Laserfiche WebLink
<br />26 <br /> <br />for controversy arising between two states. <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />MR. EMERSON: I just wish to be assured this new ;)rocess if <br /> <br /> <br />set up wouldn't be necessary until other meuns may have been <br /> <br />I, <br />exhausted, that is'the only, point I wish to be assured on~.' <br /> <br />t <br /> <br />MR. Dl~VIS: This is an expression in,the negative and in my <br /> <br />judgment, as I said, the whole thing is vnnecessary. I: don't <br /> <br />think the expression of 9ne idea in thi~ pompact excludes, any <br />other 'plane which may now be in existence. I thin~, for ~nstance, <br />without the necessity for the appointment of commissioners or <br />anything else, two governors can sit down across a tab:le ccnd <br />settle the controv~rsies between two states, submit it to tho <br />legislature and it could be adopt~d if n~t covered by the compact <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />at all, it could be accomplished just,the same. We arc not limiting <br /> <br />the state powers, as ~ see it. <br /> <br />... <br /> <br />MR. EMERSON: 1~1l I, am concerned with is thCtt this reservation <br />should apply to the' statutes now in effect as we'll as to those <br /> <br />which may be hereafter enacted. <br />,JUDGE SLOl.N: . Your objection is to, the preposition "by". <br />That means it ~e6essarily implies new,legislution. Would it <br />aCCOmplish your purpose by saying "undert! ,direc:t le'gi~lation <br />wheth,er it is present or future? <br />MR. EMERSON: Couldn't you just add 'on there "or by statutes <br />that may now be in force," or, "by (3tatutes thdt, may ~Qw be in <br /> <br />. ' <br />force and may hereafter be enacted?" The whole'thing is that that, <br />, in my mind, expresses futurity. <br />MR. DINrS:Here would oey6ur idea, "Nothing ,herein con- <br />tained shall prevent adj ustmentof " any such contro'Cersie s or <br />c nime under any plan now in force or byidirectfutupe legislative <br /> <br />fl <br /> <br />.. <br />