About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

A79192 1 (1897-04-23)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadacj0001 and id is 1 raw text is: 530 DECISIONS OF THE COMPTROLLER. CONSENT OF STATE TO USE OF LAND. 531 I am therefore without authority to answer your question. I may add, however, that the question seems to be fully cov- ered by my decision of February 15, 1897 (3 Comp. Dec., 353). Respectfully, yours, R. B. BOWLER, Mr. GEORGE W. EvANs, Comptroller. Disbursing Clerk, Department of the Interior. ERECTION OF BUILDINGS ON LAND BEFORE THE CONSENT OF THE LEGISLATURE TO THE PUR- CHASE IS GIVEN. Section 355 of the Revised Statutes prohibits the expenditure of public money upon land purchased for fortification purposes, or for the erec- tion of a public building of any kind, until the consent of the legis- lature of the State to the purchase is obtained, although the use of public funds in payment of the purchase money of such land before such consent is given may not be prohibited by the statute. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF COMPTROLLER OF THE TREASURY, April 23, 1897. SIR: I am in receipt by your reference of a letter of the .10th instant from the Chief of Engineers, U. S. A., calling atten- tion. to the appropriation in the fortifications appropriation act of March 3, 1897 (29 Stat., 642): Sea walls and embankments: * * * For construction of a riprap wall for protection of the eastern beach of United States lands at Sandy Hook, New Jersey, seventy-five thon- sand dollars. The Chief of Engineers states that the land to be protected consists of a strip connecting Sandy Hook with the mainland, 2,200 feet long, and extending from the Atlantic Ocean to Shrewsbury River, and was purchased by the United States in July, 1892; that the consent of the legislature of New Jersey, in which State the land is situated, to the purchase has not been given, although such consent was requested by the Sec- retary of War in a letter addressed to the governor of New Jersey on December 15, 1893. The Chief of Engineers further states that owing to the continued widening and deepening of the breach in the isthmus between the river and the ocean, it is of the greatest importance that immediate action be taken to check the devastating work of the sea and to repair the damage already done, and that the funds appropriated are barely sufficient for the purpose, and further delays will render additional appropriations necessary. In view of these facts, he asks whether this appropriation may be now used, notwithstanding the provisions of section 355, Revised Statutes. That section provides that- No public money shall be expended upon any site or land purchased by the United States for the purposes of erecting thereon any armory, arsenal, fort, fortification, navy-yard, cus- tonm-house, light-house, or other public building, of any kind whatever, until the written opinion of the Attorney-General shall be had in favor of the validity of the title, nor until the consent of the legislatureof the State in which the land or site may be, to such purchase, has been given. Under that section it has been held that no money can be expended for the purchase of land until the opinion as to the validity of the title has been given (10 Opin. A. G., 353, 354), although it has been held that such purchase can be made, not- withstanding the consent of the legislature thereto has not been given (10 Opin. A. G., 35; 15 id., 212; 4 Lawrence's Comp. Dec., 152). In this latter opinion Comptroller Lawrence considered the question at least doubtful, but concluded that the con- struction placed upon this section by the Attorneys-General .in the opinions above cited should not be changed. The land purchased in 1892 was no doubt purchased without first obtaining the consent of the legislature thereto, because of these opinions. If the matter were an original one, I should have serious doubts as to the legality of this practice, but con- cur in the conclusion reached by Comptroller Lawrence that it is now too late to change the construction heretofore placed upon this statute. All the opinions of the Attorneys-General agree that no money can be expended upon a site thus purchased until the consent of the legislature has been given. The language of section 355, Revised Statutes, in my opinion, clearly indicates that no money shall be expended upon the land, for any pur- poses whatever, until this consent has been given, and not that no public money shall be expended for the purposes of erecting thereon any armory, arsenal, fort, fortification, navy-yard, custom-house, light-house, or other public building, of any kind whatever. These latter words, in my opinion.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most