OCR Text |
Show -20- An Unequal Conflict During the month of February, when the Seventieth Congress had gotten into full swing and the committee hearings on the Swing and Johnson bills in the respective houses had been concluded, the offices of the Arizona Commission, which from the time of the Commission's organization had been maintained in the Capitol building, were moved from Phoenix to Washington, together with an extensive accumulation of data bearing upon all phases of the Colorado River question, and all files and records that might be found useful. An office and headquarters were maintained, under the personal charge of the Secretary of the Commission, practically until the adjournment of Congress. The entire time of not less than four members of the Commission, and for considerable periods as many as seven members, supplemented on occasions by a number of public-spirited citizens of Arizona who acted as advisors, was devoted to the cause. Three months were given on this occasion to carrying out the Commission's duty, (1) to effect, if possible, an agreement with representatives of the interested States, which might eventuate in legislation mutually agreeable and just to all, or, failing that, (2) to prevent legislation which would violate Arizona's rights and be disastrous to Arizona's interests. The Commission's endeavors to influence legislation were of course merely supplemental to the splendid efforts, and entirely subject to the direction, of Arizona's representatives in Congress, United States Senators Henry F. Ashurst and Carl Hayden, and Representative Lewis W. Douglas. These public servants were unceasing in their efforts to protect the interests of Arizona's people. During the course of the months spent by the Commission in Washington, many informal confer- |
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] : California exhibits. |