OCR Text |
Show 27 the California limitation. Why I say it must be left there is for this reason: California's request, as stated in their brief, is to say to you, Mr. Secretary, as the agent of the Government of the United states, that "I will not permit any vat>r under my control to be put on federal lands under ray control or other lands within the boundaries of the State of Arizona unless and until Arizona comes in here and agrees to the California construction of the Act, the Compact and the California limitation." ****** If this contract ie approved and signed by you, I do not believe that the questions of construction, as between Arizona and California of the terras of the compact, the act and the California iimitattm vill ever become the subject of litigation. J say that for this reason, that I believe there vill be ample water in that river to supply the California contracts, and to supply our right under this contract. If, unfortunately, anything should ever develop thefc vould make it advisable for either state to bring that litigation, why, then the rights of California under their contracts, and tht» rights of Arizona under this contract would depend, not upon the terms of this contract o? its language,, but upon the construction oi the Colorado River Compact, the Bouldei* Canyon Project Act, and the California |
Source |
Original book: [State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, California, City of San Diego, California, and County of San Diego, California, defendants, United States of America, State of Nevada, State of New Mexico, State of Utah, interveners] : |