Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ -, r-' 1 <br />O(fivij~ <br /> <br />In addition to the questions S1 ggested in the <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Salt Lake City, Utah, meeting, the ex-governor of the <br /> <br />State of' New Mexioo, Mr. Hannett, in a committee meeting <br />at Los Angeles on June 7th, requested that the brief show <br /> <br />that the consumptive use of water would not damage or de- <br /> <br />tract from the rights of the State of New Mexico. <br /> <br />We thus have, so far &.8 &.ppears from the reoord <br /> <br />made of the matter and so far &.s we have bean able to <br /> <br />ascertain, only two questions to answer, We submit, how- <br /> <br /> <br />ever, there is a third question, probably of as much in- <br /> <br />terest to the publio, the Power COIIlIlli.ssion, and the people <br /> <br />of Arizona as both of the suggested questions oombined, <br /> <br />viz: Why does Arizona desire this power site? <br /> <br />Question 1. Can Arizona claim any rights in the <br /> <br />water of the Colorado River she could not claim if she <br /> <br />were a fullrarty signatory to the Colorado River Compact? <br />Question 2. Would the State of New Mexico, or <br /> <br />any other state, suffer damage by the construction of the <br /> <br />Bridge Canyon Dam for power purposes? <br /> <br />Question 3. Why does Arizona desire this power <br /> <br />dam site? <br /> <br />Each of these questions we will treat in turn. <br /> <br />"" <br /> <br /><. <br /> <br />7. <br />