Laserfiche WebLink
<br />113 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />be so out of proportion to her water supply that ,Te could expect <br /> <br /> <br />no other than an unfavorable view by her legislature and ultimate <br /> <br /> <br />defeat of the present objective. I have, therefore, prepared the <br /> <br /> <br />suggestion offered at the eutset of my remarks. That in the main <br /> <br /> <br />embodies my idea and I will discuss the subject more fully at a <br /> <br /> <br />later date. <br /> <br /> <br />MR. HOOVER: You seemed also in the early part of your state_ <br /> <br /> <br />ment to claim complete state's right to ever<J drop of water upon <br /> <br /> <br />your state; you subsequently admit that this right has been.much <br /> <br /> <br />limi ted by the Supreme Court de cisions. Hay I get one or two <br /> <br /> <br />points clear? I take it that you necessarily deny the whole thElory <br /> <br /> <br />of priority of utilization as between states. <br /> <br /> <br />MR. CARPENTER: Emphatically. <br /> <br /> <br />MR. HOOVER: In this case, of contented complete states rights <br /> <br /> <br />and discard of priority of utilization, what,interests have the <br /> <br /> <br />states of ori[lin in any dams or works that could be built do,ID <br /> <br /> <br />below? <br /> <br /> <br />l<lR. CAFI'ENTER: He have no more legal interest in a reseI'V'oir <br /> <br /> <br />in Arizona than they have in a reservoir in Colorado. <br /> <br /> <br />Vffi. HOOVER: I gather then that if there is no established <br /> <br /> <br />right by priority of utilization as betHeen states they can build <br /> <br /> <br />all the dams they like in the canyon Hithout interference from <br /> <br /> <br />you? <br /> <br />"" <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br />.. <br />