the coast of the State of Texas. The individuals who have accepted such grants from the State of Texas acted upon the good faith and believe that the State had title to such lands and further that the Government of the United States would not violate a solemn agreement by which it has been bound for almost a century, and would not attempt to infringe or encroach upon the rights of a sovereign State. As a matter of fact, these individuals have, in many instances, actually taken possession of said lands included within their leases and have expended great sums of money in prospecting for and in producing oil and gas from said lands. The royalties received by the State have, by operation of law as above stated, been paid to the State of Texas for and on behalf of the permanent free-school fund. The actual operations under all such leases have, of course, been with the permission of the Federal Government, but such permission has been acquired in each instance only by reason of the commerce clause of the Constitution and not in recognition of any title or color of title to such lands in the Government of the United States. The lands along the coast of Texas, the title to which is sought to be claimed by the United States, involve millions of acres and contain proven oil reserves of the estimated value of $100,000,000, of which the permanent school fund of the State of Texas will be the greatest beneficiary. If Senate Joint Resolution No. 24 should become effective, even though it would be necessary for the Attorney General of the United States to assert, maintain, and establish title and possession of the United States to the submerged lands in question, and all petroleum deposits underlying the same, it would seriously cloud and slander the title of all States involved, as well as the titles of those individuals who have expended great sums of money in developing the same. The public-school fund of the State of Texas would be seriously crippled, and the State of Texas would be compelled to defend endless and expensive litigation in order to prevent any encroachment upon its rights as a sovereign State of this great Nation. I respectfully submit that the committees of the Congress now considering Senate Joint Resolution No. 24 should take positive action to see that the same does not become a law. Respectfully submitted. BASCOM GILES, Commissioner of General Land Office of the State of Texas. Mr. WALTER. Do you wish to make an oral statement? Mr. GILES. Yes, sir. It will be only a few minutes, and will not take long. Mr. CHAIRMAN. I also have a copy of a map along the Texas coast that shows the number of square miles claimed by Texas, both as a Republic and as a State, and I would like to offer this plat. That is not an original, and I would be glad to send an original if the committee would prefer, but I do have this one on hand, and if any members of the committee would like to see it, I would be glad to hand it to them. Mr. WALTER. If you will leave it here, we will have it filed with the committee. I do not think that it could be printed. Mr. TOLAN. Right there, could I interrupt you to ask you, Does that map show the operations of oil wells in submerged lands? Mr. GILES. No; this only shows the area claimed by Texas, which is 1011⁄2 miles into the Gulf, or 3 marine leagues. Mr. GIBBS. Into the Gulf? Mr. GILES. Yes, sir. Mr. GIBBS. And how long? Mr. GILES. Along the entire coast, from the mouth of the Sabine River, from the center of the mouth of the Sabine River to the center of the mouth of the Rio Grande; those are our southern and eastern boundaries. Mr. TOLAN. There is oil dredging there in the submerged land? Mr. GILES. Oh, yes; submerged land, into th Now, of course, the bri I am not going to take have been gone into, and and answer any question mary, I am going to say tha that each State, each of the to its land both surface and subsequent States joining the We also feel that the Unit that right, and further that Te of the resolutions of the Congre adoption of that resolution by the was annexed to the Union. covered in that brief. e at the insisted rest of the teachers of Tens fachers and as of the bis Thank y MHAC Yaw I ask how long they have been deriving blinds of the Gulf of Mex Now, Texas, of course, won its then became a separate nation, and out in this brief, and those boundar which is 1011⁄2 miles from the mouth parallel to the coast 1011⁄2 miles into opposite the mouth of the Rio Grande. the rest of the boundaries of the State gress for the Republic of Texas. As Senator Connally told you this mo Texas attempted to get into the Unio refused to receive Texas for the simple re lands were not worth our debts, so we the our lands, and come into the Union and n is the State would keep title to them. So then Congress in 1845 did receive us specific understanding, and then in 1846 the concurred in that; the Republic of Texas 1 ownership of those lands, and was in the pre individuals, as well as corporations, and to development of that State. We took our lands and in order to relieve was incurred by the war in winning our free proceeded to dispose of those lands in such a inure to the benefit of our State, and we have approximately 100 years. Of course, the title passes from the Governo trary to many of the States of the Union, and of those records, and prepare the patent and sig Governor, and that is the way we convey title i been doing so for 100 years, since 1836. Of course, there are a number of Spanish title granted by Spain that we recognize there now, a course are just as good as the ones patented by the Ser first drilled! im to sex that the f The first time that was Shut, tunes for the l Id here last your and ang Now then, in later years the State appropriate part of its domain for educational purposes, after of the legislature, and it was written into the Cons and our State set aside public domain for the educa solution pertains primarily to the submerged lands along it, by inference, and from its practical operation, should et the rights of every State of the Union lying adjacent ted States. O'Connor, which is also before this committee, embodies ms as S. J. Res. 208, by Senator Nye, which was heard February 23, 24, and 25, 1938, which resolution reads ishment of title of the United States to certain subbetroleum deposits. Mr. ToLAN. I think that Mr. Start of Tha reserves in the United States are constantly de s now owned by the United States are in serious rom various causes; and deposits underlie various submerged lands along and below low-water mark and within a distance below said low-water mark; and lands below said low-water mark and within such e coast of the United States are asserted to be es; and e heretofore entered, or in the immediate future n such submerged lands and remove the petrome, without the consent or permission of the rable damage and injury of the United States; the part of the United States is necessary to or the future use of the United States; Now, use of Representatives of the United States That the Attorney General of the United ed and directed, by and through speedy and aintain, and establish the title and possesnerged lands aforesaid, and all petroleum ause and effectuate by proper proceedings ons now or hereafter trespassing upon or ed lands or removing the petroleum dend permission of the United States, and by the said Attorney General instituted, ng of petroleum products by others than d lands as aforesaid; and be it further eral be, and he is hereby authorized to of the United States, and to incur such STATEMENT OF GB. WILCOX, TIE HOTE Mr. WILCOX. Mr. Chairman, I am &.