OCR Text |
Show 540 INTERSTATE ADJUDICATIONS (a) The Act of Congress, August 19,1921, c. 72,42 Stat. 171, which authorized Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming to enter into a compact regarding the waters of the Colorado River; and the appointment of a representative to act for the United States. (b) The Colorado River Compact dated November 24, 1922, signed by representatives of the seven States-to "become binding and ob- ligatory when it shall have been approved by the legislature of each of the signatory States and by the Congress of the United States." (a) The Act of Congress, December 21,1928, known as the Boulder Canyon Project Act, c. 42,45 Stat. 1057, which approved the Colorado River Compact subject to certain limitations and conditions, the ap- proval to become effective upon the ratification of the compact, as so modified, by the legislature of California and at least five of the other six States. (d) The Act of California, c. 16, March 4, 1929, limiting its use of the waters of the Colorado River in conformity with the Boulder Canyon Project Act. (e) The Proclamation of the President declaring the Boulder Can- yon Project Act to be in effect, June 25,1929,46 Stat. 3000. (f) The General Regulation of the Secretary of the Interior, con- cerning the storage of water in Boulder Dam Reservoir and the de- livery thereof, dated April 23, 1930, as amended September 28, 1931. The bill alleges, among other things: That no right of Arizona has yet been interfered with; that attempts will be made hereafter to interfere with its rights; that it is not pos- sible to bring the issues which will arise to an immediate judicial in- vestigation or determination and it may be years before this can be done because "the cause or causes of action have not accrued and may not accrue for years to come"; that facts known only to certain named persons will be evidence material in the determination of such con- troversy or controversies; that these persons will be necessary wit- nesses in the prosecution of the action or actions which Arizona will be compelled to institute in order to protect its rights and those of persons claiming under it; and that all the persons with present knowledge of the present facts may not be available as witnesses when the cause or causes of action shall have accrued to the plaintiff. The prayer is for process to take the oral depositions and to perpetuate the testimony of these witnesses. On February 20, 1934, a rule issued to those named as defendants to show cause why leave to file the bill should not be granted. All filed returns. Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming stated that they have no objection to the filing of the bill or to the taking of any competent testimony; and prayed that to each state should be granted the right of cross-examination and the right to object to any such testimony on any ground either at the time of the taking or of its presentation to this Court. California and the public agencies of that state expressed a doubt as to the existence of juris- diction in this Court. They opposed the granting of the motion on the ground that the testimony if taken would not be admissible in evidence; opposed also on the ground that the United States is an indispensable party; and insisted that the bill should not be received in the absence of consent by the United States to be sued. The Sec- |