OCR Text |
Show -42- Full opportunity was afforded by the Conference for the presentation of Arizona's position and claims, and advantage of the opportunity was taken to the extent of the ability possessed by the members of the Commission. The main discussions revolved about the questions (1) of a division between the States of Arizona, California and Nevada of the waters of the Colorado River System available to the States of the Lower Division; (2) the limitation to be placed upon the Republic of Mexico as to its right to waters of the Colorado River; (3) the ownership of the States in and to the bed and banks of navigable streams; their right to control the appropriation, distribution and use of waters within their borders, and to compensation for the use of their land and water employed in federal government projects; (4) the extent of the benefits to accrue to the States in the case of power development in the river by the federal government, and division of such benefit between States whose lands and waters are jointly used in any such development. Briefly it may be said that questions 2 and 3 were resolved, to the extent that they might be resolved by the Conference, to the entire satisfaction of Arizona's representatives and in complete accord with the views by them advanced. The; Mexican Question A resolution was adopted by the Conference, declaring adherence of the seven States of the Colorado River Basin to the policy that waters of the Colorado River stored on American soil should be for the benefit of American lands and interests; that Mexico should acquire no right, legal or moral, to the use of such stored waters; requesting the President and the State Department of the United States to act promptly in the matter of effecting a treaty with Mexico which would define and limit that country's rights in and to the waters of the Colorado River, and asking that in the formation of any commission for the purpose of negotiating a treaty the States of the Colorado River Basin be adequately represented. State; Rights In recognition of the principles embodied in question 3, the "Pitt-man Resolution," so called from the circumstance that it was introduced and ably championed by Senator Key Pittman of Nevada, was adopted, after many delays and persistent obstruction by the California representatives with no dissenting vote except of that State. The resolution is deemed of such importance that it is here set forth in full. "Whereas, it is the settled law of this country that the ownership of and dominion and sovereignty over lands covered by navigable waters within the limits of the several states of the Union belong to the respective states within which they are found, with the consequent right to use or dispose of any portion thereof, when that can be done without substantial impairment of the interests of the public in the |
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. |