OCR Text |
Show 192 WAR FOR THE COLORADO RIVER The trend of Rep. D'Ewart's thinking was similar to that of Miller, and he asked Carson if language could not be written into the project bill which would support a suit in the Supreme Court to settle the water rights controversy.261 "No," said Carson. "Could we not say that, in view of the question as to the ownership of this water, and until such time as the Supreme Court settled the argument, we will post- pone authorization?" D'Ewart inquired. Carson again said "No," and Murdock looked ex- tremely worried. The suggestions inherent in the ques- tions of Miller and D'Ewart were unpleasant to him. May 9, 1949 Engle announced that when the project proponents had completed their presentation he would move to postpone all further consideration of the project until the legal controversy had been settled, one way or another.262 "It is perfectly ridiculous for Congress to take up its time to pile up huge bales of testimony with respect to a project for which there is no assured legal supply of water, and the way to do it is to get the adjudication first," declared Engle. He then proceeded to question Carson on legal ques- tions, and for the balance of the session the two attorneys engaged in a bitter argument, which was rarely inter- rupted. May 11, 1949 Engle injected the question of land speculation in the project area, and asked Bureau Engineer Larson if it was correct that 420 farms in the area contained fifty- |