360 Antiquities Act of June 8, 1906, entitled “An Act for the perservation of American antiquities … ”; 34 Stat. 225.

361 Historic Sites Act of August 21, 1935; 49 Stat. 666, entitled “An Act to provide for the preservation of American sites, buildings, objects and antiquities of national significance and for other purposes.”

362 Act of July 10, 1935; 49 Stat. 477, entitled “An Act to create a National Park Trust Fund Board, and for other purposes.” The model for the National Park Trust is found in the National Trust of Great Britain, a private organization established in 1895 which was strengthened by the National Trust Act of 1907, incorporating the pre-existing organization, for the purpose of preserving historic buildings and lands. The governing board of the English Trust is a self-perpetuating body consisting of members and representatives of learned and scientific societies; in the United States, the Board consists of the Secretaries of the Treasury and the Interior and the Director of the National Park Service and two persons appointed by the President for five years each. The purpose of the National Park Trust Fund is very similar to that of the English National Trust and the authority given to receive gifts, estates, to set up corporations and other trusts for the administration of preserved sites and antiquities, is much the same except that the American Act gives greater powers. Pertinent information relative to foreign legislation, including Great Britain, can be found in the comparative “Report to the Secretary of the Interior on the Preservation of Historic Sites and Buildings,” prepared by T. Thomas Schneider, in 1935, now in press.

363 At Tonto National Monument, Arizona, there is urgent need for stabilizing walls of upper rooms built over several feet of undisturbed cultural debris. Stabilization must begin with foundation structures, which means that the midden must be excavated with scientific investigation. At Aztec Ruins National Monument, Colorado, it will be necessary to clear two rooms and to provide technical archaeological supervision for excavations in the plaza incident to trail preparation and the drainage of the area. At Chaco Canyon National Monument, N. M., stabilization of walls in the ruins of Chetro Ketl and Pueblo Bonito requires archaeological direction. The Chaco, one of the best known and oldest explored areas in the Southwest, is regarded as one of the most advantageous points at which to work out methods of coordinating techniques of field exploration with the problems of structural restoration and stabilization.

364 Cataloguing devices employed to date are admittedly inadequate, and temporary. The best general summary of the problem, with recommendations for procedure, is to be found in the Report of the Recreation Committee of the National Park Service to the National Resources Board in 1936. Very regrettably, this admirable document has not been made available in published form. The section on “Historical and Archaeological Sites” states the principles involved in a national survey appraisal of sites, stressing conservation as the objective, and provides a tentative scheme or schedule for evaluation. A list of known archaeological sites in the United States, whose preservation or acquisition was urgently recommended, was graded into “A,” “B,” and “ C” classes on the basis of their apparent scientific and historic importance. “A” sites were “ … selected because of their preëminent significance and because certain of these are faced with imminent destruction through unqualified excavation.” “‘A’ sites especially designated (s.d.) were recommended for semi-permanent preservation …” on the grounds that: (1) under existing conditions of archaeological exploration they might yield only duplicate information; or because, (2) steady archaeological advances in scientific techniques and methods would make them even more important repositories of scientific data than had appeared, or would appear, now—i.e., tree-ring dating has changed evaluations of a number of leading southwestern sites. These “A s.d.” sites might thus constitute a special group of “reserved monuments.” In connection with this classification, the recommendation was made: “ … That scientifically valuable archaeological sites on Federal lands not at present within a national park or monument be designated as national monuments and that Federal protection be given the sites so designated; that scientifically valuable archaeological sites on other lands be acquired and added to the monuments; that all archaeological sites which are administered by the Federal Government be classified and treated according to the system of archaeological categories developed herein above, namely ‘A,’ ‘A (s.d.),’ ‘B,’ ‘B (s.d.),’ ‘C,’ ‘C (s.d.)’ …”

365 The following accounts concerning this little-known, but very important site, should be mentioned: Salley, A. S., Introduction to F. M. Hutson's Prince William's Parish and Plantations, Richmond, 1935, gives his view of Spanish settlement on Parris Island; also see his conclusions in Appendix C of Mrs. Connor's Jean Ribault, Florida Historical Society, 1927. Major George H. Osterhout, Jr., reports on the explorations which uncovered pertinent data in his article, “Three Hundred and Fifty Years”; being the story of “Charles’ Fort,” built by Jean Ribault in 1562 on what is now known as Parris Island, S. C., in the Marine Corps Gazette for June, 1923; also, by G. H. Osterhout, “The Sites of French and Spanish Forts in Port Royal Sound,” Transactions of the Huguenot Society of South Carolina, No. 141, Charleston, S. C., 1936, pp. 22–35.