Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

§
Marginalia
Code · STATUTES-AT-LARGE · Vol. 49 STAT. · March 1, 1917 · Public Law 738

Public Law 738. to provide for the control of the floods of the Mississippi River and of the Sacramento River, California, and for other purposes”, approved March 1, 1917, the cost thereof to be paid from appropriations heretofore or hereafter made for examinations, surveys, and contingencies of rivers and harbors

15,927 words·~72 min read·/statutes-at-large/vol-49/public-law-738·

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

(/us/pl/74/737).] *Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of American in Congress assembled*, That the SecretaryAllegheny and Susquehanna Rivers, Pa.Survey of, and tributaries, directed for flood control and water conservation. of War be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to cause to be made a preliminary examination of the tributaries, sources, and headwaters of the Allegheny River in the State of Pennsylvania, where no examination and survey has heretofore been made, including the Clarion River, Redbank Creek, Mahoning Creek, Pine Creek, Kiskiminetas River, Loyalhanna Creek, Conemaugh River, Blacklick Creek, and Stoney Creek; and to cause to be made a similar examination of the tributaries, sources, and headwaters of the Susquehanna River, where no examination or survey has heretofore been made, including Clearfield Creek and Chest Creek ; with a view to the control of their floods and the regulation and conservation of their waters, in accordance with the provisions of section 3 of the ActVol. 39, p. 950; [U.
S. C., p. 1487](/us/usc/p1487). entitled “An Act to provide for the control of the floods of the Mississippi River and of the Sacramento River, California, and for other purposes”, approved March 1, 1917, the cost thereof to be paid from appropriations heretofore or hereafter made for examinations, surveys, and contingencies of rivers and harbors. Approved, June 20, 1936. Authorizing the President of the United States of America to proclaim October 11, 1936, General Pulaski’s Memorial Day for the observance and commemoration of the death of Brigadier General Casimir Pulaski. 1936-06-20 644 Chapter 49 Stat. 1565 74 2 United States Government Publishing Office text/xml EN Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.
Digitization Vendor 2025-01-07 public [CHAPTER 644.] JOINT RESOLUTION Authorizing the President of the United States of America to proclaim October 11, 1936, General Pulaski’s Memorial Day for the observance and commemoration of the death of Brigadier General Casimir Pulaski. June 20, 1936.[[S. J. Res. 187](/us/bill/74/sjres/187).][[Pub. Res., No. 110](/us/bill/74/pubres/110).] Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the PresidentGeneral Pulaski’s Memorial Day.President authorized to invite observance of. of the United States is authorized and directed to issue a proclamation calling upon officials of the Government to display1566 the flag of the United States on all governmental buildings on October 11, 1936, and inviting the people of the United States to observe the day in schools and churches or other suitable places, with appropriate ceremonies in commemoration of the death of General Casimir Pulaski.
Approved, June 20, 1936. To ratify and confirm the appointment of Isaac Gans as a member of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board of the District of Columbia. 1936-06-20 645 Chapter 49 Stat. 1566 74 2 United States Government Publishing Office text/xml EN Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain. Digitization Vendor 2025-01-07 public [CHAPTER 645.] JOINT RESOLUTION To ratify and confirm the appointment of Isaac Gans as a member of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board of the District of Columbia.
June 20, 1936.[[S. J. Res. 280](/us/bill/74/sjres/280).][[Pub. Res., No. 111](/us/bill/74/pubres/111).] Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,District of Columbia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board.Appointment of Isaac Gans as a member of, confirmed.Vol. 48, p. 321. That the appointment by the Commissioners of the District of Columbia of Isaac Gans as a member of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board of the District of Columbia for a term of four years beginning February 4, 1936, is hereby ratified and confirmed.
Approved, June 20, 1936. To amend the joint resolution entitled “Joint resolution authorizing the Federal Trade Commission to make an investigation with respect to agricultural income and the financial and economic condition of agricultural producers generally”, approved August 27, 1935. 1936-06-20 646 Chapter 49 Stat. 1566 74 2 United States Government Publishing Office text/xml EN Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.
Digitization Vendor 2025-01-07 public [CHAPTER 646.] JOINT RESOLUTION To amend the joint resolution entitled “Joint resolution authorizing the Federal Trade Commission to make an investigation with respect to agricultural income and the financial and economic condition of agricultural producers generally”, approved August 27, 1935. June 20, 1936.[[H. J. Res. 444](/us/bill/74/hjres/444).][[Pub. Res., No. 112](/us/bill/74/pubres/112).] Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,Agricultural income and financial and economic condition of agricultural producers.*Ante*, p. 929.
That section 1 of the joint resolution entitled “Joint resolution authorizing the Federal Trade Commission to make an investigation with respect to agricultural income and the financial and economic condition of agricultural producers generally”, approved August 27, 1935 (Public Resolution Numbered 61, Seventy-fourth Congress), be, and the same is hereby, amended so as to read as follows: " Federal Trade Commission to investigate and report on subjects designated. “That the Federal Trade Commission is hereby authorized and directed to investigate and report, at the next session of Congress— “First.
Extent of recent agricultural income decline.
(1)The extent of the decline in agricultural income in recent years, including the amount and percentage of such decline; “(2) Corporations engaged in sale, processing, etc., of principal farm products. The extent of the increases or decreases in recent years in the income of the principal corporations engaged in the sale, manufacturing, warehousing, and/or processing of the principal farm products, and of table and juice grapes, fresh fruits and vegetables, and of the other principal sellers, manufacturers, warehousemen, Grapes, fresh fruits, and vegetables added.and/or processors of the principal farm products, and of table and juice grapes, fresh fruits and vegetables, as compared with the decline in agricultural income, including the amount and percentage of such changes; and “(3) Proportion of consumer cost received by farmer, etc. The proportion of total consumer cost of representative products manufactured or processed from the principal farm products, and of table and juice grapes, fresh fruits and vegetables, which is represented by the proceeds received by
(a)the farmer;
(b)the manufacturers, processors, and warehousemen; and
(c)the distributors and such principal farm products, and of table and juice grapes, fresh fruits and vegetables, and such representative products manufactured therefrom. “Second. Financial position of principal manufacturing, etc., corporations. The financial position of the principal corporations engaged in the manufacturing, processing, warehousing, distribution,1567 and marketing of the representative major products manufactured from such farm products, including— “(1) The capitalization and assets of such corporations and the means and sources of the growth of such capitalization and assets; “(2) The investment, costs, profits, and rates of return of such corporations; “(3) The salaries of the officers of such companies; and “(4) The extent to which said corporations avoid income taxes, if at all, and the extent to which officers receiving such salaries paid income taxes thereon. “Third. The extent of concentration of control and of monopolyExtent of monopoly in manufacturing, marketing, etc., of major farm products, fruits, and vegetables. in the manufacturing, processing, warehousing, distribution, and marketing of representative major farm products, and of table and juice grapes, fresh fruits and vegetables, which is maintained or has been obtained by any corporation or other organization, including— “(1) Methods and devices used by such corporations for obtainingMethods used to control, etc. and maintaining their control or monopoly of the manufacturing, marketing, processing, warehousing, and distribution of such commodities, and the proportion of any such major farm commodity, and of table and juice grapes, fresh fruits and vegetables, handled by each of the large units involved; and “(2) The extent to which fraudulent, dishonest, unfair, intimidating,Extent to which injurious methods are employed. and injurious methods are employed in the grading, warehousing, and transportation of such farm products, and of table and juice grapes, fresh fruits, and vegetables, including combinations, monopolies, price fixing, and manipulation of prices on the commodity exchanges, and by racketeering and so-called auction markets. “Fourth. The extent to which the cooperative agencies haveExtent of cooperative agencies. entered into the processing, warehousing, and marketing of representative major farm products, and of table and juice grapes, fresh fruits, and vegetables, and the general effects of such cooperative agencies upon the producer and consumer.” " Sec. 2. That section 5 of the said joint resolution be, and the sameAuthorization increased. is hereby, amended by striking out the figures “150,000” and inserting the figures “300,000”. Sec. 3. That section 6 of the said joint resolution be, and the same is hereby, amended by striking out all thereof and by substituting in lieu of the said section the following: " Sec. 6. The Federal Trade Commission is directed to present aReports to Congress.*Ante*, p. 1256. final report to the Congress in respect to such principal farm products and such representative products manufactured therefrom, together with recommendations for legislation not later than October 1, 1936, and a further report to the Congress in respect to table and juice grapes, fresh fruits, and vegetables, together with recommendations for legislation on or before January 31, 1937, and a final report in respect to the said last mentioned products, together with any further recommendations, not later than May 31, 1937. “It is hereby further provided that any unexpended balance ofUnexpended balance available.*Ante*, pp. 929, 1111. the appropriation of $150,000 made in the Independent Offices Appropriation Act for the fiscal year 1936 1 in accordance with the authority contained in Public Resolution Numbered 61, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session, is hereby made available for like purpose to and including October 1, 1936.” " Approved, June 20, 1936. Authorizing the Secretary of Agriculture to expend funds of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration for participation by the United States in the 1936 Sixth World’s Poultry Congress. 1936-06-20 647 Chapter 49 Stat. 1568 74 2 United States Government Publishing Office text/xml EN Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain. Digitization Vendor 2025-01-07 public 1568 [CHAPTER 647.] JOINT RESOLUTION Authorizing the Secretary of Agriculture to expend funds of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration for participation by the United States in the 1936 Sixth World’s Poultry Congress. June 20, 1936.[[S. J. Res. 235](/us/bill/74/sjres/235).][[Pub. Res., No. 113](/us/bill/74/pubres/113).] Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,Sixth World’s Poultry Congress.Participation expenses. That the sum of $25,000, or such sum thereof as may be necessary, may be expended by the Secretary of Agriculture from the unexpended funds of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration, with a view to expanding the foreign demand for American-bred poultry through participation Exhibit.in the 1936 Sixth World’s Poultry Congress, such funds to be used for staging a live-bird and educational exhibit and for the expenses *Provisos*.Assembling, shipping, etc., exhibit.of delegates of the United States to this conference: *Provided*, That of this sum a sum of $10,000 is hereby made immediately available for assembling, preparing, and shipping the live-bird exhibit and material showing poultry-husbandry methods followed in the United Restriction.States: *Provided further*, That no part of the sum authorized to be expended by this resolution shall be used for the payment of expenses of delegates to such conference other than Government and State Agricultural college officials. Sec. 2. Invitation to bold 1939 Congress in United States authorized. The President is hereby authorized and requested to extend to the World’s Poultry Science Association an invitation to hold the Seventh World’s Poultry Congress in the United States in 1939, and to extend an invitation to foreign governments to participate in and be represented by delegates and exhibits in such congress. Approved, June 20, 1936. To declare December 26, 1936, a legal holiday in the District of Columbia. 1936-06-20 648 Chapter 49 Stat. 1568 74 2 United States Government Publishing Office text/xml EN Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain. Digitization Vendor 2025-01-07 public [CHAPTER 648.] JOINT RESOLUTION To declare December 26, 1936, a legal holiday in the District of Columbia. June 20, 1936.