AZ vs. CA:11 California Exhibits, Vol. XI; Nos. 1001-1011; 1101-1109; 1201-1251; 1301-13431301-1343

page 4

3. That it would necessarily force upon Arizona measures of legal defense which could only end with the final word of the highest courts of the land, and therefore not only would visit great expense upon the people and the Government of this State, but great and unnecessary delay, with its attendant inestimable economic losses, in the inauguration of development of the Colorado River, and in the conversion of that stream from a national menace into a national asset. 4. That the construction of the works proposed, as and in the manner and under the terms and conditions proposed, would work irreparable injury to Arizona, prejudice its most vital interests and offer up its growth and welfare as a sacrifice to the ambitions of a sister State. 5. That by authorizing, and under the plan of development proposed, making certain an inequitable division of the waters of the Colorado River, the constitu-ionality of these measures, or either of them, would become a proper subject of inquiry in the equity branch of the Supreme Court of the United States, which has jurisdiction in all maters of dispute between States, thereby further prolonging a determination of the vital issues involved and putting farther into the future the day when the development of the Colorado may be begun. 6. That the passage of either of these measures would violate and contravene both the letter and the spirit of the Act of Congress approved August 19, 1921, "to permit a compact or agreement between the States of Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming, respecting the division and apportionment of the waters of the Colorado River." 7. That although the Act of August 19, 1921, provides among other things "that any such compact or agreement shall not be binding or obligatory upon any of the parties thereto unless and until the same shall have