2. Answering the second question, this résumé also shows that the work in connection with said dam has been proceeded with in good faith on the part of the United States since the promulgation of the treaty with Mexico. 3. In answer to the third question, calling for a detailed statement showing how soon after the promulgation of the treaty work began in connection with the Engle dam and the nature and character of the work which has been done since said treaty was promulgated, together with the amount which has so far been expended, reference is made to the foregoing chronological statement, and also to the following: The treaty was promulgated January 16, 1907; therefore, as shown, work on the Engle dam and reservoir had begun nearly three years before. Prior to January 16, 1907, extensive investigations and surveys had been performed in connection with the project, and the expenditures to December 30, 1906, from the reclamation fund amounted to $48,404.15. Since that time, as shown above, preliminary investigations and surveys have been completed, active work has been carried on in acquiring the necessary lands, plans for the layout at the dam site have been completed, construction work has begun thereon, and also upon the railroad grade, which is the necessary part of the preliminary work. The amount of money expended on the Engle dam and reservoir to March 31, 1910, the latest date to which complete statements have been received in this office, is $252,535.12. Very respectfully, F. H. NEWELL, Director. Correspondence and documents relating to relations of A. P. Davis, chief engineer Reclamation Service, with J. G. White & Co. 4160 To A. P. DAVIS, [Telegram.] DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, May 6, 1910. Chief Engineer Reclamation Service, Orland, Cal.: I am reliably advised that during your absence from Washington on trip to the West between dates of January 13 and 31, 1910, inclusive, you received per diem pay from J. G. White or J. G. White & Co. in addition to your salary. Explanation giving full particulars by wire is demanded. R. A. BALLINGER, Secretary. SAN FRANCISCO, CAL., May 6, 1910. On January 11, 1910, I requested and received permission from you to take leave of absence for the purpose of examining an irrigation project in Mexico for J. G. White & Co. All except name of corporation was explained to you. I received pay while on formal leave, as provided by law. 4161 DAVIS, Chief Engineer. [Telegram.] DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, To A. P. DAVIS, Chief Engineer, Reclamation Service, Benson, Ariz.: Your wire of May 6 containing statement that I gave you permission to take leave for purpose of examining irrigation project in Mexico unfounded. You were never authorized by me or to my knowledge to engage in private employment or draw com pensation from private parties while under pay from the Government. You do not answer my telegram as to pay from J. G. White & Co. Immediate response by wire is demanded. Secretary. Secretary BALLINGER, Washington: ESPERANZA, ZEN., MEXICO, May 11, 1910. Your wire just received. I did receive pay from J. G. White & Co. while on annual leave in January, nineteen ten, understanding I had your approval. DAVIS. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, United States Senate. SIR: Pursuant to suggestion made by your committee, I transmit herewith copies of letters from J. G. White & Co., pertaining to public-land matters in which said company is interested; also a memorandum giving the history of the contract entered into by said company for the construction of the Laguna dam and sluiceways, Yuma reclamation project, Yuma, Ariz. I believe it was suggested that a conference be had by the respective attorneys and some member of your committee as to what part of this correspondence is desired to be printed in the record. I also transmit, pursuant to suggestion of the committee, copies of correspondence relative to proposed lease of public mineral lands within reservoir sites and copies of decisions of this office refusing to permit such leasing. Very respectfully, R. A. BALLINGER, Secretary. 4698 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR, The honorable the SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR. Mr. Baker submits a permit for your signature which will authorize him to occupy and pursue placer mining operations upon certain described tracts within the Taylor Park reservoir site, withdrawn under the first form authorized by the reclamation act as a reservoir to be used in connection with the Uncompahgre project, Colorado. It would be in line with the long-standing policy of the Government, as expressed in the mineral laws, to make these lands available for mineral exploration so far as may be compatible with the interests of the project. The precise time when the storage of water in this reservoir will be needed for the project can not now be stated. It is probable, however, that the interests of the project would not be adversely affected in case of an arrangement which would permit the use of portions of the reservoir for mining purposes for a period of six years, under proper restrictions. The privilege desired is a valuable one and in the opinion of this office should not be given to anyone without obtaining a proper return to the Government. This could be best accomplished by allowing all persons who may desire to utilize these lands equal opportunity to bid for the privilege of temporary occupancy. The fact that Mr. Baker and his associates have inadvertently performed some work upon the public lands so withdrawn does not afford any basis for a preference right to them and does not constitute a sufficient reason for giving them a permit to utilize these lands without making compensation. The fact that they have had an opportunity to make careful explorations of the site would be a considerable advantage to them in bidding for the privilege in question. The interests of the project might be jeopardized if the lower part of the reservoir were to be occupied for more than six years, unless at that time some storage would be available. It is therefore essential to provide for the construction