[[S. J. Res. 241](/us/bill/74/sjres/241).][[Pub. Res., No. 114](/us/bill/74/pubres/114).] Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,District of Columbia.December 26, 1936, declared a legal holiday. That December 26, 1936, is hereby declared to be a legal holiday in the District of Columbia *Proviso*.Government and District employees entitled to pay.for all purposes: *Provided*, That all employees of the United States Government in the District of Columbia and all employees of the District of Columbia shall be entitled to pay for such holiday the same as on other days. Approved, June 20, 1936. Authorizing distribution to the Indians of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation, Montana, of the judgment rendered by the Court of Claims in their favor. 1936-06-20 649 Chapter 49 Stat. 1568 74 2 United States Government Publishing Office text/xml EN Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain. Digitization Vendor 2025-01-07 public [CHAPTER 649.] JOINT RESOLUTION Authorizing distribution to the Indians of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation, Montana, of the judgment rendered by the Court of Claims in their favor. June 20, 1936.[[S. J. Res. 243](/us/bill/74/sjres/243).][[Pub. Res., No. 115](/us/bill/74/pubres/115).] Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,Blackfeet Indian Reservation. Mont.Per capita distribution of court judgment to Indians of, authorized.Vol. 43, p. 21. That the Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized and directed to withdraw from the tribal fund of the Blackfeet, Blood, and Piegan Indians of the Blackfeet Reservation, Montana, credited or to be credited on the books of the Treasury under the Act of March 13, 1924 (43 Stat. 21), a sufficient sum to make a per-capita distribution of $85 to each member of said tribes who was living and entitled to enrollment with said Indians on the date final judgment was rendered in their favor by the Court of Claims in the case Docket Numbered E–427; such per-capita distribution to be made under such rules and regulations as the Secretary of the Interior may prescribe. Sec. 2. Disposition of balance. The balance remaining in the tribal fund of the Blackfeet, Blood, and Piegan Indians after the per-capita distribution1569 herein authorized shall be available for disposition by the tribal council of said Indians, with the approval of the Secretary of the Interior, in accordance with the constitution and bylaws of the Blackfeet Tribe of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation. Approved, June 20, 1936. Authorizing distribution to the Gros Ventre Indians of the Fort Belknap Reservation, Montana, of the judgment rendered by the Court of Claims in their favor. 1936-06-20 650 Chapter 49 Stat. 1569 74 2 United States Government Publishing Office text/xml EN Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain. Digitization Vendor 2025-01-07 public [CHAPTER 650.] JOINT RESOLUTION Authorizing distribution to the Gros Ventre Indians of the Fort Belknap Reservation, Montana, of the judgment rendered by the Court of Claims in their favor. June 20, 1936.[[S. J. Res. 245](/us/bill/74/sjres/245).][[Pub. Res., No. 116](/us/bill/74/pubres/116).] Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Secretary of theFort Belknap Reservation, Mont.Per capita distribution of court judgment to Gros Ventre Indians of, authorized. Interior is hereby authorized and directed to withdraw from the Treasury and to distribute per capita, as provided herein to the Gros Ventre Indians of the Fort Belknap Reservation, Montana, the sum arising from a judgment rendered in their favor by the Court of Claims in the case docketed as E–427, credited or to be credited to said Indians on the books of the Treasury under theVol. 43, p. 21. Act of March 13, 1924 (43 Stat. 21). Sec. 2. That for the purpose of making the distribution hereinRoll of Indians to be prepared. authorized, the Secretary of the Interior shall cause a roll of said Indians to be prepared by a commission consisting of the Gros Ventre members of the Fort Belknap Community Council. In the preparation of said roll, those members of the Gros Ventre Tribe whose names appear on the allotment roll made pursuant to the Act of March 3, 1921 (41 Stat. 1355), and who are alive on theVol. 41, p. 1355. date of approval of this resolution shall first be enrolled, to which number shall be added the names of all children of one-fourth or more Gros Ventre Indian blood born to all allotted Indians of the Fort Belknap Reservation, regardless of place of residence of such children or their parents: *Provided*, That all such children so*Provisos*.Enrolling of children. enrolled shall be alive and in being on the date of approval of this resolution: *Provided further*, That there shall be added to andNames of George Gambler and Josephine Gambler White added. included in the roll herein authorized the names of George Gambler and Josephine Gambler White, two Gros Ventre Indians omitted from the Fort Belknap allotment roll due to absence from the reservation: *Provided, however*, That said George Gambler and JosephineCondition. Gambler White have not been enrolled with or participated in the benefits of any other tribe. Sec. 3. When the roll herein provided for shall have been completedPer capita share to be credited upon completion of roll. and approved by the Secretary of the Interior, he shall thereupon cause the per-capita share due each member of said Gros Ventre Tribe so enrolled to be credited to the individual Indian money account of such member for expenditure in accordance with the individual Indian money regulations. Approved, June 20, 1936. Authorizing the Veterans’ Administration to prepare and publish a compilation of all Federal laws relating to veterans of wars of the United States. 1936-06-20 651 Chapter 49 Stat. 1569 74 2 United States Government Publishing Office text/xml EN Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain. Digitization Vendor 2025-01-07 public [CHAPTER 651.] JOINT RESOLUTION Authorizing the Veterans’ Administration to prepare and publish a compilation of all Federal laws relating to veterans of wars of the United States. June 20, 1936.[[H. J. Res. 583](/us/bill/74/hjres/583).][[Pub. Res., No. 117](/us/bill/74/pubres/117).] Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the AdministratorVeterans’ Administration.Compilation of Federal laws relating to veterans’ relief, authorized. of Veterans’ Affairs is authorized to compile and publish all Federal laws relating to veterans’ relief, including such laws as are administered by the Veterans’ Administration as well as by other1570 agencies of the Government, in such form as he may, in his discretion, deem advisable for the purpose of making currently available for the use of the Veterans’ Administration and full-time representatives of the several service organizations an annotated, indexed, and cross-referenced statement of the laws providing veterans’ relief in Maintenance on current basis.convenient form, and the Administrator is further authorized to maintain such compilation on a current basis either by the publication, from time to time, of supplementary documents or by complete *Proviso*.Funds for printing and binding.revision of the compilation: *Provided*, That funds from the printing and binding appropriation for the Veterans’ Administration may be used for this purpose and the distribution of the compilation to the representatives of the several service organizations shall be determined by the Administrator of Veterans’ Affairs. Sec. 2. Distribution of previous compilation. Distribution of the supply remaining in the Veterans’ Administration of Senate Document Numbered 131, Federal Laws Relating to Veterans of Wars of the United States, shall be made in the discretion of the Administrator of Veterans’ Affairs, Vol. 47, p. 1780.notwithstanding the provisions of Senate Concurrent Resolution Numbered 29, Seventy-second Congress, first session. Approved, June 20, 1936. Authorizing the construction of certain public works on rivers and harbors for hood control, and for other purposes. 1936-06-22 688 Chapter 49 Stat. 1570 74 2 United States Government Publishing Office text/xml EN Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain. Digitization Vendor 2025-01-07 public [CHAPTER 688.] AN ACT Authorizing the construction of certain public works on rivers and harbors for hood control, and for other purposes. June 22, 1936.[[H. R. 8455](/us/bill/74/hr/8455).][[Public, No. 738](/us/pl/74/738).] *Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of American in Congress assembled*,Flood Control Act of 1936. declaration of policy Sec. 1. Declaration of policy. It is hereby recognized that destructive floods upon the rivers of the United States, upsetting orderly processes and causing loss of life and property, including the erosion of lands, and impairing and obstructing navigation, highways, railroads, and other channels of commerce between the States, constitute a menace to national welfare; that it is the sense of Congress that flood control on navigable waters or their tributaries is a proper activity of the Federal Government in cooperation with States, their political subdivisions, and localities thereof; that investigations and improvements of rivers and other waterways, including watersheds thereof, for flood-control purposes are in the interest of the general welfare; that the Federal Government should improve or participate in the improvement of navigable waters or their tributaries, including watersheds thereof, for flood-control purposes if the benefits to whomsoever they may accrue are in excess of the estimated costs, and if the lives and social security of people are otherwise adversely affected. Sec. 2. Jurisdiction of Federal activities. That, hereafter, Federal investigations and improvements of rivers and other waterways for flood control and allied purposes shall be under the jurisdiction of and shall be prosecuted by the War Department under the direction of the Secretary of War and supervision of the Chief of Engineers, and Federal investigations of watersheds and measures for run-off and waterflow retardation and soil erosion prevention on watersheds shall be under the jurisdiction of and shall be prosecuted by the Department of Agriculture under the direction of the Secretary of Agriculture, except Reports upon examinations and surveys.as otherwise provided by Act of Congress; and that in their reports upon examinations and surveys, the Secretary of War and the Secretary of Agriculture shall be guided as to flood-control measures1571 by the principles set forth in section 1 in the determination of the Federal interests involved: *Provided*, That the foregoing grants*Proviso*.Reclamation projects. of authority shall not interfere with investigations and river improvements incident to reclamation projects that may now be in progress or may be hereafter undertaken by the Bureau of Reclamation of the Interior Department pursuant to any general or specific authorization of law. Sec. 3. That hereafter no money appropriated under authority ofState, etc., cooperation required. this Act shall be expended on the construction of any project until States, political subdivisions thereof, or other responsible local agencies have given assurances satisfactory to the Secretary of War that they will
(a)provide without cost to the United States all lands,Easements, etc. easements, and rights-of-way necessary for the construction of tho project, except as otherwise provided herein;
(b)hold and save theLiability for damages. United States free from damages due to the construction works;
(c)maintain and operate all the works after completion in accordanceMaintenance of works after completion.*Provisos*.Construction of dams. with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of War: *Provided*, That the construction of any dam authorized herein may be undertaken without delay when the dam site has been acquired and the assurances prescribed herein have been furnished, without awaiting the acquisition of the easements and rights-of-way required for the reservoir area: *And provided further*, That whenever expendituresWhere expenditures for lands, etc., exceed estimates. for lands, easements, and rights-of-way by States, political subdivisions thereof, or responsible local agencies for any individual project or useful part thereof shall have exceeded the present estimated construction cost therefor, the local agency concerned may be reimbursed one-half of its excess expenditures over said estimated construction cost: *And provided further*, That when benefits of anyBenefits accruing to property outside State where project located. project or useful part thereof accrue to lands and property outside of the State in which said project or part thereof is located, the Secretary of War with the consent of the State wherein the same are located may acquire the necessary lands, easements, and rights-of-way for said project or part thereof after he has received from the States, political subdivisions thereof, or responsible local agencies benefited the present estimated cost of said lands, easements, and rights-of-way, less one-half the amount by which the estimated cost of these lands, easements, and rights-of-way exceeds the estimated construction cost corresponding thereto: *And provided further*, ThatProportion of estimated cost to States. the Secretary of War shall determine the proportion of the present estimated cost of said lands, easements, and rights-of-way that each State; political subdivision thereof, or responsible local agency should contribute in consideration for the benefits to be received by such agencies: *And provided further*, That whenever not less than 75Maintenance provisions inapplicable if 75 per centum of benefits accrue without the State. per centum of the benefits as estimated by the Secretary of War of any project or useful part thereof accrue to lands and property outside of the State in which said project or part thereof is located, provision
