My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP09503
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
9001-10000
>
WSP09503
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:54:06 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 3:40:02 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8278.400
Description
Title I - Mexican Treaty
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
5/10/1962
Author
CWCB - D. Hamburg
Title
Mexican Water Treaty Negotiations Pertaining to the Colorado River
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
60
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />. <br /> <br />Middle of P. 34l to top of P. 342: <br /> <br />"SENATOR DOV1NEY. Returning to the question of any <br />implied guaranty in the treaty that water shall be of <br />sufficient quality to be available for irrigation, I <br />suppose that you formed your opinion merely from the <br />language of the treaty itself, without regard to those <br />conversations and exchanges between the two Governments <br />that you have spoken of. Would you still be of the <br />opinion that from the language of the treaty itself a <br />court or an international arbitration tribunal would not <br />hold that Mexico was entitled to water that was fit for <br />irrigation purposes? <br /> <br />MR. TIPTON. That is my unqualified opinion, Senator, <br />because the language of the treaty resulted from these <br />conversations that you mention, and the language of the <br />treaty was just as plain as it was possible to make it, <br />and in my unqualified opinion the language of the treaty <br />is such that Mexico could not ask for more water than <br />1,500,000 acre-feet for any purpose whatsoever. <br /> <br />SENATOR DOWNEY. You do not think that just adding <br />three simple words, "regardless of quality", would have <br />made it any plainer? <br /> <br />MR. TIPTON. The language of the treaty is perfectly <br />plain. <br /> <br />SENATOR DOWNEY. Now, Mr. Tipton, you say that if the <br />treaty had included the expression, "regardless of qual- <br />ity", that might perhaps have prevented the Mexican <br />Senate from ratifying the treaty? <br /> <br />MR. TIPTON. The ones in the Mexican Senate are not <br />so conversant with the situation on the river as those <br />who negotiated the treaty. Those who negotiated the <br />treaty understood fully what they were doing. They under- <br />stand fully what the condition might be ultimately, while <br />those in the Senate might not be conversant with that <br />condition. The language in the treaty is plain and it <br />means one thing, and one thing only, and the ones who <br />negotiated this treaty for Mexico understand it. They <br />also understand about what the quality might be under <br />ul timate conditions. I.n other words, there was no ten- <br />dency on the part of the United States negotiators to <br /> <br />-31- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.