to his heirs, if he died before having made a selection of land for an allotment, but that rights vested upon the selection of an allotment by his heirs; that the rights of the Indians could be taken away by Congress before such selection, but not after their rights had vested under a selection.

This is the last decision of the Supreme Court on this point, and is in line with all others.

Thus it appears that, if the resolution in question should be passed by Congress, the rights of the five citizens affected thereby can not be destroyed, but the only effect of the legislation would be to put them to the labor and expense of testing their rights in the courts.

It is submitted that no such burden should be placed upon these unfortunate wards of the Government by act of Congress. Such legislation is in direct violation of the decisions of the highest courts of the land, and is in contravention of the agreement between the United States and the Creek Nation under which they have lived for 16 years and under which allotments have been made to every Creek citizen except these five.

The question of valuation, be it said to the credit of the courts, has never influenced them in their decisions.

The majority of the committee in reporting the resolution recommend the following amendment, to be added at the end thereof:

Provided, That the Secretary of the Interior be, and is hereby, authorized and directed to pay any citizen of the Creek Nation of Indians of Oklahoma who was duly and legally enrolled on the final citizenship rolls of said nation on or prior to March fourth, nineteen hundred and seven, who has not received an allotment of land or who may have been allotted and deprived of the land by reason of contest or otherwise, the sum of $800 as compensation for and in lieu of an allotment of land out of any moneys in the Treasury of the United States to the credit of said Creek Nation.

The amendment suggested is an attempt by legislation to take away from these citizens a right which has attached under existing law and remand them to one less valuable and one not of their own choice. Respectfully submitted.

O

P. P. CAMPBELL.
J. D. POST.

CHANGING NAME OF STEAMER "GENERAL GARRETSON" TO "S. H. ROBBINS."

JANUARY 28, 1915.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House and ordered to be printed.

Mr. ALEXANDER, from the Committee on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries, submitted the following

REPORT.

[To accompany H. R. 21126.]

The Committee on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 21126) to authorize the change of name of the steamer General Garretson to S. H. Robbins, having considered the same, report it to the House with the recommendation that it do pass.

Under the act of March 2, 1881, a special act of Congress is required for the change of name of a vessel not free from mortgage. The steamship General Garretson is encumbered, and for that reason application is made to Congress for authority to change the name.

O

}

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. No. 1331.

REPORT

63D CONGRESS, 3d Session.

DELIVERY OF CONDEMNED CANNON, ETC.

JANUARY 28, 1915.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union and ordered to be printed.

Mr. FIELDS, from the Committee on Military Affairs, submitted the following

REPORT.

[To accompany S. 5495.]

The Committee on Military Affairs having had under consideration Senate bill No. 5495, Sixty-third Congress, second session, favorably report same with amendment by including therein certain items contained in sundry House bills, the character and purpose of which are the same as the items contained in the bill under consideration.

CONGRESS, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. {

FUR-BEARING ANIMALS IN ALASKA.

JANUARY 28, 1915.-Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed.

Mr. PALMER, from the Committee on Ways and Means, submitted the

following

REPORT.

[To accompany H. R. 21159.]

The Committee on Ways and Means, to whom was referred House bill (H. R. 21159) to amend section 4 of the act of April 21, 1910, entitled "An act to protect the seal fisheries of Alaska, and for other purposes," having had the same under consideration, report it back to the House with an amendment as follows:

On page 2, line 10, after the word "force," insert the words "with reference to the fur-bearing animals in Alaska.”

And as so amended the committee recommend that the bill do pass. The purpose of this bill is to enable the Department of Commerce to perform the duties which Congress has intrusted to it and thereby prevent the unlawful exploitation of the fur-bearing animals of Alaska.

THE PRESENT LAW.