(c)of this section shall not apply thereto; nothing herein shall impair or abridge the powers now existing in the Department of War with respect to navigable streams: *And provided further*,Completion of work now under way. That nothing herein shall be construed to interfere with the completion of any reservoir or flood control work authorized by the Congress and now under way. Sec. 4. The consent of Congress is hereby given to any two orFlood-control compacts between States. more States to enter into compacts or agreements in connection with any project or operation authorized by this Act for flood control or the prevention of damage to life or property by reason of floods upon any stream or streams and their tributaries which lie in two or more such States, for the purpose of providing, in such manner and such proportion as may be agreed upon by such States and approved by the Secretary of War, funds for construction and1572 maintenance, for the payment of damages, and for the purchase of rights-of-way, lands, and easements in connection with such project Ratification by Congress; exception.or operation. No such compact or agreement shall become effective without the further consent or ratification of Congress, except a compact or agreement which provides that all money to be expended pursuant thereto and all work to be performed thereunder shall be expended and performed by the Department of War, with the exception of such reasonable sums as may be reserved by the States entering into the compact or agreement for the purpose of collecting taxes and maintaining the necessary State organizations for carrying out the compact or agreement. flood control act of 1936 Sec. 5. Projects adopted and authorized to be prosecuted. That pursuant to the policy outlined in sections 1 and 3, the following works of improvement, for the benefit of navigation and the control of destructive flood waters and other purposes, are hereby adopted and authorized to be prosecuted, in order of their emergency as may be designated by the President, under the direction of the Secretary of War and supervision of the Chief of Engineers in accordance with the plans in the respective reports and records hereinafter designated: *Provided*, That penstocks or other similar *Proviso*.Installation of penstocks, etc.facilities, adapted to possible future use in the development of adequate electric power may be installed in any dam herein authorized when approved by the Secretary of War upon the recommendation of the Chief of Engineers. lake champlain basinLake Champlain basin. Lamoille River, Vt. Lamoille River, Vermont: Channel improvement by reconstruction of Hardwick Dam, excavation at Johnsons Gorge and bank revetment at twelve places; House Document Numbered 145, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $66,000. Rutland, Vt. Rutland, Vermont, on Otter Creek: Channel improvement by construction of dikes; House Document Numbered 144, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $49,500. Proctor, Vt. Proctor, Vermont, on Otter Creek: Channel excavation and dam reconstruction; House Document Numbered 144, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $22,500. North Adams, Mass. North Adams, Massachusetts, on Hoosic River: Channel clearing; House Document Numbered 684, Seventy-first Congress, third session; estimated construction cost, $66,000. Bennington, Vt. Bennington, Vermont, on Hoosic River: Channel clearing; House Document Numbered 684, Seventy-first Congress, third session; estimated construction cost, $216,000. Hoosic Falls, N. Y. Hoosic Falls, New York, on Hoosic River: Channel clearing; House Document Numbered 684, Seventy-first Congress, third session; estimated construction cost, $43,000. merrimack river, new hampshire and massachusettsMerrimack River, N. H. and Mass. Reservoir system for reducing flood heights. Construction of a system of flood-control reservoirs in the Merrimack River Basin for the reduction of flood heights in the Merrimack Valley generally; estimated construction cost, $7,725,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $3,500,000. connecticut river basinConnecticut River basin. Reservoirs in Vermont and New Hampshire. Reservoir system for the control of floods in the Connecticut River Valley: Construction of ten reservoirs in Vermont and New Hampshire on tributaries of the Connecticut River; plans in House Document1573 Numbered 412, Seventy-fourth Congress, second session, as the same may be revised upon further investigation of the 1936 flood; estimated construction cost, $10,028,900; estimated cost of lands and damages, $3,344,100. southern new york and eastern pennsylvaniaSouthern New York and Eastern Pennsylvania.Detention reservoirs, etc., for protecting certain cities in. Construction of detention reservoirs and related flood-control works for protection of Binghamton, Hornell, Corning, and other towns in New York and Pennsylvania, in accordance with plans approved by the Chief of Engineers on recommendation of Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors at an estimated construction cost of $27,154,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $5,930,000. susquehanna river basinSusquehanna River basin. Williamsport, Pennsylvania: Levees on West Branch of SusquehannaWilliamsport, Pa. to protect people and city property; Report pursuant to House Document Numbered 308, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $2,444,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $156,000. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania: Levees to protect people and cityHarrisburg, Pa. property; Report pursuant to House Document Numbered 308, Sixty-ninth dongress, first session; estimated construction cost, $104,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $5,200. Sunbury, Pennsylvania: Levees to protect people and city property;Sunbury, Pa. Report pursuant to House Document Numbered 308, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $93,600; estimated cost of lands and damages, $15,600. York, Pennsylvania: Retarding dams and channel improvementYork, Pa. to protect people and city property; Report pursuant to House Document Numbered 308, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $2,210,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $390,000. Milton, Pennsylvania: Levees on West Branch of SusquehannaMilton. Pa. River to protect people and city property; report pursuant to House Document Numbered 308, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $263,900; estimated cost of lands and damages, $13,000. Montgomery, Pennsylvania: Levees on West Branch of SusquehannaMontgomery, Pa. River to protect people and city property; report pursuant to House Document Numbered 308, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $139,100; estimated cost of lands and damages, $5,200. Muncy, Pennsylvania: Levees on West Branch of SusquehannaMuncy, Pa. River to protect people and city property; report pursuant to House Document Numbered 308, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $360,800; estimated cost of lands and damages, $11,100. Jersey Shore, Pennsylvania: Levees on West Branch of SusquehannaJersey Shore, Pa. River to protect people and city property; report pursuant to House Document Numbered 308, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $395,900; estimated cost of lands and damages, $12,500. Lock Haven, Pennsylvania: Levees on West Branch of SusquehannaLock Haven, Pa. River to protect people and city property; report pursuant to House Document Numbered 308, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $2,860,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $39,000. 1574 Bloomsburg, Pa. Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania: Levees on North Branch of Susquehanna River to protect people and city property; report pursuant to House Document Numbered 308, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $131,300; estimated cost of lands and damages, $5,200. West Pittston, Pa. West Pittston, Pennsylvania: Levees on North Branch of Susquehanna River to protect people and city property; report pursuant to House Document Numbered 308, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $100,000. Swoyerville and Forty Fort, Pa. Swoyerville and Forty Fort, Pennsylvania: Levees on North Branch of Susquehanna River to protect people and city property; report pursuant to House Document Numbered 308, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $529,800; estimated cost of lands and damages, $42,300. Kingston and Edwardsville, Pa. Kingston and Edwardsville, Pennsylvania: Levees on North Branch of Susquehanna River to protect people and city property; report pursuant to House Document Numbered 308, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $1,658,200; estimated cost of lands and damages, $13,700. Plymouth, Pa. Plymouth, Pennsylvania: Levees on North Branch of Susquehanna River to protect people and city property; report pursuant to House Document Numbered 308, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $728,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $46,800. Nanticoke, Pa. Nanticoke, Pennsylvania: Levees on North Branch of Susquehanna River to protect agricultural community; report pursuant to House Document Numbered 308, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $381,700; estimated cost of lands and damages, $13,500. Wilkes-Barre and Hanover Township, Pa. Wilkes-Barre and Hanover Township, Pennsylvania: Levees on North Branch of Susquehanna River to protect people and city property; report pursuant to House Document Numbered 308, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $2,129,400; estimated cost of lands and damages, $12,000. potomac river basinPotomac River basin.Washington, D. C. Washington, District of Columbia: Levees and grade raising to protect downtown portion of Washington, Arlington Experimental Farm, Bolling Field, and Anacostia Naval Air Station; plans in House Document Numbered 101, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $571,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $16,000. Cumberland, Md. and Ridgely, W. Va. Cumberland, West Cumberland, South Cumberland, Maryland, and Ridgeley, West Virginia: Levees, retaining walls, movable dam, and channel clearing to protect people and city property; plans in House Document Numbered 101, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $743,400; estimated cost of lands and damages, $143,700. Moorefield, W. Va. Moorefield, West Virginia: Levees on Moorefield River to protect Seople and town property; plans in House Document Numbered 101, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $41,500; estimated cost of lands and damages, $5,400. Harpers Ferry, W. Va. Harpers Ferry, West Virginia: Levees and concrete flood wall to grotect people and town property; plans in House Document Numbered 101, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $164,900; estimated cost of lands and damages, $4,000. 1575 tar riverTar River. North Carolina: Channel improvement between Tarboro andTarboro to Rocky Mount, N. C. Rocky Mount for flood relief; special report in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $82,500. savannah riverSavannah River. Augusta, Georgia: Levees and retaining walls to protect peopleAugusta, Ga. and city property; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $685,000. escambia river basinEscambia River basin. Brewton, Alabama: Levees to protect people and city property;Brewton, Ala. House Document Numbered 350, Seventy-first Congress, second session; estimated construction cost, $235,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $7,000. Flomaton, Alabama: Levees to protect people and city property;Flomaton, Ala. House Document Numbered 350, Seventy-first Congress, second session; estimated construction cost, $149,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $5,000. mobile river basinMobile River basin. Rome, Georgia: Levees on Coosa River to protect people and cityRome, Ga. property; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $330,000. mississippi riverMississippi River. Tiptonville to Obion River, Tennessee: Construction of the leveeTiptonville to Obion River, Tenn. designated as plan 1 for the protection of the towns of Tiptonville, Ridgely, and various smaller communities; and agricultural lands in Lake, Obion, and Dyer Counties, Tennessee; in accordance with House Document Numbered 188, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $730,000. Ittawamba County, Mississippi, near Fulton: Clear floodway of theIttawamba County, Miss. Tombigbee River; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $109,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, none. pearl riverPearl River. Jackson and vicinity, Mississippi: Clearing flood channel to protectJackson, Miss. people and property in Jackson and vicinity; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $10,000. homochitto riverHomochitto River. Homochitto River, Adams and Wilkinson Counties, Mississippi:Adams and Wilkinson Counties, Miss. Small earth dams at heads of minor tributaries and channel improvement; no report to Congress; data in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $50,000. buffalo riverBuffalo River. Buffalo River, Wilkinson County, Mississippi: Channel improvement;Wilkinson County, Miss. no report to Congress; data in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $35,000. 