| OCR Text |
Show - 3 - VI. The proposed contract contains numerous obscurities and ambiguities, and therefore should not be executed. VII. The awarding of the proposed contract to the State of Arizona, which State is not a signatory to the Colorado River Compact, would constitute a gross injury and injustice to the Upper Basin States. VIII. The contract proposed by the State of Arizona is so manifestly illegal that, if executed, it would be subject to judicial annulment. Preliminary Statement Regarding the Colorado River Compact and Boulder Canyon Project Act. The Project Act, under which the dam is being built and the Arizona contract is proffered, is predicated upon the Colorado River Compact, whether signed by all seven of the Colorado River States, or as it was in fact, only by six. The Act as will appear presently, is so worded, purposely so, that when carried out Arizona's signature to the Compact as one of the seven states, from the practical point of view, through the Government's exercise of its authority over its dam and public domain, becomes unnecessary, although legally required. The Compact had for its purpose the equitable apportionment in perpetuity of the water of the entire Colorado River System between the Upper and the Lower Basins as defined by the Compact; the states principally interested in the Upper Basin apportionment being Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming, and the states princi- |
| 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] : |
