AZ vs. CA:12 California Exhibits, Vol. XII; Nos. 1350-1383; 1400-1446; 1501-1518; 1601-1603; 1701-1703

page 51

D JL that they will be the equivalent of direct taxation. Furthermore, following the period of amortization, at a time when revenues from power should be considerable, the payments to Arizona and Nevada for the use of their resources cease. Exemption of the Gila River from an embargo which is placed upon the granting of power permits by the Federal Power Commission, on the Colorado or its tributaries, until the Act becomes effective, is, upon analysis, found to be no exemption at all, inasmuch as a subsequent section of the Act (13c) subjects all licenses or other privileges from the United States, and their recipients, to the provisions of the Colorado River Compact. A grave injustice to the Yuma Project which was proposed in the original bill is eliminated; reference to Arizona's amendment of certain "irrevocable ordinances" of her constitution, which were contained in the Enabling Act, is dropped, and other minor amendments were designed to lessen Arizona's opposition, but a final summing-up finds the Act still grossly unjust and violative of this State's indubitable rights. It proposes the allocation by Act of Congress, of the waters of the Colorado River, something which is not within the power of Congress to do, and the proposed allocation is in itself unfair. It proposes to make the Colorado River Compact effective as to seven States when ratified by six, by putting behind it the power of the Federal government over the public lands. It ignores the State's ownership of the waters within its borders, and the exclusive power to control its appropriation and use.