« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »
required for the proper continuation of the work of the commission during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1922, is $50,000, together with the unexpended balance from previous appropriations.
My reason for this is that when the estimates were transmitted to the Secretary of State on September 17 last, there was an outstanding bill due the Canadian section for the printing and binding of the report of the survey and reestablishment of the international boundary from the Arctic Ocean to Mount St. Elias, the amount of this bill being $5,718.24:
As an estimate was secured from the Government Printing Office for the reproduction of this book which indicated that the sum charged by the Canadian section was apparently excessive, a reconsideration of the bill was asked for. This resulted in a new bill being submitted by the Canadian section, in the sum of $2,972.39, and this bill has been paid, which results in a net gain to the appropriation of $2,745.85.
So I saved $2,745.85 in asking a reconsideration, because I thought the bill was excessive.
Also, at the time the estimates were submitted on September 17, two parties were still in Alaska and it was then believed that the total sum allotted for the expenses of these parties would be required to complete the work and return the parties to Washington. After the return of the parties to Washington it was found that there was a balance of $2,186.17 in the allotment, which was returned to the appropriation. In other miscellaneous items that have been settled up to date, there has been a reduction over the estimated expenditure of $67.98.
Therefore, the estimated unexpended balance on June 30, 1921, will be $5,000 larger than was originally estimated, that is, instead of $13,013 there will be $18,013. As the estimated total expenditure for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1920, is $68,013, the total to be appropriated for the fiscal year 1922 should be $50,000.
Gentlemen, there has been a good deal of money expended by this commission since it originally began work in 1903. I can give you the amount, if you want it. It is a large sum. We have been at work—this would be the 18th year, I think, and if you care to go into the sum which has been expended, I have the figures here by years, but it appeared to me that it was only proper that the committee should know what the Government is going to receive for this apparently large expenditure of money and therefore I have brought sample maps with me and the report, which is already published, in order that I might give you an idea of just what the result of the expenditure would be and its uses to the governmental bureaus and to the public.
As I stated before, this commission is charged under the treaties of 1903, 1906, 1908, and 1910 with the establishment or reestablishment of the boundary line between the United States and Canada from the Arctic Ocean to Cape Muson and from the Pacific Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean, except through the portion through the St. Lawrence River, Great Lakes, and connecting waters.
The treaties require that signed reports describing the work done and signed joint maps on which the boundary line has been drawn by the commissioners shall be filed with each Government in duplicate; therefore it will be necessary for the commissioners to prepare and transmit to their respective Governments in duplicate seven reports accompanied by atlases, as follows:
1. Report upon the establishment of the boundary between the United States and Canada along the one hundred and forty-first meridian from the Arctic Ocean to Mount St. Elias, accompanied by atlas of 38 signed joint maps, which has been completed and distributed.
2. Report upon the survey and establishment of the boundary line from Cape Muson to Mount St. Elias, accompanied by an atlas of 13 signed joint maps. 4 maps engraved; none printed.
3. Report upon the survey and reestablishment of the boundary line between the United States and Canada from the forty-ninth parallel to the Pacific Ocean, accompanied by a chart (now in press). 1 chart printed.
4. Report upon the survey and reestablishment of the boundary line along the forty-ninth parallel from Point Roberts to the northwesternmost point of the Lake of the Woods, accompanied by an atlas of 59 maps. 58 maps engraved, 50 printed. Report 50 per cent completed.
5. Report upon the survey and establishment of the boundary line between the United States and Canada from the northwesternmost point of the Lake of the Woods to the mouth of Pigeon River, Lake Superior, accompanied by an atlas of approximately 85 maps. Report 25 per cent completed. None engraved or printed.
6. Report upon the survey and reestablishment of the boundary line from the St. Lawrence River to the source of the St. Croix River, accompanied by an atlas of 55 maps. 21 maps engraved, none printed.
7. Report upon the survey and establishment of the boundary line through the St. Croix River and Passamaquoddy Bay, accompanied by an atlas of 25 maps. None engraved or printed.
Total 275 maps, of which 89 have been engraved and printed and 33 others have been engraved and are ready for printing.