&W, Mr. WALTER. Do you think that apples to d Mr. WILCOX. Both of them, because the inte therewith as he may deem properly e directions and purposes of this joint ily interested only in the latter resother of these resolutions would cloud dollars worth of submerged oil land, propriated for the use and benefit of of Texas. We maintain that all mmon in preserving their rights and us coasts. hich we consider fundamental, that esolutions, are in fact the property act of Congress is needed to enable as provided in these resolutions. t the property of the United States nd in that event, certainly there ich would cloud the title to these e or ownership in said lands that is recently passed a resolution ns asserting title or ownership in s, and further asserting that the Sources thereof, is vested in the Said resolution is as follows: Mr. GILES. Oh, yes; we have a well out as far as 4,000 feet into the submerged land, into the Gulf. Now, of course, the brief is a matter of law, and not being a lawyer, I am not going to take your time because so many of those points have been gone into, and there will be attorneys who will follow me and answer any question with regard to that. However, in a summary, I am going to say that this brief sets out the fact that we think that each State, each of the Original Thirteen States, did have title to its land both surface and submerged, and we further feel that all subsequent States joining the Union have that same right. We also feel that the United States Government does not have that right, and further that Texas has an additional right by reason of the resolutions of the Congress of the Republic of Texas, and the adoption of that resolution by the United States Congress when Texas was annexed to the Union. Those are the four principal things covered in that brief. Now, Texas, of course, won its independence from Mexico, and then became a separate nation, and established its boundaries as set out in this brief, and those boundaries are as outlined on this map, which is 102 miles from the mouth of the Sabine River, and a line parallel to the coast 1011⁄2 miles into the Gulf to a point 1011⁄2 miles opposite the mouth of the Rio Grande. Those boundaries, as well as the rest of the boundaries of the State, were established in the Congress for the Republic of Texas. As Senator Connally told you this morning, that a few years later Texas attempted to get into the Union by treaty, and Congress refused to receive Texas for the simple reason that they said that our lands were not worth our debts, so we then said that we would keep our lands, and come into the Union and not sacrifice our lands, that is the State would keep title to them. So then Congress in 1845 did receive us into the Union with that specific understanding, and then in 1846 the legislature by resolution concurred in that; the Republic of Texas had previously exercised ownership of those lands, and was in the process of selling them to individuals, as well as corporations, and to the railroads, for the development of that State. We took our lands and in order to relieve the State of debt that was incurred by the war in winning our freedom from Mexico, we proceeded to dispose of those lands in such a way that they would inure to the benefit of our State, and we have done that now for approximately 100 years. Of course, the title passes from the Governor of the State, contrary to many of the States of the Union, and I am the custodian of those records, and prepare the patent and sign jointly with the Governor, and that is the way we convey title in Texas, and have been doing so for 100 years, since 1836. Of course, there are a number of Spanish title grants that were granted by Spain that we recognize there now, and those titles of course are just as good as the ones patented by the State. Now then, in later years the State appropriated the remaining part of its domain for educational purposes, after 1873, by an act of the legislature, and it was written into the Constitution in 1876, and our State set aside public domain for the education of the chil dren through the public-school system, the principal of which they cannot spend, but only use what we call the available school funds, or the money received from that. We also at that same time set aside a certain amount of money for the creation and operation of a University of Texas, and incidentally I do not mind telling you that we are pretty proud of that. We have a great university, it has many oil wells, and it is very wealthy, and personally we do not see any reason in Texas why you do not have the same right to take our university and our private land as you do our coast, because we asserted our right and have exercised that right for some hundred years. The boundary of the Republic of Texas was recognized by the Family of Nations and particularly by the countries of France, Holland, and Great Britain. That is set out, however, in my brief, and I hope you will pardon me for referring back to that. We want the Navy to have the things that it needs, and we must have a good Navy, but we do not feel in Texas that we should pay for all of the oil to operate the Navy on, any more than you should conscript our other resources along the coast any more than those up in the State. There is not a bit more reason to that. I am here to file my protest against the passage of this resolution, and there are a number of other speakers to follow and I do not want to take your time, and I appreciate this opportunity to appear before you. Mr. TOLAN. I think that Mr. Stuart of Texas is next. Mr. STUART. Mr. Wilcox will appear first, the president of the Texas State Teachers would like to make a statement. Mr. WALTER. Did you not make a statement last year? Mr. STUART. Yes; but Mr. Wilcox would like to make a statement first and then I will supplement my statement of last year if I might. STATEMENT OF G. B. WILCOX, THE PRESIDENT OF THE STATE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION OF TEXAS Mr. WILCOX. Mr. Chairman, I am G. B. Wilcox, the president of the State Teachers Association of Texas, and I am here as their representative, of the some 48,000 teachers of that State, and one million and a half children of that State, because we fear the passage of this particular enactment will jeopardize some of the rights and interests of the school fund of Texas. Mr. WALTER. Do you think that applies to either of the resolutions, or just one? Mr. WILCOX. Both of them, because the income, as pointed out by Senator Connally and the speaker preceding me, in large measure, the school fund has always come from lands, the oil lands, and which, of course, involve leases and royalties. Within the past 5 years something like 8 or 10 million dollars has accrued to that permanent school fund mentioned by Mr. Giles, the income of which supports and operates the schools each year in Texas. We feel that the passage of this bill might be an entering wedge that eventually it would operate to jeopardize the income for the operation and payment of the cost of the public schools of Texas. Consequently, I am 141082-39-ser. 2 |