Laserfiche WebLink
<br />300 <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />~Qc:cotar;y of the int.orior, Cur.nnorco and Agriculture, sta'~ing 'Gl"l0.t I vm.s <br /> <br />not vll'iting as a member of tho Colorado Rivor Commission nt all but aD an <br /> <br />t <br /> <br />officor of California stating that ,in my judgmont it would.bo Q~"iso at <br /> <br /> <br />this timo to erant a lioonso to Hr. Girand or any othor porson for tho <br /> <br />oroction of works for genorating poyror. I havonot mado that ll.tatOlOlont to. <br /> <br />any one of tho so conunissionors horotofore. I thoui'pt it noed not be made; <br /> <br />but I do not caro TIithout further onlightenn~nt as to TIhat may oocur in <br /> <br />'. . <br /> <br />tho futuro, to chango myattitudo as an officor of tho Stato of California. <br /> <br />.JUDGE DAVIS: My judgment on it is _ <br /> <br />MR. NORVIEL: (Intorruptine) .Just a moment. I would liko to asle <br /> <br />Mr. McCluro to stato his reasons for assuming that attitudo. <br /> <br />Mn. MC CLUHE: Duo program at a timo, aB 'Colonol Sorugham sUG(lestod. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Aftor this mattor is out of the w8;y, thon wo can approach tho noxt. proeram. <br />. ' <br /> <br />I do not considor that. it is our provinco at all to .pass on tho matteX' ef <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />tho application for a projoct for powor. <br /> <br />CHAIRlU\.N HOOVER: Judgo Davis? <br /> <br />JUDGE DAVIS: The vory last romark that Mr. McCluro mado, I thinl( <br /> <br />states my attitudo, I feol that TIO aro met horo under very definito rOHerS <br /> <br />and at the samo time under very definito limitations of p01'fOr. He havo <br /> <br />one duty and that I think we havo already accomplished, It is not .-rUhin <br /> <br />the provinco of this cenunission to determine tho value of any particular <br /> <br />project on tho river whethor it is for irrigation or pOVIor or anything olso, <br />. . <br /> <br />If it woro not for tho fact that tho Fodoral Power Commissioner has TIX'itton <br /> <br />to us a latter I should say that wo should tako no actionwhato:or regardine <br /> <br /> <br />tho mattor. .But sinco no. havo rocoivod tho letter, I thi.nlc it should 100 <br /> <br />j,: <br /> <br />answored. Do ansvror it by saying tho matt or is 1;>"yond our jurisdiction <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />and personally I would bo willing to go ono step :moro and say the mattaX' is <br /> <br />beyond our jurisdiction and thorefore we have no objection to thD issuing <br />