This is the report [exhibiting], gentlemen. That report contains a description of the work executed by the commission in detail with a description of the boundary line, giving the description of every monument. I might say that this boundary line is marked on the ground by aluminum-bronze posts set in concrete foundations, the smaller ones 3 feet high and the large ones, placed at the important streams and trail crossings, 5 feet high. These posts are, as far as possible, intervisible, and the boundary line is a straight line adjoining these posts [indicating].
Mr. Rogers. They are not a very large distance apart, then?
Mr. BARNARD. No. In addition to that there has been a scheme of triangulation extended the full length from the Arctic Ocean to Mount St. Elias, 625 miles, and these triangulation stations are all marked, and the geographic position of each of the monuments as well as the elevation above mean sea level has been determined and recorded.
The boundary line is shown on 38 maps on the scale of 1: 62,500, or about 1 mile to the inch. On these maps the physical featuresthat is, the configuration of the country—is shown by 100-foot contours in brown, the streams and lakes in blue, the monuments and their proper location in black, and the timber in green. This will give you an idea of the monuments that have been erected. This (indicating] is the scheme with 38 maps, beginning at the Arctic Ocean. That [indicating] is the small monument that is placed in the more accessible parts, and this [indicating] is the large monument which is placed at streams and trail crossings.
Mr. Rogers. You said in a previous hearing that the maximum distance between the monuments, except in certain mountainous parts of Alaska, was 4 miles?
Mr. BARNARD. Absolutely. There is no place on the boundary line anywhere in the United States, except on the St. Lawrence River and the Great Lakes, where the monuments are in excess of 4 miles apart, except that portion of the boundary line south of the White River and Mount St. Elias and some inaccessible places on Alaskan coast boundary. You can well see the reason—from here [indicating] it is some 40 miles to the nearest monument [indicating], because this sindicating] is a glacier with snow on it.
Mr. Rogers. Any monument put up would be swept away with the glacier!
Mr. BARNARD. Yes, sir. You could not put it on the snow. Of course, if gold were discovered in there' Tindicating] then some additional work would have to be done to define just where this boundary line was here [indicating].
I might say in that connection that four men who were engaged in the line of duty locating points on the boundary line were prevented from reaching the summit of Mount St. Elias which they intended to occupy as a triangulation station by a few hours as a violent snowstorm which prevailed for several days prevented them ascending the last 2,000 feet, which was good going. As this storm lasted for several days and the supplies became exhausted, it was necessary for the party to retreat.
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Barnard, you spoke a moment ago of the desirability which, of course, is obvious, of having these monuments inter visible?
Mr. BARNARD. Yes, sir.
Mr. ROGERS. To what extent, speaking of the whole boundary line as a unit, has it been possible to accomplish that intervisibility?
Mr. BARNARD. I should say that about 80 per cent of the monuments were intervisible.
Mr. Rogers. Eighty per cent?
Mr. BARNARD. Yes, sir. Of course, that is sometimes impracticable without putting in a great number of monuments. You have to come down into a valley and you have a monument on the summit and if you put it on the summit, where it belongs, you can not see over this bump in the hill, but along this boundary line of the one hundred and forty-first meridian, which is the meridian line, any two monuments that are intervisible show the line, because they are all on this straight line. Along the forty-ninth parallel, which is naturally a curved line, there it is essential that so far as practicable the monuments shall be intervisible.
Mr. ROGERS. Suppose you are running your line through a deep forest, is it the policy to cut out an avenue of trees so as to achieve intervisibility?
Mr. BARNARD. Through a forest we first run a random line to determine where the true line should be, and then a vista is cut along through the trees with a sky line of 20 feet; that is, 10 feet on either side of the line. That is one of the very large expenditures on this work.
Mr. ROGERS. And one of the most essential!
Mr. BARNARD. Yes; that vista will remain for years and years. In fact, I think it would be good business, a good investment on the part of both Governments to keep that vista open, because there is a definite boundary line through the woods, better marked than it would be on the open prairie.
Mr. ELSTON. Is that true away up on the northern reaches where there are no inhabitants and no travel, where even the physical line is practically a visible line? It would not be of any use, and I do not see why you should go to any expense in opening up that avenue?
