The Coconino sun., 1923-11-30
SENATOR WINSOR OPPOSED
TO "HEARD PLAN"
TO DEFEAT COMP
Continued from Page one)

RADIO river compact, which is all-im-
portant, and to that extent must in
evitably give aid and comfort to those
who are willing to sacrifice the .devel-
opment of the river by defeating the
ratification of the treaty between the
states of the Colorado river basin.
ut was proposed that a conference
be held with Representatives Of the
states of California and Nevada with
view to the formulation of a sup
Elemental treaty between these states
of the lower basin. While ! have no
objection to any conference by Of
ficials or private citizens Of Arizona
with officials Of California and Ne
vada, | am firmly of the opinion that
quately safeguarded by the compact,
by existing water law unamended by
the compact, and by the natural con-
ditions which exist, than they pos
sibly could be protected through the
medium Of a separate treaty with
California and Nevada--insofar, at
least, as such a treaty would relate
to the division Of water, which is the
only subject Of the compact. There
fore, / am opposed to such a treaty
and to any attempt to formulate such
a treaty. Rather than safeguarding
Arizona's rights, treaty with Cali
fornia and Nevada, in my opinion,
would prove a positive loss, and might
well constitute serious menace to
Arizona's development. But that is
not my greatest fear | really have
no fear that there will be any treaty
between Arizona, California and Ne
vada, for | have not the slightest idea
that an agreement can be reached
between those states with respect to
the division of the waters which, un-
der the terms of the compact, are al
located to the lower basin The at
tempt made at Santa Fe, when the
compact was formulated, to divide the
waters of the river as between individ-
ual states failed, and an attempt TO
divide them as between the individual
should fail, for it would be a complete
abrogation and abandonment Of the
fundamental doctrine Of prior appro-
priation.
"a violation of that principle to the
extent of an anlicable and fair divis-
ion Of the Colorado's waters between
the upper and lower groups Of
states, as embodied in the compact, is
justifiable on the ground that it is
necessary to remove the legal and poll
itical obstacles to development Of the
Colorado's resources. Its complete
abrogation and extinction by a specific
division of waters between the indiv-
idual states is not necessary to de-
velopment and cannot be justified on
any group, and to Arizona would
danger is not that such treaty viii be
consummated. The danger is that
the proposed negotiations, unauthCriZ-
ed by congressional consent-Which IS
essential to the formulation Of a
treaty between the states Of the fed
eral union viii result in a further
clouding off the issue, in the loss Of
valuable time which it must necessar-
lily entail, and most Of all IN the Ill
feeling which a failure to agree is
likely to engender between the citi-
zens of the states interested, thus en-
| couraging a disposition to view the
question at issue not so much upon its
merits as in the light of a controversy
between the states.
Nothing was offered or proposed
at the conference which at ali affects,
or in any degree mOdifies, my earnest
belief that ratification of the Colora-
do river compact is essential to the
development of the Colorado river,
which viii follow ratification Of the
compact, means a growth to Arizona
and to the southwest which cannot be
estimated; that Arizona's rights are
adequately safeguarded by the COM
pact; that Arizona's duty is first to
ratify, in order that there may be de-
velopment by some agency, and then
to settle in orderly sequence the var
rious questions which have been raised
as to how and by whom the develop
ment should be carried forward
whether by the federal government,
by the state of Arizona, or by private
interests"
D.