees allowed by law to commissioners of the district courts of the United States, be paid an annual salary of $1,500, payable quarterly." These amendments are suggested in order to make the bill conform more nearly to the provisions of the act of May 7, 1894 (28 Stat., 73), to protect birds and animals in the Yellowstone National Park, to punish crimes in said park, and for other purposes, which act has been satisfactorily administered since the date of its passage. With the amendments above mentioned, I recommend that the bill receive favorable consideration in your committee and be enacted into law at the earliest practicable date. In this connection attention is invited to the fact that a bill similar to that under consideration (H. R. 29164, 61st Cong., 3d sess., to accept the cession by the State of Washington of exclusive jurisdiction over the lands embraced within the Mount Rainier National Park, and for other purposes) was reported favorably by the House Committee on the Public Lands January 24, 1911 (H. R. Rept. No. 1978). Very respectfully, CARMI A. THOMPSON, Assistant Secretary. [Session laws, 1901. Chapter XCII (S. B. 231).] Ceding to United States jurisdiction over Rainier National Park. Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Washington: SECTION 1. Exclusive jurisdiction shall be, and the same is hereby, ceded to the United States over and within all the territory that is now or may hereafter be included in that tract of land in the State of Washington set aside for the purposes of a national park and known as the Rainier National Park, saving, however, to the said State the right to serve civil or criminal process within the limits of the aforesaid park in suits or prosecutions for or on account of rights acquired, obligations incurred, or crimes committed in said State, but outside of said park; and saving further to the said State the right to tax persons and corporations, their franchises and property on the lands included in said park: Provided, however, This jurisdiction shall not vest until the United States, through the proper officer, notifies the governor of this State that they assume police or military jurisdiction over said park. Passed the senate February 28, 1901. Passed the house March 13, 1901. Approved by the governor March 16, 1901. The question has been raised as to whether the Legislature of the State of Washington could legally cede its jurisdiction. The following has been submitted on that point: JURISDICTION. By section 8 of Article I of the Constitution Congress is given power, among other things "To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever over such district (not exceeding 10 miles square) as may, by cession of particular States and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the State in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings." To bring a case strictly within this clause as applicable to the case at bar there must be, first, a purchase by the United States; second, the consent of the legislature of the State; and, third, it must be for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and needful buildings. Considerable latitude of construction of this clause has been indulged in by the courts. In Tucker v. The United States (122 Fed., 518) it was held that "purchase" includes the case of a cession of the land by the State. In ex parte Hebard (4 Dillon, 343) it is held in effect that ownership by the United States of lands is sufficient to satisfy this requirement. It is held that the case of consent by the State and ownership by the United States of lands used by the Government is within Article I, section 8, and that a purchase is not necessary. In United States v. Stahl (Woolworth, 192) it is held that it is doubtful if consent of the State is necessary for the use of the lands as an instrumentality of the United States. In Sinks v. Reese (19 Ohio State) it is held that an asylum for disabled volunteer soldiers is covered by Article I, section 8. The court, in the McGlinn case (114 U. S., 542), in describing its decision in the Fort Leavenworth case (114 U. S., 525), used this language: "We also held that it is incompetent for the legislature of a State to cede exclusive jurisdiction over places used by the General Government in the execution of its power, the use of the places being in fact as much for the people of the State as for the people of the United States generally, and such jurisdiction necessarily ending when the places cease to be used for those purposes.' Fort Trumbull (Conn.) case: "It is not questioned that the land is owned by the United States or that the purchase was with the consent of the legislature of the State. There is wanting a formal deed of cession, which the legislature intended should be executed on the part of the State. Such a formality is not necessary to give jurisdiction. The purchase by the United States, and the consent of the legislature to the purchase, gave to Congress the exclusive power of legislation over the purchased land. (Const., U. S., Art. I, sec. 8.) A legislative consent to the purchase could be given either before or after the purchase, and such consent, whenever given, together with the fact of purchase, establishes the jurisdiction of the United States." (Vol. 13, p. 411, Opins. Attys. Genl., citing 7 ibid., 628.) Independently of the said constitutional provision (Art. I, sec. 8), it is believed that a State has authority to cede and the United States to accept jurisdiction and sovereignty over territory whenever the State in its wisdom may see fit to grant it and the Government to accept it where the cession may be of use to the United States in the exercise of its governmental powers. In U. S. v. Tucker (122 Fed., 518) it is held that— "Both a purchase with the consent of the State and an express cession of jurisdiction are not necessary to the powers and rights of the Government. Either will be sufficient if the place is owned by the United States and is actually used for governmental purposes. In this case, however, we find both." Where there is a purchase of property with the consent of the State legislature, exclusive jurisdiction follows and attaches by virtue of the constitutional provision itself, while in the case of express cession of jurisdiction to the United States by a legislative enactment for that purpose the jurisdiction of the United States over the place is derived from such legislative act and not necessarily from the constitutional provision per se. In the various Kansas cases decided by the Supreme Court there was not purchase by the United States of the place then in question (Government reservation) with the consent of the State of Kansas, because the United States had acquired title to all the vacant land in the Territory of Kansas by the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, over half a century before the State was created in 1861. The land in question in those cases, the legal title to which was in the United States, was reserved from public sale and retained for governmental uses; but the State of Kansas after its admission into the Union did, by express legislation, cede jurisdiction over it, and this, coupled with ownership and use, was treated as entirely sufficient to bring it within the exclusive jurisdiction of Congress. The authorities which clearly establish these general propositions are those of Fort Leavenworth R. R. Co. v. Lowe (114 U. S., 525); Chicago, R. I. & Pacific R. R. Co. v. McGlinn (114 U. S., 542); Benson v. U. S. (146 U. S., 330); Palmer v. Barrett (162 U. S., 402); United States v. Cornell (2 Mason, 60 Fed. Cas. No. 14, 867); Sharon v. Hill (24 Fed., 729); Martin v. House (C. C.) (39 Fed., 694); Bannon v. Burns (C. C.) (39 Fed., 899); In re Ladd (C. C.) (74 Fed., 31); State v. Mack (23 Nev., 359); Foley v. Shriver (81 Va., 572); 1 Story on Constitution, 1216–1229. HR-62-3-vol 1-53 |