1576 big black river, mississippiBig Black River, Mississippi. Improving flood channel in designated counties. Improvement of the flood channel of the Big Black River in Choctaw, Webster, Montgomery, Attala, Carroll, Holmes, Madison, Yazoo, Warren, Claiborne, and Hinds Counties in Mississippi; by means of channel clearing and suitable cut-offs throughout the entire length of the river; special report, in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $850,000. red river basinRed River basin. Red River Parish, La. Red River Parish, below Shreveport, Louisiana: Raising, enlarging, and extending existing levee system to improve flood protection; House Document Numbered 378, Seventy-fourth Congress, second session, and supplemental report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $150,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $30,000. Bayou Pierre, La. Bayou Pierre, Louisiana: Channel enlargement from Bayou Wincey to mouth at Grand Encore to reduce flood damages and improve sanitary and living conditions over large area; House Document Numbered 378, Seventy-fourth Congress, second session, and supplemental report in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $300,000. Natchitoches Parish, La. Natchitoches Parish, Louisiana: Levees on west side of Red River, dam and floodgate at mouth of Cane River, and drainage ditches; House Document Numbered 378, Seventy-fourth Congress, second session, and supplemental report in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $315,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $40,000. Saline Point, etc., Parishes, La. Saline Point, Avoyelles and Catahoula Parishes, Louisiana: Cutoff to reduce flood heights; House Document Numbered 378, Seventy-fourth Congress, second session, and supplemental report in Office of the Chief of Engineers: estimated construction cost, $135,000. Black Bayou, La. Black Bayou, Louisiana: Earth dam and reservoir for flood storage to protect population and lands below; House Document Numbered 378, Seventy-fourth Congress, second session, and supplemental report in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $125,000. Bayou Bodcau, La. Bayou Bodcau, Louisiana: Floodway for the diversion of Bayou Bodeau and Cypress Bayou to improve flood protection; House Document Numbered 378, Seventy-fourth Congress, second session, and supplemental report in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $1,825.000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $68,000. Bayou des Glaises, La. Bayou des Glaises, Louisiana: Diversion ditch from Moreauville to borrow pit of West Atchafalaya levee at Lake Bayou to reduce flood damages and improve sanitary and living conditions over large area; House Document Numbered 378, Seventy-fourth Congress, second session, and supplemental report in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $280,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $5,000. Wallace Lake, La. Wallace Lake, Louisiana: Earth dam and reservoir for flood storage to improve protection of population and lands below; House Document Numbered 378, Seventy-fourth Congress, second session, and supplemental report in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $380,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $20,000. ouachita river basinOuachita River basin. Columbia, La. Columbia, Louisiana: Levees, bulkhead, and drainage structures to protect people and city property: House Document Numbered1577 196, Seventy-third Congress, second Session, and data in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $339,100; estimated cost of lands and damages, $55,900. Jonesville, Louisiana: Levee, retaining wall, and drainage structuresJonesville, La. to protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 196, Seventy-third Congress, second session, and data in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $368,200; estimated cost of lands and damages, $74,800. arkansas river basinArkansas River basin. Caddoa Reservoir, near Lamar in Colorado: For flood control andCaddoa Reservoir, Colo. water conservation in Colorado and Kansas; plans in House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $9,700,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $300,000. Conchas Reservoir near Tucumcari, on the South Canadian RiverConchas Reservoir, South Canadian River, N. Mex. in New Mexico: For completion of project now under way for flood control, irrigation, and water supply benefits in New Mexico; plans in House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $12,270,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $230,000. Optima Reservoir on North Canadian River: For flood control inOptima Reservoir, North Canadian River, Okla. the North Canadian Valley in Oklahoma; plans in House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $1,350,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $180,000. Fort Supply Reservoir on North Canadian River: For flood controlFort Supply Reservoir, North Canadian River, Okla. in the North Canadian Valley in Oklahoma; plans in House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $2,360,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $225,000. Hulah Reservoir on Caney River tributary of Verdigris River,Hulah Reservoir, Okla, and Kans. Oklahoma and Kansas: For flood control in Verdigris River Valley in Oklahoma and for water-supply purposes; plans in House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $1,325,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $1,018,000. Great Salt Plains Reservoir on Salt Fork of Arkansas River inGreat Salt Plains Reservoir, Okla. Oklahoma: For flood control and incidental benefits in Oklahoma; plans in House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $972,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $261,000. Kaw, on Arkansas River in Oklahoma: Levee to protect peopleKaw, Okla. and city property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $32,500. Near Fort Gibson on Arkansas River in Oklahoma: ConstructionFort Gibson, Okla. of new levees to provide flood protection for population and lands; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $7,900; estimated cost of lands and damages, $1,080. Near Dardenelle on Arkansas River in Arkansas: Raising and enlargingDardenelle, Ark. existing levee system to improve protection; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $93,500; estimated cost of lands and damages, $13,500. Little Rock, Arkansas: Levees to provide flood protection to peopleLittle Rock, Ark. and city property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session, and supplemental report in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $110,500. 1578 North Little Rock, Ark. North Little Rock, in Pulaski County, Arkansas: Construction of levee and flood wall to protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated cost, $401,000; estimated costs of lands and damages, unknown. North Little Rock to Gillette, Ark. From North Little Rock, Arkansas, to Gillette, Arkansas, on the north bank of Arkansas River: Levees to protect agricultural lands and communities; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth. Congress, first session; estimated cost, $2,424,400. Clarksville, Ark. Clarksville on Spadra Creek, tributary of Arkansas River in Arkansas: Levees to protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $70,000. West of Morrilton, Ark. West of Morrilton on Arkansas River in Arkansas: Construct new levees and raise and enlarge part of existing levee system to improve protection; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $603,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $53,000. Faulkner County, Ark. Faulkner County, on Arkansas River, levee district numbered one: To protect agricultural lands: cost, $100,000. Winfield, Kans. Winfield, on Walnut River in Kansas: Levees to protect people and city property; report to Congress not yet made; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $108,000. Augusta, Kans. Augusta, on Walnut River in Kansas: Levees to protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session: estimated construction cost, $109,800; estimated cost of lands and damages, $18,600. Hutchinson, Kans. Hutchinson, on Arkansas River in Kansas: Diversion of Cow Creek and levees to protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; *Proviso*.Preliminary examination of Cow Creek.estimated construction cost, $1,050,000: *Provided*, That $10,000 of this amount be made available for a preliminary examination and survey for flood control of Cow Creek; estimated cost of lands and damages from $350,000 to $1,350,000. Wichita and Valley Center, Kans. Wichita and Valley Center, on Arkansas River in Kansas and vicinity: Levees and flood way to protect people, city property, and environs; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $2,603,100; estimated cost of lands and damages, $1,597,100. Big Slough to Belle Plaine, Kans. Big Slough to Belle Plaine, on Ninnescah River, tributary of Arkansas River, Kansas: Floodway and levees on Ninnescah River to provide flood protection and improved economic and living conditions to large area; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $1,650,200; estimated cost of lands and damages, $232,000. Florence, Kans. Florence, on Grand (Neosho) River in Kansas: Levees to protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $17,000. Cottonwood Falls, Kans. Cottonwood Falls, on Grand (Neosho) River in Kansas: Levees to protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $7,200. Emporia, Kans. Emporia, on Grand (Neosho) River in Kansas: Levees to protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $22,700. Neosho Rapids, Kans. Neosho Rapids, on Grand (Neosho) River in Kansas: Levees to protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $38,900. 1579 Hartford, on Grand (Neosho) River in Kansas: Levees to protectHartford, Kans. people and city property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $43,200. Burlington, on Grand (Neosho) River in Kansas: Levees to protectBurlington, Kans. people and city property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $27,000. Leroy, on Grand (Neosho) River in Kansas: Levees to protectLeroy, Kans. people and city property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $9,600. Neosho Falls, on Grand (Neosho) River in Kansas: Levees toNeosho Falls, Kans. protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $32,400. Iola, on Grand (Neosho) River in Kansas: Levees to protect peopleIola, Kans. and city property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $20,700. Humboldt, on Grand (Neosho) River in Kansas: Levees to protectHumboldt, Kans. people and city property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $19,300. Chetopa, on Grand (Neosho) River in Kansas: Levees to protectChetopa, Kans. people and city property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $28,600. Cherokee County, on Grand (Neosho) River in Kansas: LeveesCherokee County, Kans. (unit numbered 4) to protect people and property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $234,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $54,000. Lyon County, on Grand (Neosho) River in Kansas: Levees (unitLyon County, Kans. numbered 39) to protect people and property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $237,100; estimated cost of lands and damages, $38,400. West of Fredonia, on Fall River, Tributary of Verdigris River inWest of Fredonia, Kans. Kansas: Levees (unit numbered 43) to protect people and property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $189, 900; estimated cost of lands and damages, $16,900. West of Benedict, on Verdigris River in Kansas: Levees (unitWest of Benedict, Kans. numbered 20) to protect people and property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $195,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $19,700. West of Elk City, on Elk River tributary of Verdigris River inWest of Elk City, Kans. Kansas: Levees (unit numbered 41) to protect people and property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $81,400; estimated cost of lands and damages, $8,800. Caney Creek, tributary of Verdigris River in Oklahoma andCaney Creek, Okla, and Kans. Kansas: Levees (unit numbered 36) to protect people and property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $157,600; estimated cost of lands and damages, $13,300. Verdigris River from mouth to Madison, Kansas: Channel clearingVerdigris River, from mouth to Madison, Kans. in Kansas and Oklahoma for flood relief; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $231,800. 