Mr. BARNARD. The expense of cutting a vista in Alaska has not been anything like as great, because there is not so much timber as there is along the forty-ninth parallel through the Cascades, where we frequently had to cut trees 8 to 10 feet in diameter. I think it was a good policy. Gentlemen, we do not know but that to-morrow morning on that particular point of the one hundred and forty-first meridian there will be a gold stampede, and there would be great difficulty if they do not know where the boundary line is. It will be recognized for a great many years to come, and it is something very essential in order to get the direction from one point to another.
STATUS OF SERVICE.
Mr. Elston. I am not so well acquainted with the details of this matter as the chairman is, and I do not want to ask any questions which will be merely in the way of repetition.
Is this service a continuing service, and may it be regarded as a perpetual service, or is it drawing to a close ?
Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Barnard testified before the Committee on Foreign Affairs in January of this year that the field work was practically completed then and that it would be entirely completed during the coming summer, and that the work after that would be office work and would consist of putting down upon paper and in permanent form the results of the field investigations and surveys; that the office work would probably consume from five to six years from that time, and that thereafter the commission would go out of existence, although there would always be a certain amount of work requisite in keeping alive the actual boundary as the monuments became out of repair or as the tree vistas became closed.
Mr. BARNARD. That is it exactly. For instance, so far as the work of the commission is concerned under the treaty of 1906, which provided for the establishment of the boundary line from the Arctic Ocean to Mount St. Elias, its duties are completed.
Mr. Elston. Will this appropriation be a diminishing appropriation?
Mr. BARNARD. It will be a pretty permanent appropriation, and probably diminishing, for the office work; that is, the computations of the triangulations and the preparation and engraving and printing of maps and the preparation of reports
Mr. ROGERS (interposing). Your final report you estimate will take about five years?
Mr. BARNARD. About five years. So, gentlemen, I consider the expense as to the one hundred and forty-first meridian as a closed book. The report has been completed and copies have been filed with the different departments, and it has been distributed to several hundred depository libraries of the United States. It seemed to me that that was the best way of having this report preserved.
WORK OF PREVIOUS BOUNDARY COMMISSIONS.
Gentlemen, I do not know whether you know, but there is very little known as to what was done by previous boundary commissions, although they expended $1,200,000. The report of the commission that located the boundary line from the Straits of Georgia to the summit of the Rocky Mountains, from 1859 to 1863, the maps are available, but the report has disappeared. It disappeared off the face of the earth, and no one knows where it is.
The report and maps of the commission that agreed upon the boundary line from Lake of Woods to Lake Superior during the year 1842, Ashburton and Webster. Porter and Barclay had maps made in 1823–1825, but they did not thoroughly agree on the boundary line; but Ashburton and Webster drew the line. We had to secure copies of those maps from Great Britain. In 1842-1846 the * boundary line from the St. Lawrence to the source of the St. Croix River was located. The report of the work done covers 10 pages; 100 maps were burned before transmittal and there was not a single one in this country, and we had to get copies from Great Britain. I think it is a good expense, perfectly justifiable, to print a number of copies of this report and have it distributed in such a way that it will not likely be destroyed.
PREPARATION OF MAPS.
Mr. Elston. Are these maps prepared separately by the two Governments so that it involves a duplication of expense ?
Mr. BARNARD. Everything is joint. So far as I know, this is the only case of a joint report which is absolutely identical with the report transmitted to the British Government, and the maps are absolutely identical in every way.
Mr. Elston. Are they printed in the same establishment ?
Mr. BARNARD. Some of them are printed here and some in Ottawa, and we divide the expense up to the point of printing, and then each party pays for the number of copies he wants.
Mr. ROGERS. In the field work for years the two Governments have had their parties working as unit parties?
Mr. BARNARD. Unit parties. It was much more economical to let each Government do a section of the work and then have a joint examination than to run joint parties, except from Arctic Ocean to Mount St. Elias.
Mr. ROGERS. Have you the actual expenditures for the last two fiscal years?
Mr. BARNARD. Yes. In 1920 there was $85,000 actually expended.
Mr. Rogers. Please excuse me if I do the testifying, but I have found a table.
In 1919 there was $60,000 spent; in 1918, $84,000; in 1917, $104,000; and in 1916, $96,000; those being actual expenditures in each case.
For the ensuing fiscal year you estimate a balance of $13,000 ?