Section 4 of the act of April 21, 1910, provides that

No person shall kill any otter, mink, marten, sable, or fur seal, or other fur-bearing animal, within the limits of Alaska Territory, or in the waters thereof; and every person guilty thereof shall, for each offense, be fined not less than two hundred nor more than one thousand dollars, or imprisoned not more than six months, or both; and all vessels, their tackle, apparel, furniture, and cargo found engaged in violation of this section shall be forfeited; but the Secretary of Commerce and Labor shali have power to authorize the killing of any such mink, marten, sable, fur seal, or other fur-bearing animal under such regulations as he may prescribe; and it shall be the duty of the Secretary of Commerce and Labor to prevent the killing of any fur seal except as authorized by law and to provide for the execution of the provisions of this section until it is otherwise provided by law.

The present law only prohibits the killing of the fur-bearing animals. It does not prohibit the taking, pursuing, the capture, or the destruction of them by removing them from Alaska, or in any way except by killing.

Under the present law the Secretary of Commerce has issued certain rules and regulations, but the department has been absolutely

H R-63-3-vol 1-30

powerless to enforce them, because in order to prosecute under the act a person must be actually caught in the act of killing a fur-bearing animal.

THE PROPOSED BILL.

The present law only prohibits the killing of fur-bearing animals in Alaska. The bill proposed provides that

No person shall kill or capture, or attenpt to kill or capture, any otter, sea otter, fox, beaver, bear, mink, marten (American sable), ermine (weasel), or other fur-bearing animal, or any hair seal, harbor seal, sea lion, or walrus, within the limits of Alaska Territory or in the waters thereof, or have in his possession or ship out of Alaska, either dead or alive, any of such animals, or any part thereof, except under such rules and regulations as the Secretary of Commerce may from time to time prescribe.

REASONS WHY THE PRESENT LAW SHOULD BE AMENDED.

. Dr. E. Lester Jones, Deputy Commissioner of Fisheries of the Department of Commerce, has submitted certain reasons why the present law should be amended, which are here to attached and made a part of this report.

REASONS WHY THERE SHOULD BE AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 4 OF THE ACT OF APRIL 24, 1910, ENTITLED "AN ACT TO PROTECT THE SEAL FISHERIES OF ALASKA, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.'

1. That under the present law the Secretary of Commerce has only the right to prescribe restrictions and regulations governing the actual killing of fur-bearing animals.

2. That the weaknesses of such an ineffective law can be summarized as follows: (a) That a person to be prosecuted must be actually caught in the act of killing a fur-bearing animal, as possession is not prima facie evidence that the animal was killed illegally.

(b) That the possession of unprime skins is not punishable under the present law. (c) That there is nothing in the present law to prevent anyone shipping out of Alaska every fox, mink, marten, land otter, or ermine, dead or alive.

(d) That the present law forbidding the shipment of great brown or Kadiak bear skins makes complications and confusions, as it is interpreted to apply to any shade of brown skins, be they from a black, brown, cinnamon, grizzly, or great brown or Kadiak bear.

(e) That under the present law unscrupulous and well-organized manipulators are taking advantage of its inadequacies by killing fur-bearing animals at random, trapping at all seasons, the parent animals are caught when their young are helpless, ultimately resulting in their death, while the captured live foxes are exported under false affidavits or smuggled outside of the Territory, principally into Canada.

3. Therefore the advantages of the proposed amendment to the present law can be summarized thus:

(a) That all the fur-bearing animals, including the great brown or Kodiak bear, sea lions, and walrus will be under one department. (b) That under the new act anyone attempting to trap, injure, disturb, ship, or kill a fur-bearing animal can be prosecuted.

(c) That the residents of Alaska can ship their bearskins, thereby correcting a great hardship and injustice, which has caused loss of money to the people of the Territory.

(d) That the suggested broadening of the law will prove a great boom to those in the Territory who are honestly endeavoring to domesticate certain fur-bearing animals, principally foxes, and conducting fur farms or ranches, as the new restrictions will drive out and discourage men who have no interest in the future welfare of this valuable resource of Alaska, except to get all they can in anyway they can and get out of the Territory.

O