1580 Blackwell, Okla. Blackwell, on Chikaskia River, tributary of the Salt Fork River, in Oklahoma: Levees to protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 308, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $50,000. white river basinWhite River basin. East Poplar Bluff and Poplar Bluff, Mo. East Poplar Bluff and Poplar Bluff, on Black River in Missouri: Leveed floodway to protect people and city property; plans in House Document Numbered 102, Seventy-third Congress, first session; revised cost data in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $546,800; estimated cost of lands and damages, $209,400. Poplar Bluff, Mo., to Knoble, Ark. Poplar Bluff, on Black River in Missouri to latitude of Knoble, Arkansas: Leveed floodway to protect people and property of agricultural communities; plans in House Document Numbered 102, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $1,972,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $632,000. Little Black River, Mo. and Ark. Little Black River in Missouri and Arkansas: Levees to protect people and property of agricultural communities; plans in House Document Numbered 102, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $754,900; estimated cost of lands and damages, $65,100. Skaggs Ferry, Ark. Skaggs Ferry, on Black River east of Pocahontas, in Arkansas: Levees to protect people and property of agricultural communities; plans in House Document Numbered 102, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $63,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $17,100. Big Bottom, Ark. Big Bottom, on White River, in Independence County, Arkansas: Levees to protect people and property of agricultural communities; plans in House Document Numbered 102, Seventy-third Congress, first session; revised cost data in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $128,700; estimated cost of lands and damages, $19,800. Newport, Ark. Newport, on White River, in Arkansas: Levees to protect people and city property; plans in House Document Numbered 102, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $138,600; estimated cost of lands and damages, $22,500. Village Creek, etc., Ark. Village Creek, White River and Mayberry District, in Arkansas: Levee protection of people and property of extensive agricultural area; plans in House Document Numbered 102, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $931,500; estimated cost of lands and damages, $222,300. Clarendon to Laconia Circle, Ark. Clarendon to Laconia Circle, on White River, in Arkansas: Levees to protect people and property of extensive agricultural communities; plans in House Document Numbered 102, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $8,960,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $182,000. Big Creek and L’Anguille River, Ark. Big Creek and L’Anguille River, northwest of Marianna, in Arkansas: Levees to protect people and property of agricultural communities; plans in House Document Numbered 102, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $86,400; estimated cost of lands and damages, $10,800. upper mississippi riverUpper Mississippi River.East Saint Louis, Ill. East Saint Louis, Illinois, and vicinity: Raise and enlarge existing levees to protect population and railroad center; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $1,158,000. 1581 East Cape Girardeau and Clear Creek Drainage District, Illinois:Drainage and levee districts.East Cape Girardeau and Clear Creek, Ill. Raising and enlarging existing levee system to improve protection; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $395,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $15,300. North Alexander Drainage and Levee District, Illinois: RaisingNorth Alexander, Ill. and enlarging existing levee system to improve protection; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $271,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $18,900. Clear Creek Drainage and Levee District, Illinois: Raising andClear Creek, Ill. enlarging existing levee system to improve protection; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $649,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $16,500. Preston Drainage and Levee District, Illinois: Raising and enlargingPreston, Ill. existing levee system to improve protection; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $244,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $8,100. Degognia and Fountain Bluff Levee and Drainage District, Illinois:Degognia and Fountain Bluff, Ill. Raising and enlarging existing levee system to improve protection; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $330,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $14,600. Perry County Drainage and Levee Districts Numbered 1, 2, andPerry County, Mo., Districts 1, 2, and 3. 3, Missouri: Raising and enlarging existing levee system to improve protection; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $859,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $54,200. Saint Genevieve Levee District Numbered 1, Missouri: RaisingSaint Genevieve, Mo., District 1. and enlarging existing levee system to improve protection; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $177,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $25,000. Fort Chartres and Ivy Landing Drainage District Numbered 5,Fort Chartres and Ivy Landing, Ill., District 5. Illinois: Raising and enlarging existing levee system to improve protect ion; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $120,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $10,500. Harrisonville and Ivy Landing Drainage and Levee DistrictHarrisonville and Ivy Landing, Ill., District 2. Numbered 2, Illinois: Raising and enlarging existing levee system to improve protection; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $453,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $15,100. Columbia Drainage and Levee District Numbered 3, Illinois:Columbia, Ill., District 3. Raising and enlarging existing levee system to improve protection; special report on record in Office, of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $546,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $19,200. Wilson and Wenkel and Prairie du Pont Drainage and LeveeWilson and Wenkel and Prairie du Pont, Ill. Districts, Illinois: Raising and enlarging existing levee system to improve protection; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $520,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $18,700. Choteau, Nameoki, and Venice Drainage and Levee District,Choteau, Nameoki, and Venice, Ill. Illinois: Raising and enlarging existing levee system to improve protection: special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $132,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $22,000. 1582 Saint Louis County, Mo. Saint Louis County Drainage and Levee District, Missouri: Raising and enlarging existing levee system to improve protection; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $259,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $20,000. Wiedmer Chemicals, Mo. Wiedmer Chemicals Drainage and Levee District, Missouri: Raising and enlarging existing levee system to improve protection; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $76,500; estimated cost of lands and damages, $1,500. Green Island, Iowa, District 1. Green Island Levee and Drainage District Numbered 1, Iowa: Raising and enlarging existing levee system to improve protection; special report on record in Office of the Chief or Engineers; estimated construction cost, $68,000. Carroll County, Ill., District 1. Carroll County Levee and Drainage District Numbered 1, Illinois: Raising and enlarging existing levee system to improve protection; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $13,200. Keithsburg, Ill. Keithsburg Drainage District, Illinois: Raising and enlarging existing levee system to improve protection; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $11,000. Henderson County, Ill., District 3. Henderson County Drainage District Numbered 3, Illinois: Raising and enlarging existing system to improve protection; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $13,600. Green Bay, Iowa, District 2. Green Bay Levee and Drainage District Numbered 2, Iowa: Raising and enlarging existing levee system to improve protection; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $100,000. Gregory, Mo. Gregory Drainage District, Missouri: Raising and enlarging existing levee system to improve protection; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $44,400. Fabius River, Mo. Fabius River Drainage District, Missouri: Raising and enlarging existing levee system to improve protection; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $82,000. South Quincy, Ill. South Quincy Drainage and Levee District, Illinois: Raising and enlarging existing levee system to improve protection; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $46,000; estimated cost of hinds and damages, $500. South River, Mo. South River Drainage District, Missouri: Raising and enlarging existing levee system to improve protection; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $37,000. Sny Island, Ill. Sny Island Levee District, Illinois: Raising and enlarging existing levee system to improve protection; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $71,000. Riverland, Mo. Riverland Levee District, Missouri: Raising and enlarging existing levee system to improve protection; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $73,000. Dry Run Reservoir, Iowa. Dry Run Reservoir near Decorah, Iowa: For flood protection of people and city property; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $91,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $29,000. red river of the north basinRed River of the North basin.Lake Traverse and Bois De Sioux River, S. Dak. Lake Traverse and Bois De Sioux River, South Dakota: Reservoir for flood protection of agricultural communities, water conservation,1583 and other incidental benefits; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $1,115,200; estimated cost of lands and damages, $284,800. minnesota riverMinnesota River. Lac Qui Parle Reservoir, in Minnesota: For flood protection inLac Qui Parle Reservoir, Minn. valley of Minnesota River; special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $464,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $974,000. illinois and des plaines river basinIllinois and Des Plaines River basin.Beardstown, Ill., to mouth of Illinois River. Between Beardstown, Illinois, and mouth of Illinois River: Levee setback and improvements to floodway; House Document Numbered 182, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $730,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $370,000. Lost Creek Drainage and Levee District, Illinois: Improve existingDrainage and levee districts.Lost Creek, Ill. levee for additional protection to people and property; House Document Numbered 182, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $46,100; estimated cost of lands and damages, $1,600. Liverpool Drainage and Levee District, Illinois: Improve existingLiverpool, Ill. levee for additional protection to people and property; House Document Numbered 182, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $48,600; estimated cost of lands and damages, $8400. Hennepin Drainage and Levee District, Illinois: Levee and channelHennepin, Ill. improvements for additional protection to people and property; House Document Numbered 182, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $46,800; estimated cost of lands and damages, $6,800. Big Lake Drainage and Levee District, Illinois: Improve existingBig Lake, Ill. levee for additional protection to people and property; House Document Numbered 182, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $52,500; estimated cost of lands and damages, $4.000. Seahorn Drainage and Levee District, Illinois: Improve existingSeahorn, Ill. levee for additional protection to people and property; House Document Numbered 182, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $32,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $4,800. Lacey, Langellier, West Matanzas, and Kerton Valley DrainageLacey, etc., Ill. and Levee District, Illinois: Set back and improve existing levees to protect people and property; House Document Numbered 182, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $188,400; estimated cost of lands and damages, $49,000. Banner Special Drainage and Levee District, Illinois: ImproveBanner, Ill. existing levee for additional protection to people and property; House Document Numbered 102, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $128,700; estimated cost of lands and damages, $17,600. Rocky Ford Drainage and Levee District, Illinois: Improve existingRocky Ford, Ill. levee for additional flood protection to people and property; House Document Numbered 182, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $47,900; estimated cost of lands and damages, $2,400. Pekin and La Marsh Drainage and Levee District, Illinois:Pekin and La Marsh, Ill. Improve existing levees for additional protection to people and property; House Document Numbered 182, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $145,300; estimated cost of lands and damages, $7,000. 