WSP10568

• File Number: 8200.300.40.A
• Description: Colorado River Compact
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Date: 11/19/1922
• Author: Co. R Compact Comm.
• Title: Minutes of Colorado Compact Commission - Meeting #19
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Publication

15

.

request of the Governor of one ,such state, appoint commissioners

.

,who shall consider and adjust such claims or contr,oversies, subject
,to ratification by the Legislatures of the states so affected,U
Well, tak~the first one, that would apply to (a). As to (b) it
necessarily has to go back to the lagislature for ratification.

If you could determine on the interpretation or enforcement they

..

don' thave to go back to the ,legislature for ratification.
MR .,DAVIS: I am not entire Iy sure about that.
CHAIRMAN HOOVER: (c) and (d), it struck me there is a certain
fi.eld in there whioh they might c,ome to an agreement ODaITlOng
themselves without necessar~ly legislative action.
MR. CARPENTER: It is my impression no such compact should
rest without legislative ratification,Bsn matte~ of ample caution,

so that no dispute as to its validity should ever come up by

.

somebody challenging the court. Legislative'ratification should

always follow.
~R. DAVIS: Of course it might work out in practice.
CHAIRMAN HOOVER: I guess you are right.
MR. CARPENTER: ! have one more suggestion to make. Mr.

Emerson raised it the other day and I m~rely bring it up now at

. "

this point. This artic Ie should not, be taken to hinder or pre~ent.

the settlement at any such matter, or the granting of consent by

one state to another, in clause (d), by direct legislative action.

..

Our Supreme Court has held that compacts between states,-I 'refer

to the United states Supreme Court, may be made by concurrent

'If

section of the legislatures when one, as it were, offers and the

other accepts, in the language of Justice Holmes. Now that was

what was done in Wyoming in the Utah situation and this article

i