El Paso herald. (El Paso, Tex.) 1901-1931, 1915-06-29

OF the movement 10 10 70 ~ NoAANAA%
Taft for an order to begin construc-
tion. Neither the reclamation heads
nor the secretary of the interior seem
ed willing to give il, each blaming the
other for the delay
Mexico should Pay.
As the testimony went on, AIR. Mar
tinez expressed the opinion that 1t vas
unfair that the Rio Grande valley far
mers must pay perpetually for the wa
ter which Mexico is to receive from the
dam He said he thought that at least
80 per cent of the construction cost or
the project should be borne by Mexico,
as a direct beneficiary. But SINCE ne
explained the treaty stipulated thai
none Of the cost should be borne Dy
Mexico, it was up to" the government
to make this expense good It was
pointed out that the action Of the far
mers in assuming the responsibility OF
building the dam. and actually build
ing il. relieved the United States Of the
$50, 0000 900 claim maze by Mexico; that
it was not the duty Of the local farm
ers TO bear this expense any more Ihan
the farmers of any other section OF
the country since il was strictly a ma
tional responsibility and not local
MexieO's Equity.
Here Porter W. Dent, legal adviser
, to the reclamation service began 70
question Mr.. Martinez on MS idea OF
Mexico's equity in the Dement'S to be
derived from the project and Why ne
thought the government should relieve
the local farmers Of some Of the ex-
pense This action brought Mr.. Holt
to his feet with the suggestion that
the reclamation service and the water
users work IN complete harmony on
this point since it was strictly an i'm
partial one It is the intention Of the
water users to use this Mexico aspect
as an argument when the next re-
quest for an appropriation to complete
the project is made.
Bring Out All Sides.
tempting to bring out all sides Of the
question seemed to drop a small sized
bomb into the proceedings. Mr. Mar
tineZ said he was astonished that Mr.
Dent, whose salary is paid by the wa
ter users Of the country, should at
tempt to show Mexico's side of the
case. AIr. Dent answered that he felt
he was present not only to represent
the water users, but also as a sort
Of custodian for the funds Of the treas
ury department. out of which the pro-
posed appropriation will come He eX-
pressed his willingness to see the wa
ter user get all the money they want,
but he felt il just to place before con-
gress all the facts in the case When
the session was recessed for lunch the
argument had subsided and AIR Mar
tinez was being questioned by the re-
clamatiOn attorney
Objects Of Investigation.
A clear idea Of the object Of cost re-
view board Investigations and the du-
ties Of such boards is given in the gen
eral Instructions TO the boards from
secretary Of the interior Franklin X
Lane These Instructions from exhibit
/ Of the records Of the cost review ses-
sion in progress here
Under the classification of objects
Of investigation are the following in
structiOns:
First, to ascertain the proper con-
struction cost 10 be collected under
the terms Of the reclamation act and
amendments thereto from the settlers
project Of the reclamation service. or
units Of projects, as to which the con-
strucuion charged have been hereto
fore announced BY public notice
Second, to fix the proper charges
on projects where construction charges
have not been announced where such
projects have reached such a stage or
completion as Co make it practicable
and desirable to do so.
Must Serutinize Expenditures.
Third. in order 10 properly Xix the
amounts to be collected. 1t is neces- /
sary to determine whether any ex-
penditures direct or indirect have
been or are being charged to the pro-
Jects that under ordinary conditions
OF carrying out similar works should
NOT be so charged and were not nee
essary for the laying out, designing
and construction OF the completed pro-
Jet; and on the other hand whether
ted, as. for example, by treating them
as a general charge to be apportioned
to all parties when the whole, or any
part thereof, should have been a Ill
rect charge TO particular project"
Duties of the Board
Wide latitude is given the board
members by that section Of the sec
retary's letter Of instruction sub-head-
ed; Duties Of the local boards or
outlined:
cd The board Of review for each
project shall scrutinize and analvze
eaeu item OF the EraraunanN
ana Tor this purpose shall have access
10 the records of the project manager.
Supervision engineer, Washington
Office and such other detached offices
as may be necessary and NAV cali
upon any employees Of the service Tor
Information and assistance. The mem
80 q me Doard OF review for eacn
project may individually or collective
~ make any remarks or suggestions 3
desired relative TO the character or
AMOUNT OF the charge pertaining 10
defi1 - ~ ~ IeauJustInents
signed by the board as a whole or pv
a majority of the members
al 1usf Explain recommendation.
% In recommending readfust-
menIs the board must clearly indicate
me item referred to and give in de-
talL the data and reasons on which
s men. conclusions are based. The char /
acter and property of the Charges or Z
20 oe made against Individual pro-
Jects, or units thereof. are in question (;
0ilIy ana each local board shall con- Z
Ilne It's investigations and report 10 I
ne project to which IL is assigned bv &
the secretary Of the interior with the z
Xew Of aiding him to determine the (
yust and equitable amount to be col
iected from said projects or units .
% 4 full hearing will be given 4
20 an matters pertinent. and the board I
WIZ nave the right to exclude irreIe- (
want matter and duplication of testf- /
mony-
go It is to be kept in mind nv ]
the local boards that all the exDendf- i
lures Of the reclamation service have 1
oeen made under direction Of the sec !
IelaIy OF the INTERIOR on works and I
projects approved by him. ana rhar
such expenditures have been examined /
and approved by the treasury depart /
ment. leaving for determination the j