1584 Spring Lake, Ill. Spring Lake Drainage and Levee District, Illinois: Improve existing levees for additional protection to people and property; House Document Numbered 182, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $384,200; estimated cost of lands and damages, $10,800. East Liverpool, Ill. East Liverpool Drainage and Levee District, Illinois: Improve existing levees for additional protection to people and property; House Document Numbered 182, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $137,700; estimated cost of lands and damages, $13,600. East Peoria, Ill. East Peoria Drainage and Levee District, Illinois: Improve existing levees for additional protection to people and property; House Document Numbered 182, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $29,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $1,600. Thompson Lake, Ill. Thompson Lake Drainage District, Illinois: Improve existing levees for additional protection to people and property; House Document Numbered 182, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $351,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $27,200. Kelly Lake, Ill. Kelly Lake Drainage and Levee District, Illinois: Improve existing levees for additional protection to people and property; House Document Numbered 182, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $100,200; estimated cost of lands and damages, $4,800. sangamon river basinSangamon River basin. Sangamon River, Ill., mouth. Mouth of Sangamon River, Illinois: Clearing and enlarging flood channel to improve flood discharge; House Document Numbered 186, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $122,400; estimated cost of lands and damages, $13,600. Salt Creek to Robey, Ill. Sangamon River from mouth of Salt Creek to Robey, Illinois: Channel straightening for flood relief; House Document Numbered 186, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $773,000. Salt Creek, Middletown, Ill. Salt Creek in vicinity of Middletown, Illinois: Channel straightening for flood relief; House Document Numbered 186, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $48,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $5,700. Levees, etc.East of Hubley Bridge, south side of Sait Creek, Ill. East of Hubley Bridge on south side of Salt Creek, Illinois: Raise and improve existing levee system to increase protection; House Document Numbered 186, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $20,300; estimated cost of lands and damages, $800. Lussenhaf, north side of Salt Creek, Ill. Lussenhaf Levee, on north side of Salt Creek, Illinois: Raise and improve existing levee system to increase protection; House Document Numbered 186, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $1,850; estimated cost of lands and damages, $450. Swager, etc., Ill. Swager, Whitney, Young-Holbite Levee on north side of Salt Creek, Illinois: Raise and improve existing levee system to increase protection; House Document Numbered 186, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $10,200; estimated cost of lands and damages, $600. Donavon, Ill. Donavon Levee on north side of Salt Creek, Illinois: Raise and improve existing levee system to increase protection; House Document Numbered 186, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $28,400; estimated cost of lands and damages, $1,100. 1585 Mason and Menard Drainage District on Sangamon River nearMason and Menard, Oakford, Ill. Oakford, Illinois: Raise and improve existing levee system to increase protection; House Document Numbered 186, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $78,900; estimated cost of lands and damages, $4,000. Tar Creek Levee, west of Oakford, Illinois: Raise and improveTar Creek, west of Oakford, Ill. existing levee system to increase protection; House Document Numbered 186, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $34,800; estimated cost of lands and damages, $900. Watts Levee on south side of Salt Creek, Illinois: Raise andWatts, south side of Salt Creek, Ill. improve existing levee system to increase protection; House Document Numbered 1S6, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $34,400; estimated cost of lands and damages, $900. Farmers Levee and Drainage District on north side of SangamonFarmers, north side of Sangamon River, Ill. River, Illinois: Raise and improve existing levee system to increase protection; House Document Numbered 186, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $242,600; estimated cost of lands and damages, $4,000. Clear Lake Levee at junction of Sangamon and Illinois Rivers inClear Lake, at junction of Sangamon and Illinois Rivers, Ill. Illinois: Raise and improve existing levee system to increase protection; House Document Numbered 186, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $69,250; estimated cost of lands and damages, $750. Oakford Special Drainage District on south side of SangamonOakford, south side of Sangamon River, Ill. River, Illinois: Raise and improve existing levee system to increase protection; House Document Numbered 186, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $25,500; estimated cost of lands and damages, $2,200. Near Springfield on Sangamon River, Illinois: Alteration ofBridge alteration near Springfield, Ill. Chicago and Illinois Midland Railroad bridge to improve flood channel; House Document Numbered 186, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $90,000. Sangamon River and Salt Creek, Illinois: Clearing and cleaningChannel clearing, etc., Sangamon River and Salt Creek, Ill. channels to improve flood discharges at fifty bridge sites; House Document Numbered 186, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $12,500. Panther Creek West Side Levee, Illinois: Levees to provide floodPanther Creek, Ill. protection; House Document Numbered 186, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $143,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $9,980. Bell and Mertz Levees, Panther Creek, and Sangamon River, Illinois:Bell and Mertz, Panther Creek and Sangamon River, Ill. Raise and improve existing levee system to increase protection; House Document Numbered 186, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $31,100; estimated cost of lands and damages, $500. kankakee river basinKankakee River basin. Between Shelby Bridge and Baums Bridge in Indiana: Levees toShelby Bridge to Baums Bridge, Ind. protect agricultural communities; House Document Numbered 784, Seventy-first Congress, third session; estimated construction cost, $176,600. rock river basinRock River basin. Penny Slough near Hillsdale, Illinois: Levees and drainage ditchesPenny Slough, Hillsdale, Ill. to protect agricultural community; special report in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $109,000. Jonesville and Indian Ford Dams, Wisconsin: Provide floodgatesJonesville and Indian Ford Dams, Wis. for flood control to communities around Lake Koshkonong and in Fort Atkinson; special report in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $29,000. 1586 Freeport, Ill. Freeport on Pecatonia River in Illinois: Channel rectification for protection of people and city property; special report in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $463,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $103,000. ohio river basinOhio River basin; reservoirs. Pittsburgh, Pa. Reservoir system for the protection of Pittsburgh: Construction of reservoirs for the Allegheny-Monongahela Basin as in comprehensive plan for the protection of Pittsburgh and for the reduction of flood heights in the Ohio Valley generally, as set forth in House Document Numbered 306, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session, and in the report on the Allegheny-Monongahela Rivers and tributaries on record in the Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $20,646,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $34,569,000. Below Pittsburgh, Pa. Reservoir system for the reduction of Ohio River floods below Pittsburgh: Construction of reservoirs including the completion of the Bluestone Reservoir now under way, which together with the reservoirs for Pittsburgh flood control, constitutes a comprehensive plan for flood control on the main stream of the Ohio River and on the tributary stream below the reservoirs, as set forth in House Document Numbered 306, Seventy-fourth Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $19,616,800; estimated cost of lands and damages, $10,519,600. wabash riverWabash River. Indianapolis, Ind.Walfleigh section. Indianapolis, Walfleigh section, on West Fork of White River, Indiana: Levees, bridge reconstruction, and channel improvement to protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 100, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $1,020,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $400,000. Fall Creek section. Indianapolis, Fall Creek section, on West Fork of White River, Indiana: Levees, bridge reconstruction, and channel improvement to grotect people and city property; House Document Numbered 100, eventy-third Congress, first session, and data in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $540,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $798,000. Wabash, Ind. Wabash, on Wabash River, Indiana: Levees and bridge reconstruction to protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 100, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $205,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $355,000. Peru, Ind. Peru, on Wabash River, Indiana: Improvement of levees, flood wall, and bridge changes to protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 100, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $1,720,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $780,000. Logansport, Ind. Logansport, on Wabash River, Indiana: Construction of remedial works for flood relief; data in Office of Chief of Engineers; cost, $612,000. Anderson, Ind. Anderson, on West Fork of White River, Indiana: Levees, flood wall, bridge changes, and drainage improvements to protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 100, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $127,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $258,000. Muncie, Ind. Muncie, on West Fork of White River, Indiana: Flood wall, bridge changes, and channel improvements to protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 100, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $840,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $660,000. 1587 Shoals, on East Fork of White River, Indiana: Levees to protectShoals, Ind. people and city property; House Document Numbered 100, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $127,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $65,000. Terre Haute, on Wabash River, Indiana: Levees to protect peopleTerre Haute, Ind. and city property; House Document Numbered 100, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $37,500; estimated cost of lands and damages, $2,500. Lyford Levee Unit on Wabash River, Indiana: Raising andLyford, Ind. improving existing levees to increase protection; House Document Numbered 100, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $84,650; estimated cost of lands and damages, $23,350. Levee Unit Numbered 10, on West Fork of White River, Indiana:White River, Ind.—West Fork, Unit 10. Raising and improving existing levees to increase protection to the town of Worthington, and on units; House Document Numbered 100, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $39,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $54,000. Levee Unit Numbered 9, on West Fork of White River, Indiana:Unit 9. Raising and improving existing levees to increase protection; House Document Numbered 100, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $4,025; estimated cost of lands and damages, $12,675. Gill Township Levee Unit on Wabash River, Indiana: Raising andWabash River, Ind.—Gill Township Unit. improving existing levees to increase protection; House Document Numbered 100, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $180,250; estimated cost of lands and damages, $152,150. Levee Unit Numbered 2, on Wabash River, Indiana: Raising andInd.—Unit 2. improving existing levees to increase protection; House Document Numbered 100, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $734,900; estimated cost of lands and damages, $417,100. Levee Unit Numbered 1 on Wabash River, Illinois: Raising andIll—Unit 1. improving existing levees to increase protection; House Document Numbered 100, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $812,225; estimated cost of lands and damages, $371,775. Levee Unit Numbered 3 on East Fork of White River, Indiana:White River, Ind.—East Fork, Unit 3. Raising and improving existing levees to increase protection; House Document Numbered 100, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $634,475; estimated cost of lands and damages, $281,525. Levee Unit Numbered 5 on Wabash River, Indiana: Raising andWabash River, Ind —Unit 5. improving existing levees to increase protection; House Document Numbered 100, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $1,339,500; estimated cost of lands and damages, $694,520. Levee Units Numbered 3 and 4 on Wabash River, Illinois: RaisingIll.—Units 3 and 4. and improving existing levees to increase protection; House Document Numbered 100, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $1,580,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $797,000. Levee Unit Numbered 8 on West Fork of White River, Indiana:White River, Ind.—West Fork, Unit 8. Raising and improving existing levees to increase protection; House Document Numbered 100, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $376,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $170,000. Brevoort Levee Unit on Wabash River, Indiana: Raising andWabash River, Ind.