OCR Text |
Show A28 APPENDIX 204 of the waters, appears to be recognized and adequately provided for by Article III (c) of the compact. On December 12, 1895, Hon. Judson Harmon, Attorney General of the United States, in a letter to the Secretary of State (21 Op. Atty. Gen. 274), discussed fully the obligations of the United States toward Mexico in relation to the Rio Grande, both as to navigation and irrigation, international rights on that river being governed by the same treaties as on the Colorado. He reached the conclusion that Mexico had no legal basis, either under the treaties or under general principles of international law, for complaint against the construction of a dam on the Rio Grande within the United States, irrespective of its effect upon the navigability of the river below the boundary line or upon the irrigation of lands in that country. Should Congress take the view opposed to the policy of preferring reclamation to navigation and desire to leave navigation as a superior use, the purpose can be accomplished by a reservation or exception in the approving legislation under the last sentence of the paragraph quoted without affecting the balance of the compact. RELATIONS WITH THE REPUBLIC OP MEXICO, EXCLUSIVE OF NAVIGATION Some 200,000 acres of land in the Republic of Mexico are now irrigated by the waters of the Colorado River, and it is understood that there are additional lands in Mexico that might be brought under irrigation. The compact does not undertake to deal with these lands nor with any rights which may exist to the diversion of water for their benefit. It was realized that this subject was beyond the powers of the commission as defined in the various legislative acts and the act of Congress, which authorized the apportionment of waters only among the several States interested, and that the question could be properly determined only by agreement between the United States and the Republic of Mexico, through the treaty-making agencies of the Federal Government. At the same time the commission realized that it was not beyond the bounds of possibility that, as a matter of international comity, a treaty or agreement might at some time be entered into by the two nations which would establish some valid rights to the irrigation of these Mexican lands, with a resulting obligation upon the United States to allow some quantity of water to pass the international boundary for their use, under such terms and conditions as might be agreed to. To provide for this possible future contingency, the terms of which cannot now be foreseen, the compact provides (Art. Ill, c) for the equal distribution of this burden between the two basins in the United States. By reference to the letter of the Secretary of State, already quoted, it will be seen that he considers this provision adequate to cover the situation. |
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] : |