OCR Text |
Show sional Record of May 28, 1928. On that date the senior Senator from Nevada [Mr. Pittman] asked to have the amendment printed in the Congressional Record, for the information of the Senate.1 The Presiding Officer. (Mr. Fess in the chair). May the Chair ask the Senator whether the amendment he has in mind has been offered and is now pending? Mr. Hayden. If it has not been, I intend to offer it very soon. The Presiding Officer. The clerks at the desk want to know the status. It has not been offered yet, it appears. Mr. Hayden. I shall offer the amendment in a few moments. At the time to which I have just referred the Senator from Nevada stated that at a conference held in the city of Denver during the summer of 1927, at the instance of the Governors of the States of New Mexico, Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming, there were present governors and commissioners from the States of Nevada, Arizona, and California. The subject of paramount importance, the subject that was the most discussed at that conference, was an adjustment of the differences between the States of Arizona and California with respect to an apportionment of the waters of the lower Colorado River Basin, in order that, if those two States might be brought into accord, the Colorado River compact, which affected the entire seven States, might be ratified and approved by all of the States. Each of the States in the lower basin was called upon to submit to the Denver conference a statement of the 1Supra, pp. 4-5. |
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. |