Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ouo <br /> <br />remain as they are now proposed with- <br />out any alternates or additions." <br /> <br />~m. SPARKS: "Second the motion." I <br />MR. MOSES: "Question?" <br /> The motion was unanimously carried. <br /> <br />Mr. Larson introduced the members of his staff <br />who were attending the meeting with him: Mr. H. F. Bah. <br />meier and Mr. L. E. Holmes. <br /> <br />M-R. MOSES: <br /> <br />"Governor do you have anything you <br />wish to say to the Board?" <br /> <br />GOv. McN1CHOIB: <br /> <br />"I have nothing in particular at <br />this time." <br /> <br />MR. SPARKS: <br /> <br />"I would like to call the Board's <br />attention to a recent case decided by <br />the United States Circuit Court of <br />Appeals. This case involved a treaty <br />between the United States and Canada <br />concerning the division of power rights <br />along the Niagara River. When this <br />treaty was sent to the United States <br />Senate for ratification the Senate at- <br />tached certain conditions to the treaty <br />which dealt purely with domestic issues <br />in the United States. These conditions <br />were accepted by the Canadian Parliament. <br />When a proposed power development in the <br />Uni ted States was contemplated a suit <br />then arose over these conditions attached <br />by the United States Senate. The case <br />went into the Federal courts and the <br />United States Court of Appeals beld that <br />conditions attached by the United States <br />Senate to this treaty were invalid. The <br />reasoning of the court was based" upon the <br />fact that these conditions had nothing to <br />do with international law and were con- <br />cerned only with purely domestic issues. <br />The matter of particular concern here to <br />us is the fact that the treaty between the <br />United States and Mexico concerning the <br />division of waters of the Colorado River <br />contain conditions which were attached by <br /> <br />I <br />