| OCR Text |
Show 224 WAR FOR THE COLORADO RIVER There was evidence to indicate, however, that even though they were rushed, badgered and sometimes impugned, the conservationists, California witnesses, and other opponents had scored sufficient points to make Aspinall apprehensive. When the last witness had con- cluded, he announced that he would hold special hear- ings, to hear additional testimony from the top men of the Bureau of Reclamation. No other witnesses would be called, and there would be no rebuttal. The Bureau men would have their say while all others would be forced to keep silent.277 The Bureau luminaries appeared on April 18, 20 and 22. While the meetings were in some respects reminis- cent of the Anderson-Watkins love-feast in the Senate, there were times when sour notes were heard that made Aspinall and Company wince. Usually the hard going came when Reps. Saylor and Hosmer had their turns to ask questions of the hand-picked witnesses. Reclamation Commissioner Dexheimer probably took the worst pummeling from the two astute congressmen. He had prepared a table which, he explained, showed how benefits from the crsp would be distributed among the states during its construction period.278 Every state, he declared, would receive money for labor and materials, and together they would benefit to the tune of $923,052,000 and 184,610 man-years. Rep. Pillion had been rendered speechless by the cost of the Navajo Project, and Rep. Hosmer was equally dumbfounded by Dexheimer's study, but he managed to hang on to his voice. "The expressed philosophy of the Bureau of Recla- mation," said Hosmer,279 "embraces the contention that reclamation is all things to all men. As it has done year |
