OCR Text |
Show 162 WAR FOR THE COLORADO RIVER dock said he took an opposite view, and thought the resolutions would delay a settlement. "Why?" asked Rep. Winfield K. Denton. Murdock appeared to be somewhat lost. "When somebody brings in a bill, and asks that it be acted on in some committee, some lawyer is apt to say, 'Is not this matter in litigation?' 'Yes.' 'Well, Congress is no place to try a lawsuit.' " Now it was Keating who appeared somewhat con- fused. "As I understand it, suits of this character be- tween sovereign states are brought in the first instance in the Supreme Court; is not that correct?" Murdock did not reply, but Rep. Lane did: "Yes," he told Keating. "And there are certain rules of the court as to the time for proceeding in that court," Keating continued. "I cannot conceive of how it would run into a matter of several years if either state started action promptly after reporting the bill out." California, said Murdock, had facilities for draining the river dry, and Arizona had to depend on Congress for protection. He thought there already were sufficient laws passed since 1928 to give that protection. Keating asked: "You feel that the determination [of the controversy] on its merits should be made by Congress rather than by the court?" Murdock did. "Is there a dispute between California . . . and these states. . . as to the meaning and the proper interpretation of the 1928 law?" Keating inquired. "I think that is true," said Murdock. "And you feel that dispute should be settled by an act of Congress rather than by a court proceeding?" |