of the dam to be completed at least by that date. This office recommends that the situation be inet by the adoption of a plan somewhat as follows: Issue specifications for the construction of the dam at the reservoir site in accordance with the plans found necessary for the needs of the project, the specifications being so drawn as to permit the contractor to utilize the site for a period of six years from a specified date in 1910 in any way that he may see fit, which would not injure it for future use as a reservoir site. That the contractor would be permitted to develop such power from the dam as might be necessary for the purposes of mining and to extract minerals from the gravels in the reservoir site. The contractor should also agree to transfer to the United States any lands which he may own within the limits of the reservoir site or to which he may acquire title. The lands at the upper end of the reservoir might be left open for the use of the contractor for a period greater than six years if satisfactory arrangement be made by the contractor to secure for the use of the project the storage needed, according to certain amounts specified in the contract. The right of the contractor to occupy the reservoir site should cease in any event after a period of eleven years, which is as long a time as appears to be necessary for the purpose. Bids are to be called for upon these specifications, the best terms offered to be accepted as a basis of contract for the construction. If such a plan meets the approval of the department, instructions can be given for preparing the necessary specifications in the field so that bids may be advertised for during the present summer and afford intending bidders an opportunity to inspect the lands before the winter season closes in. It would then be practicable for the bids to be opened and the contract awarded in time for work to begin as soon as the season opens in 1910. In the opinion of this office, the plan proposed will provide for the utilization of these lands for mineral purposes without in any way interfering with the interests of the project and at the same time secure for the project some reasonable return for the privileges which the contractor will obtain. In the opinion of this office, the granting of permission without competition and without compensation would not be just to the project nor to other persons who might desire to utilize these lands for mining purposes. Very respectfully, P. S.-Mr. Baker's letter is herewith inclosed. F. H. NEWELL, Director. 4699 Mr. GEORGE I. BAKER, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, 4725 Cedar Avenue, Philadelphia, Pa. SIR: I am in receipt of your communication of June 16, and accompanying papers, requesting that you be given permission to conduct mining operations upon certain lands in Taylor Park, Gunnison County, Colo., heretofore withdrawn for reservoir purposes under the reclamation act of June 17, 1902. After considering the matter I am forced to the conclusion that the Secretary of the Interior has no authority to grant the permission requested. While these lands have been withdrawn from disposal, yet this department did not, by such withdrawal, acquire any right or power to dispose of the mineral deposits therein. However desirable it may be to exploit the mineral resources of these tracts, this department has no power to dispose of such minerals except under specific authority from Congress. Very respectfully, R. A. BALLINGER, Secretary. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, The DIRECTOR OF THE RECLAMATION SERVICE. SIR: In your communication of June 18, reporting on the application of George I. Baker for permission to occupy and pursue placer mining operations upon certain lands within the Taylor Park reservoir site, withdrawn under the first form to be used in connection with the Uncompahgre project, Colorado, you suggest a plan by which this ground may be utilized for mining purposes. This plan, substantially, is that advertisement be made calling for bids to construct a dam at this site, in accordance with plans found necessary for the project, the specification to be so drawn as to permit the contractor to utilize the site for a period of at least six years, and not to exceed eleven years, in any way that he may see fit which would not injure it for future use as a reservoir site. Presumably, such a plan would decrease the cost of the project and at the same time. permit the exploitation of the ground for mineral purposes. However desirable this might be, I am convinced, after careful consideration, that there is no authority for its adoption. The withdrawal of these lands for the specific purpose of constructing irrigation works would not give this department power to dispose of the mineral which may be deposited there. The law specifically provides the manner in which the right to enter upon lands belonging to the United States for the purpose of extracting minerals which may be found there may be acquired, and the Secretary of the Interior has no power to make other provision respecting the matter, or to confer such a privilege upon one individual or association as against the general public. I am not prepared to approve the plan suggested by you and therefore can not grant the authority to proceed in accordance therewith. The papers are returned for the. files of your office. Very respectfully, R. A. BALLINGER, Secretary. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR, The honorable the SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR. SIR: Under date of November 10, 1908, application was made to the Commissionerof the General Land Office by the Cutter Copper Company, of Kansas City, Mo., for permission to mine coal on sec. 20, T. 14 N., R. 3 W., N. M. P. M., New Mexico. This tract being covered by first form withdrawal dated March 26, 1908, under the reclamation act of June 17, 1902, in connection with the Rio Grande project, New Mexico, is not subject to entry under the mining laws of the United States (35 L. D., p. 216). The application was referred to this office for consideration, and since the receipt thereof negotiations have been pending with the applicants looking toward the determination of a satisfactory basis of adjustment. Up to the present time it has been impossible to prepare mutually acceptable conditions for leasing the land at a stipulated rental for a limited term and securing full protection of the interests of the United States in connection with the use of said lands. 