OCR Text |
Show 90 WAR FOR THE COLORADO RIVER the issued must be settled." He read into the record a letter to Millikin from Governor Warren in which Warren expressed the opinion that the proposed liti- gation could "be conducted and concluded within a brief time, because the essential issues between the states are legal in character and do not involve inter- minable examinations of factual evidence. I believe the case could be presented to the court on an agreed state- ment of facts." How mistaken Warren was, would come to be known. Once the controversy was before the court, half a dozen years would pass before the initial ruling would come down. Senator McCarran, one of the authors of the resolu- tions, was in Bethesda Hospital, but he had prepared a statement, and Knowland read it to the committee.71 "Under our system of government," McCarran declared, "the Supreme Court is the exclusive arbiter of interstate disputes, and no other agency has the power to construe or interpret the various laws and documents, no other tribunal can resolve interstate disputes." An opinion requested of the Department of Justice by the subcommittee, arrived during Knowland's testi- mony. It was signed by Peyton Ford, an assistant to the Attorney- general.7 2 Behind the scenes some important conferences had been held prior to the issuance of the Justice Depart- ment's statement. As soon as the Supreme Court Reso- lutions had been introduced by California and Nevada, McFarland and Hayden, both administration stalwarts, had scurried down Pennsylvania Avenue to talk with Attorney-general Tom Clark and Ford. They had per- mission to speak for several other senators from Colorado River Basin states - notably Millikin, O'Mahoney, |