Evening star., 1946-02-05
Federal Ownership
|0f Coastal Oil Lands
Demanded by Ickes
.y the Associated Press.

BY the Associated Press.
Secretary Of the Interior Ickes to-
lday advocated holding submerged
coastal oil lands as q Federal oil
reserve.
He asked the Senate Judiciary
Committee to reject House -passed
Legislation surrendering to the States
Iany Federal claim to ownership OF
submerged lands within State
boundaries.
The submerged coastal lands are
the greatest potential reserve Of oil
which we have" Mr.. Ickes said In q
statement prepared for the commit
tee. 'It would be far better for the
Nation If the oil were under Federal
rather than State control"
The bill before the committee, he
asserted, is one which gives away to
Ia few States extremely valuable oil
which the United States claims,
which makes 1t impossible to save
this oil as a reserve for the vital
needs Of our national defense, and
which Gusts the Supreme Court OF
the United States Of It's Jurisdiction
to decide an important case pend
ing before it."
Case Pending in High Court.
A Government suit against the
State Of California claiming Fed
eral ownership Of oil-bearing lands
on the coast Of California is pending
before the Supreme Court. Attorney
General Robert w. Kenny OF Cali
fornia asserted in his answer that
the State has owned the lands since
its admission to the Union, IL not
longer.
Supporters of the legislation con-
tend the Supreme Court has ruled
on the question in favor of the
States in at least 50 previous cases
The issue will never be settled final
ly, they assert, unless Congress
passes legislation definitely sur
rendering any Federal claim to
ownership of coastal lands, re-
claimed tidelands and lands be-
meath navigable rivers and lakes.
Representatives Of various port
cities, including New York, Boston
Los Angeles, Miami, Long Beach
and Seattle, are expected to testify
during the hearings. They claim
that title to billions of dollars worth
Of port and harbor facilities /.
clouded by the Governments AS
serted ownership Of coastal sub
merged lands.
MIR. Ickes contended the Supreme
Court should be given a chance te
decide the California suit. The Gov
ernment claims ownership Of SUBJ
merged lands OF the Californis
coast between low-water mark and
the smile limit.
Decision On Coastal Lands Denied
Mr.. Ickes insisted that no Federal
court ever had decided who owns
the submerged coastal lands.
'"The advocates (of the legislation)
have insisted that many decisions
Of the Supreme Court have laid the
question at rest" Secretary Ickes
said. This is simply not the case.
These decisions have dealt with
the lands under inland lakes and
rivers, and with bays and harbors
No one is claiming these lands on
behalf of the United States, and no
one doubts that the courts have
held that they are owned by the
States.
California and the oil companies
insist that these decisions with ref
erence to the lands beneath inland
waters apply to the submerged lands
OF the coast; the Attorney General
says tf4t they do not. This ques-
ton, Is the heart Of the pending Law
suit, and the advocates OF this reso-
luton have not and cannot produce
a single decision by the Supreme
Court which has settled this ques-
tion."