4700 It is believed that a form of lease could be agreed upon if such procedure be deemed proper in view of the decision of the department dated May 26, 1909, in the case of the proposed lease of lands in Nebraska under the North Platte project to the Chicago, Burlington and Quincy Railroad Company for taking gravel from a certain tract of land. The decision of the department is requested whether a lease for the purposes of exploring for coal and extracting the same may be made for land withdrawn under first form under the reclamation act. The DIRECTOR OF THE RECLAMATION SERVICE. SIR: I am in receipt of your letter of July 23, 1909, reporting the submission of an application by the Cutter Copper Company for permission to mine coal on section 20, T. 14 N., R. 3 W., New Mexico, which land is included in a first form withdrawal in connection with the Rio Grande project. You ask whether the land may be leased to this company in order that it may explore for and extract coal therefrom. In reply I have to advise you that section 3 of the reclamation act, which authorizes the withdrawal from entry of lands required for irrigation works, directs that thereafterany of the lands not needed be restored to the public domain. The primary purpose of the withdrawal-construction of reclamation works-does not contemplate any use thereof which will depreciate the value of the land, and if the land should be leased for the extraction of coal and thereafter be found to be not needed for construction, they would necessarily be restored to the public domain in a different condition from that when withdrawn, i. e., depleted or partly depleted of the mineral deposits. Further, the only method of disposing of the minerals in the public domain is that contained in sections 2318 to 2352, Revised Statutes, and minerals are expressly reserved from other forms of disposition. I have, therefore, to advise you that there is no authority for leasing the coal deposits within the tract in question. FRANK PIERCE, Acting Secretary. Very respectfully, MEMORANDUM. July 6, 1905, contract was entered into with J. G. White & Co. for constructing and completing the Laguna dam and sluiceways, Yuma project, Arizona. Bond in the sum of $160,000 was also furnished, with the American Surety Company, of New York, as surety for the faithful performance of the work. April 11, 1906, contract was entered into with White & Co. for constructing and completing the sluicegates and regulator gates for the Arizona side of Laguna dam, Yuma project, Arizona. July 6 and 7, 1906, the company addressed letters to the Secretary of the Interior transmitting copies of correspondence between the superintendent for the construction company and the Reclamation Service engineer, indicating that a difference of opinion existed in regard to the interpretation of the specifications relative to the rock to go into the dam, and on July 13, 1906, report was made that a board of engineers would be convened to consider the matter. August 7, 1906, J. G. White & Co. submitted claims for reimbursement for extraordinary expenses incident to the work of constructing the Laguna dam. A board of service engineers was appointed, consisting of Messrs. Grunsky, Davis, Sanders, Hill, Bien, Hamlin, and Vincent, to consider the claims of the contractors. This board held meetings at the Laguna dam August 2, 3, 7, and 13, and on the latter date reported that the character of the material available for construction was such that it was necessary to make substantial modifications in the specifications. Accordingly, a board consisting of the above-named engineers held meetings at the Laguna dam on August 2 and 3 and then adjourned to August 7 in order that its mem bers might investigate the conditions on the Lower Colorado River at the point 4701 where the river had left its proper channel and to examine the new water course in the southern end of the Salton Basin where flood waters had done much channel cutting and which, in case of failure to restore the river to its proper channel, might materially affect the conditions under which the dam was to be completed. The board reassembled at Los Angeles August 7, 1906, and held daily sessions, being in frequent conference with representatives of J. G. White & Co., and reported to the chief engineer on August 13 in detail in regard to the claims of the company, which were as follows, namely: 1. Claim No. 1 for increased cost for sorting rock, due to deviations from the specifications. 2. For deviations from the specifications in the placing of material in the dam. 3. Unfavorable character of material available for paving. 4. For delays based on claims 1 and 2 and delays due to character of material. 5. Based on the assumption that work was to be stopped. After consideration of the evidence presented and after examination of the site of the work, the board, on August 10, concluded that a basis existed for claims 1 and 2 and for such part of claim 4 as belongs logically under them, but that no basis existed for claim No. 3, nor for so much of claim No. 4 as was based on protraction of the work due to unfavorable character of material. The board refused to consider any proposition involving the closing down of the work, and therefore gave no consideration to claim No. 5. The board found that the character of the material available for construction was such as to necessitate material changes in the specifications, as authorized by paragraph 24 of the contract, namely, "should any change be made in a particular piece of work so that the contractor is put to any extra expense, the engineer shall make reasonable allowance therefor, which action shall be binding upon both parties." The changes found necessary consisted principally in the substitution of a layer of concrete instead of rock pavement and the omission of the requirement that in the |