—Brevoort Unit. improving existing levees to increase protection; House Document1588 Numbered 100, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $976,500; estimated cost of lands and damages, $952,500. cumberland riverCumberland River. Pineville, Ky. Pineville, on Cumberland River, Kentucky: Levees to protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 38, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $444,200; estimated cost of lands and damages, $135,000. Middlesboro, Ky. Middlesboro on Cumberland River, Kentucky: Levees to protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 38, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $536,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $60,000. missouri river basinMissouri River basin. Kansas Citys, Mo. and Kans. Kansas Citys on Missouri and Kansas Rivers in Missouri and Kansas: Levees and flood walls to protect people and city property; in accordance with plans approved by the Chief of Engineers on recommendation of the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors and as amended by further surveys and studies now in progress at an estimated construction cost not to exceed $10,000,060; estimated cost of lands and damages, $8,000,000. Council Bluffs, Iowa. Council Bluffs near confluence of Indian Creek with Missouri River, Iowa: Channel improvement for flood control; no report to Congress; special report in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $1,532,300; estimated cost of lands and damages, $166,000. kansas riverKansas River. Topeka, Kans. Topeka, on Kansas River, Kansas: Levees and flood wall to protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 195, Seventy-third Congress, second session and as amended by further surveys and studies now in progress; estimated construction cost, $845,300; estimated cost of lands and damages, $806,500. Lawrence, Kans. Lawrence, on Kansas River, Kansas: Levees to protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 195, Seventy-third Congress, second session and as amended by further surveys and studies now in progress; estimated construction cost, $163,100; estimated cost of lands and damages, $118,100. cheyenne riverCheyenne River. Belle Fourche, S. Dak. Belle Fourche at confluence of Belle Fourche and Redwater Rivers, tributaries of Cheyenne River, South Dakota: Levees to protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 190, Seventy-second Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $24,100; estimated cost of lands and damages, $22,400. yellowstone riverYellowstone River. Forsyth, Mont. Forsyth and vicinity on Yellowstone River, Montana: Levees to protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 256, Seventy-third Congress, second session; estimated construction cost, $65,900; estimated cost of lands and damages, $13,200. little missouri riverLittle Missouri River. Wilbaux River, Mont. Wilbaux River on Beaver Creek, tributary of Little Missouri River, Montana: Levees to protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 64, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated1589 construction cost, $42,300; estimated cost of lands and damages, $62,400. Marmath on Little Missouri River, North Dakota: Levees toMarmath, N. Dak. protect people and city property; House Document Numbered 64, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $21,700; estimated cost of lands and damages, $39,000. milk riverMilk River. Saco on Milk River, Montana: Levees to protect people and citySaco, Mont. property; House Document Numbered 88, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $26,800; estimated cost of lands and damages, $5,300. Glasgow on Milk River, Montana: Levees to protect people andGlasgow, Mont. city property; House Document Numbered 88, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $25,800; estimated cost of lands and damages, $8,000. Harlem on Milk River, Montana: Levees to protect people andHarlem, Mont. city property; House Document Numbered 88, Seventy-third Congress, first session; estimated construction cost, $9,700; estimated cost of lands and damages, $9,600. los angeles and san gabriel rivers, californiaLos Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers, California. Construction of reservoirs and principal flood channels in accordanceReservoirs and flood channels. with plans to be approved by the Chief of Engineers on recommendation of the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors at an estimated construction cost not to exceed $70,000,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $5,000,000. santa and river, californiaSanta Ana River, California. Construction of reservoirs and related flood-control works for protectionOrange County, Calif. of metropolitan area in Orange County, California, in accordance with plans to be approved by the Chief of Engineers on recommendation of the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, at an estimated construction cost not to exceed $13,000,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $3,500,000. eel river, californiaEel River, California. Eel River, California: Construction of current retards and leveeDelta section. to protect agricultural community in the Delta section; House Document Numbered 194, Seventy-third Congress, second session; estimated cost, $144,000. columbia river basinColumbia River basin. Drainage and diking districts in Cowlitz County, Washington:Drainage and diking districts.Cowlitz County, Wash. Raise and improve existing levees to increase flood protection for the following listed projects for the protection of agricultural communities as set forth in a special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers: Diking and Improvement District Numbered 5, estimated construction cost, $251,500; Consolidated Diking and Improvement District Numbered 1, including protection for the town of Longview, estimated construction cost, $286,200. Drainage and diking districts, in Wahkiakum County, Washington:Wahkiakum County, Wash. Raise and improve existing levees to increase flood protection for the following listed projects for the protection of agricultural communities as set forth in a special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers: Diking Districts Numbered 1 and 3, estimated1590 construction cost, $193,000; Diking District Numbered 1 (Little Island), estimated construction cost, $26,000; Diking and Improvement District Numbered 4, estimated construction, cost $150,200. Pacific County, Wash. Pacific County Diking District, Pacific County, Washington: Raise and improve existing levees to increase flood protection for agricultural community as set forth in a special report in the Office of the Chief of Engineers, estimated construction cost, $22,700. Multnomah County, Oreg. Drainage and diking districts in Multnomah County, Oregon: Raise and improve existing levees to increase flood protection for the following agricultural communities as set forth in a special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers: Sandy Drainage District, estimated construction cost, $92,000; Multnomah Drainage District Numbered 1, estimated construction cost, $547,400; Peninsular Drainage District Numbered 1, estimated construction cost, $133,300; Peninsular Drainage District Numbered 2, estimated construction cost, $287,200. Columbia County, Oreg. Drainage and diking districts in Columbia County, Oregon: Raise and improve existing levees to increase flood protection for the following listed projects for the protection of agricultural communities as set forth in a special report on record in Office of the Chief of Engineers: Scappoose Drainage District, estimated construction cost, $329,400; Rainier Drainage District, estimated construction cost, $25,700; Beaver Drainage District, estimated construction cost, $216,600; McGruder Drainage District, estimated construction cost, $33,200; Midland Drainage District, estimated construction cost, $62,600; Marshland Drainage District, estimated construction cost, $60,100; Webb Drainage District, estimated construction cost, $61,100; Woodson Drainage District, estimated construction cost, $19,100. Clatsop County, Oreg. Drainage and diking districts in Clatsop County, Oregon: Raise and improve existing levees to increase flood protection for the following listed projects for the protection of agricultural communities, contained in a special report in Office of the Chief of Engineers: Westport District, estimated construction cost, $27,200; Tenashillahe Island, estimated construction cost, $54,700; Blind Slough, miscellaneous dikes, estimated construction cost, $92,200; Drainage District Numbered 1, estimated construction cost, $107,900; Knappa Area, miscellaneous dikes, estimated construction cost, $8,200; Karlson Island, estimated construction cost, $35,000; John Day River dikes, estimated construction cost, $27,800; Walluskia River dikes, estimated construction cost, $68,200; Youngs River dikes, estimated construction cost, $217,100; Diking District Numbered 2, estimated construction cost, $39,400; Diking District Numbered 3, estimated construction cost, $4,500; Diking District Numbered 5, estimated construction cost, $12,900; Lewis and Clark River dikes, estimated construction cost, $88,000; Warrenton Diking District Numbered 1, estimated construction cost, $23,000; Warrenton Diking District Numbered 2, estimated construction cost, $41,900; Warrenton Diking District Numbered 3, estimated construction cost, $14,900. Wahkiakum County, Wash. Drainage and Diking Districts in Wahkiakum County, Washington: Levees to protect areas now subjected to inundation; the following projects are set forth in a special report in the Office of the Chief of Engineers: Skamokawa Creek Area; estimated construction cost, $99,200; Upper Grays River Area; estimated construction cost, $78,200; Deep River Area; estimated construction cost, $46,800. Sauvie Island (areas A and B), Oreg. Sauvie Island (areas A and B) in Multnomah County, Oregon: Levees to protect areas now subject to inundation; special report1591 in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $1,364,900. Drainage and Diking Districts in Columbia County, Oregon: LeveesColumbia County, Oreg. to protect areas now subject to inundation; the following projects are set forth in a special report in the Office of the Chief of Engineers: Deer Island Area, estimated construction cost, $281,600; Prescott Area, estimated construction cost, $281,600; Prescott Area, estimated construction cost $26,200; Westland Area, estimated construction cost, $116,600. willamette riverWillamette River. Construction of bank-protection works, with channel clearing onBank protection, preventing losses by erosion, etc., designated rivers. the Willamette River, Clackamas River, Tualatin River, Molalla River, Santiam River, Marys River, Muddy Creek, and on McKenzie River in Oregon, for the reduction of flood heights and to prevent loss of land by erosion; special report in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $2,430,000. umatilla riverUmatilla River. Construction of flood-control works at Pendleton, Oregon; surveyFlood control, Pendleton, Oreg. and data in the Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $200,000. lewis riverLewis River. Cowlitz County, Diking Improvement District Numbered 1, Washington:Cowlitz County, Wash. Improve existing works for additional protection of agricultural communities; special report in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $208,000. cowlitz riverCowlitz River. Improvement of existing works for additional protection of agriculturalCowlitz County, Wash. communities in Cowlitz County, Washington: Diking, Drainage, and Improvement Districts Numbered 1, 2, and 13; special report in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $210,400. stillaguamish riverStillaguamish River. Improvement of flood channel by clearing and bank revetmentFlood channel improvement. at twenty-six places to prevent flood damages and loss of land by erosion; special report in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $261,000. puyallup riverPuyallup River. Upper Puyallup River, Washington: Bank protection; report toUpper Puyallup River, Wash. Congress not yet made; special report in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $50,000. Mud Mountain Reservoir, on White River, Washington: For floodMud Mountain Reservoir, White River, Wash. control; special report in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $3,177,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $28,000. Tacoma, on Puyallup River, Washington: Channel improvementTacoma, Wash. to protect people and industrial section of city; special report in Office of the Chief of Engineers; estimated construction cost, $894,000; estimated cost of lands and damages, $1,555,000. 1592 skagit riverSkagit River. Avon Cut-oft, Wash., construction. Construction of Avon Cut-off in Washington, for the diversion of flood waters from Skagit River to Padilla Bay for protection of lower river valley; House Document Numbered 187, Seventy-third Congress, second session; estimated construction cost, $3,150,100; estimated cost of lands and damages, $1,832,000. Sec. 6. Preliminary flood control examinations, etc., authorized. The Secretary of War is hereby authorized and directed to cause preliminary examinations and surveys for flood control at the following-named localities, and the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized and directed to cause preliminary examinations and surveys for run-off and waterflow retardation and soil erosion prevention on the watersheds of such localities: the cost thereof to be paid from appropriations heretofore or hereafter made for such purposes: *Provisos*.Specific authority required for new works.*Provided*, That no preliminary examination, survey, project, or estimate for new works other than those designated in this or some prior Supplementary reports restricted.Act or joint resolution shall be made: *Provided further*, That after the regular or formal reports made as hereby authorized on any examination, survey, project, or work under way or proposed are submitted to Congress, no supplemental or additional report or estimate shall be made unless authorized by law or by resolution of the Committee on Flood Control of the House of Representatives or the Project not authorized until adopted by law.Committee on Commerce of the Senate: *And provided further*, That the Government shall not be deemed to have entered upon any project for the improvement of any waterway mentioned in this Act until the project for the proposed work shall have been adopted by law: Maine.Androscoggin River, Maine. Kennebec River, Maine. Penobscot River, Maine. Saco River, Maine. Vermont.Passumpsic River, Vermont. Winooski River, Vermont. Dog River, Vermont. West River, Vermont, between Weston and Brattleboro. Massachusetts and New Hampshire.Merrimack River, Massachusetts and New Hampshire. Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Connecticut.Connecticut River, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Connecticut. Massachusetts.Big Black River, Massachusetts. Massachusetts and Rhode Island.Blackstone River, Massachusetts and Rhode Island. Rhode Island.Seekonk River, Rhode Island. Woonasquatucket River and tributaries, Rhode Island. Moshassuk River and tributaries, Rhode Island. New York.Birch Creek, New York. Bushnelville Creek, New York. Beaverkill Creek, New York. Beaverkill River, Sullivan County, New York. Catskill Creek, Greene County, New York. Delaware River, East Branch, Sullivan County, New York. Moose and Black Rivers, New York. Esopus Creek, New' York. Lackawack River, Sullivan County, New York. Ne versink Creek, Ulster County, New York. Neversink River, Sullivan County, New York. Oswego, Oneida, Seneca, and Clyde Rivers, New York. Rondout Creek, Ulster County, New York. Sawkill Creek, Ulster County, New York. Schoharie Creek, Greene County, New York. Schoharie Creek and tributaries, Schoharie County, New York. Woodland Creek, New York. Warner Bushkill Creek, New York.1593 Willowemoc River, Sullivan County, New York.Preliminary examinations—Continued. Sanisto River, New York. Cattaraugus Creek, New York. Cayuga Lake, New York. Chemung River, New York. Chenango River, New York. Conchocton11 So In original. River, New York. Delaware River, New York. Keuka Lake, New York. New Creek, New York. Onondaga Creek, New York. Seneca Creek, New York. Susquehanna River, New York and Pennsylvania.New York and Pennsylvania. Tioghnioga River, New York.New York. Tioga River, New York. Genesee River, New York. Passaic River, New Jersey.New Jersey. Allegheny and Susquehanna Rivers, Pennsylvania—tributaries,Pennsylvania. sources, and headwaters. Delaware River, Tinicum Township, Pennsylvania. Lackawanna River, Pennsylvania. Potomac River and tributaries.Potomac River, etc. Salyersville Licking River, near Magoffin County, Kentucky.Kentucky. The Big Sandy and its tributaries, Kentucky. The Licking River and its tributaries, Kentucky. Mud River and Wolfe Creek, Kentucky. Rough River and its tributaries, Kentucky. Nolin River and its tributaries, Kentucky. Marshy Hope Creek, Maryland.Maryland. Patuxent River and its tributaries, Maryland. James River, Virginia.Virginia. Contentnea Creek, North Carolina.North Carolina. Drum Inlet, North Carolina. Edisto River and tributaries.Edisto River and tributaries. Great Pee Dee, Lynches, Little Pee Dee, and Waccamaw Rivers,South Carolina. South Carolina. Congaree, Wateree, Santee, and Cooper Rivers, South Carolina. Coosa River and tributaries, Georgia.Georgia. Altamaha River, Georgia. Savannah River, Georgia. Ogeechee River, Georgia. Pearl River, Mississippi.Mississippi. Hillsboro River, Florida.Florida. Intracoastal Waterway throughout Broward County, Florida. Withlacoochee River, Florida. Paint Rock River, Alabama.Alabama. Coosa River and tributaries, Georgia and Alabama.Georgia and Alabama. Cataco Creek and its branches, Morgan County, Alabama.Alabama. Flint River, Alabama and Tennessee.Alabama and Tennessee. Flint Creek and its branches, Morgan County, Alabama.Alabama. Mermentau River, Louisiana.Louisiana. Buffalo Bayou, Texas.Texas. Leon River, Texas. Trinity River, Texas. Sulphur River, Texas. Neches River and tributaries, Texas. Pease River and tributaries, Texas. Nueces River and tributaries, Texas. Colorado River. Texas, above the county line between Coke and Runnels Counties.1594 Preliminary examinations— Continued.Sabine River, Texas. Lower Colorado River, Texas. Louisiana and Texas.Caddo Lake Dam and Jefferson-Shreveport Waterway, Louisiana and Texas. Arkansas.Arkansas River and Fourche Bayou, vicinity of Little Rock and North Little Rock, Arkansas. Point Remove Creek, Arkansas. Big Mulbury Creek, Arkansas. Cosatot River. Arkansas. Little River, Arkansas. Petit Jean River, Arkansas. Poteau River, Arkansas. Little Missouri River, Arkansas. Red River, Arkansas. Sulphur River, Arkansas. Missouri.North Fabius River, Missouri. Salt River, Missouri. Weldon River, Missouri. Kansas.Cow Creek, Kansas. Marais des Cygnes River, Kansas. Missouri and Kansas.Kansas Citys on Missouri and Kansas Rivers in Missouri and Kansas. Kansas.Lawrence, North Lawrence and immediately contiguous area on Kansas River, Kansas. Morris County on Grand (Neosho) River in Kansas. Manhattan, Kansas. Marmaton River, Kansas. Nebraska and Kansas.Republican River, Nebraska and Kansas. Kansas.Smoky Hill River, Kansas. Big Blue River, an affluent of the Kansas River and its tributaries, Kansas. Verdigris River, Kansas. Illinois.Spoon River, Illinois. North Dakota.Souris River, North Dakota. Minnesota.Minnesota River, Minnesota. Cannon River, Minnesota. Crow River, Minnesota. Rum River, Minnesota. Roseau River, Minnesota. Saint Louis River, Minnesota. Minnesota and Wisconsin.Saint Croix River, Minnesota and Wisconsin. Ohio.Mad River, Ohio. Pennsylvania.Youghiogheny River, Pennsylvania. West Virginia.Cheat River and tributaries, West Virginia. Greenbrier River and tributaries, West Virginia. Wisconsin.Fond du Lac River and tributaries, Wisconsin. Fox River and tributaries, Wisconsin. Wyoming.Snake River and tributaries, Wyoming. North Platte River and tributaries, Wyoming. Big Horn River and tributaries, Wyoming. Green River and tributaries, Wyoming. Belle Fourche River and tributaries, Wyoming. Powder River and tributaries, Wyoming. Michigan.Saginaw River, Michigan. Sebewaing River, Michigan. Ohio.Sandusky River, Ohio. Mad River at Springfield, Ohio. Colorado.Apishapa River, Colorado. Purgatoire (Picket Wire) River, Colorado.1595 Cuchara River, Colorado.Preliminary examinations—Continued. Huerfano River, Colorado. Gila River and tributaries above the San Carlos project diversionArizona and New Mexico. dam, Arizona and New Mexico. Dry Cimarron River, Union County, New Mexico.New Mexico. Santa Cruz and Sonoita Rivers, Santa Cruz County, Arizona.Arizona. Sabino Canyon, Pima County, Arizona. Lower Santa Cruz River, Pinal County, Arizona. Queen Creek, Arizona. Hassayampa River, Arizona. San Diego River, California.California. Los Angeles River and tributaries, California. San Joaquin River from Herndon to Antioch and its main east side tributaries. San Diego, San Luis Rey and Tia Juana Rivers in San Diego County. Salinas River in Monterey County. Pajaro River in San Benito County. Eel and Mad Rivers in Humboldt County. Bear, Black Rascal and Mariposa Creeks in Merced County. American, Feather, Yuba, and Bear Rivers, tributaries of the Sacramento River. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Valleys, California. San Gabriel River and tributaries, California. Canal Creek, California. Fahrens Creek, California. Black Rascal Creek, California. Bear Creek, California. Miles Creek, California. Owens Creek. California. Duck Creek, California. Marposa Creek, California. Little Deadmans Creek, California. Big Deadmans Creek, California. Burns Creek, California. Ventura Harbor, California. Coos River and tributaries, Oregon.Oregon. Coquille River and tributaries, Oregon, Nehalem, Miami, Kilchis, Wilson, Trask, and Tillamook Rivers, Oregon. Nehalem River and tributaries, Clatsop, Columbia, and Wash-ington Counties, Oregon. Rogue River and tributaries, Oregon. Siuslaw River and tributaries, Oregon. Salmon River, Oregon. Siletz River and tributaries, Oregon. Umpqua River and tributaries, Oregon. Willamette River, Oregon. Yaquina River and tributaries, Oregon. Cowlitz River and tributaries, Washington.Washington. Chehalis River and tributaries, Washington. Columbia River and tributaries, Washington. Goldsborough Creek, Washington. Lewis River and tributaries, Washington. Skykomish River, Washington. Snoqualmie River, Washington. Snohomish River and tributaries, Washington. Skagit River and tributaries, Washington. Green River, Washington. Nooksac11 So in original. River, Washington.1596 Preliminary examinations—Continued.Yakima River and tributaries, Washington. Stilaguamish River, Washington. Nisqually River, Washington. Cedar River, Washington. Coos River and tributaries, Washington. Duwamish River, Washington. Samamish River, Washington. Walla Walla River and tributaries, Washington. Idaho.Spokane River and tributaries, Idaho. Alaska.Tanana River and Chena Slough, Alaska. Lowell Creek, Alaska. Oklahoma.Kenton Reservoir, Cimarron River, Oklahoma. Eufaula Reservoir, Oklahoma. Pensacola Reservoir, Oklahoma. Markham Ferry Reservoir, Oklahoma. Fort Gibson Reservoir, Oklahoma. Wister Reservoir, Oklahoma. Oolagah Reservoir, Oklahoma. Braman Reservoir, Oklahoma. Mannford Reservoir, Oklahoma. South of Antwine, Levees on Chikaskia River, Oklahoma. Tulsa and West Tulsa Levees on Arkansas River, Oklahoma. Tenkiller Ferry Reservoir on Illinois River, Oklahoma. Eagle Town Reservoir, Oklahoma. Sec. 7. Surveys authorized of flood-control operations with opportunities for power development. The Secretary of War is hereby authorized and directed to continue surveys, studies, and reports at the following-named localities, where, according to the surveys and estimates already made, opportunities appear to exist for useful flood-control operations with economical development of hydroelectric power whenever sufficient markets to absorb such power become available, the cost of these surveys to be paid from appropriations heretofore or hereafter made under the authorization in this Act or subsequent similar Acts: Projects designated.Table Rock Reservoir, Missouri. Clark Hill Reservoir, Georgia, Reservoirs in Grand (Neosho) River. Wild Cat Shoals Reservoir, Arkansas. Denison Reservoir, Texas. Big Horn Canyon Reservoir, Montana. Hungry Horse Dam, Montana. Reservoirs in Roanoke and Tar Rivers, North Carolina. Rocky River (Love’s Ford and Crump’s Ford), North Carolina. Wilkesboro Dam, Yadkin River, North Carolina. Sec. 8. Mississippi River Flood Control Act not affected.Vol. 45, p. 534. Nothing in this Act shall be construed as repealing or amending any provision of the Act entitled “An Act for the control of floods on the Mississippi River and its tributaries, and for other purposes”, approved May 15, 1928, or any provision of any law Funds and provisions herein considered supplemental.amendatory thereof. The authority conferred by this Act and any funds appropriated pursuant thereto for expenditure are supple mental to all other authority and appropriations relating to the departments or agencies concerned, and nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit or retard any department or agency in carrying out similar and related activities heretofore or hereafter authorized, or to limit the exercise of powers conferred on any department or agency by other provisions of law is11 So in original. carrying out similar and related activities. Sec. 9. Appropriation authorized.Division of expenditure. The sum of $310,000,000 is authorized to be appropriated for carrying out the improvements herein and the sum of $10,000,000 is authorized to be appropriated and expended in equal amounts by 1597the Departments of War and Agriculture for carrying out any examinations and surveys provided for in this Act and other Acts of Congress: *Provided.* That not more than $50,000,000 of such sum*Provisos.*Maximum expenditure during 1937.Relief of unemployment. shall be expended during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1937: *Provided further*, That for the relief of unemployment, in addition to the regular appropriation, persons may be employed on such works of improvement and the compensation of said persons when so employed shall be paid from the funds available to the Works Progress Administration for the continuance of relief and work relief on useful projects. Approved, June 22, 1936. Making appropriations to supply deficiencies in certain appropriations for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1936, and prior fiscal years, to provide supplemental appropriations for the fiscal years ending June 30, 1936, and June 30, 1937, and for other purposes. 1936-06-22 689 Chapter 49 Stat. 1597 74 2 United States Government Publishing Office text/xml EN Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain. Digitization Vendor 2025-01-07 public [CHAPTER 689.] AN ACT Making appropriations to supply deficiencies in certain appropriations for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1936, and prior fiscal years, to provide supplemental appropriations for the fiscal years ending June 30, 1936, and June 30, 1937, and for other purposes. June 22, 1936.[[H. R. 12624](/us/bill/74/hr/12624).][
Connections7 cite this · traces to 4
4 references not yet in our index
  • 49 Stat. 1566
  • 49 Stat. 1568
  • 49 Stat. 1569
  • 49 Stat. 1597
Citation graph
cites case law
Public Law 738
to provide for the control of the floods of the Mississippi River and of the Sacramento River, California, and for other purposes”, approved March 1, 1917, the cost thereof to be paid from appropriations heretofore or hereafter made for examinations, surveys, and contingencies of rivers and harbors
Stat.×7
Stat.Public Law 738
Stat.Chapter 54
Stat.Chapter 135
Stat.Public Law 83
Stat.49 Stat. 1566
Stat.49 Stat. 1568
Stat.49 Stat. 1569
Stat.49 Stat. 1597
Cites 8Cited by 7 across 1 source
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.