Arizona state miner., 1924-06-28
RODENTS IN RATIFICATION


Ratification of the Colorado pact is
wilfully "camouf1aged" by lengthy
technicalities, so that it's true import
may not be recognized by the aver
age mind.
The pact in all simplicity is the ac-
quirement of title to water and it's
potential asset-power The same
pact idea of requirement of title to
Colorado river water and it's potent
1al1ty is shown in the leasing to spe-
clal privilege of government coal
lands in Alaska; the oil resources of
Montana included in the Teapot
Dome scandals; timber resources of
the northwest; setting aside of ma
t1onal parks, roads, and trails, which,
thru federal bureaucratic aid, may be
allocated, leased, or bought by pri-
vate corporations as a perpetual pro-
ut making asset.
In word, the Colorado river COM
pact is an ALLEGATION of title to water
which, as commodity, belongs to
the riparian owners settled along that
stream and it's tributaries in the var
lous states.
In Aslatic countries, where people
have irrigated for thousands of years,
there is no such a thing as title to
water. The water belongs to the
land and is distributed faithfully each
season in proportion to the amount
of water on hand and the amount of
land to be irrigated.
The physical effect of allocating
all the stream flow of the Colorado
river and it's tributaries by pact ap-
port1onment is to create questionable
title to water.
Stream flow should forever remain
open to all land owners, as their in
dlv1dual needs require and not be al
located to private parties as a COM
modify that may be sold for profit
making ventures
There should be no division of wa
ters of the Colorado to the various
states any more than should the high
seas be divided or allocated to spec
1al nations for navigation purposes.
The watersheds and stream flow of
the Colorado River, through it's var
1ous states belongs in perpetuity to
those various states I'm proportion
only as their needs require. Vesting
water title in certain states, like in
dlv1duals, is to create valuable as
set and making it transferable, which
properly belongs only to those who
can use it without detriment to others
entitled to it's utilization. And right
there is the crux of all litigation and
contention over the pact.
Again creation of water titles to
lndlvldual states makes it possible
tor those states to lease, transfer and
allocate their titles to private cor
poratlons, individuals or syndicates
mot only the water, but it's power
potent1alities) the same as the United
States is leasing lands, COAL oil and
timber and all other reserves set
aside for the people.
In encouraging production under
this system the country is already
aghast not only at the enormous
frauds practiced but the throttling of
competition and elevation of cost bv
prlce-tlxlng combines who are snec-
Tally created by political bureaus
Last winter much propaganda or
Iglnated between Carl Hayden and
Mul1ord Wlnsor relative to the nact
botn went around the state posing
as pact promoters. A wing of the
Arizona Legionaires stood out boldly
Tor making the pact a real political
issue of the campaign. Editor Breen
OF the Coconino Sun was elected to
the state legislature on a pro-pact
platform. AS if in ntra-distinction
another representative from Stoddard
was elected on an anti-pact ticket
so the issue still stands in the hal
ance, with the republicans loathe to
come out on pro-pact plank because
OF dividing their own ranks and leay-
ing the field to the democrats
Recently in the Presidents cabinet
were three members, Messrs. Work.
Weeks and Wallace, who favored the
private control of the Boulder Can
yon and other Colorado River pro-
Jects, and there were conflicting state
ments and most all there was to them
in effect was to create the impress
sion that California will ultimately
need more water to keep up her phe-
nomenal growth. In such an event
the Colorado River offers the only
solution and pact of some kind is