The Coconino sun., 1927-05-27
Colorado River Commission Gives Voters
Reasons Why They Should Vote yes On
Proposed Amendments To Constitution

permitted to usurp the states sover-
eign powers to its very great detri-
ment
That proponents of the Swing-Joh ohm
son bill attach great Importance to
the limiting provisions of Arizona's
constitution, is shown. Section 13 OF
the measure makes the act supple
ment to the reclamation law, and en-
dows it with all of the powers attach
ing to that law. Arizona is then tied,
hand and foot, by the following pro-
vision: Nothing in this act shall be
deemed to waive any of the rights or
powers reserved or granted to the
United States by the tenth
paragraph of Article Xxx of the con-
stitution of Arizona, but the secretary
of the interior is authorized on behalf
of the United States to exercise such
of said rights and powers as may be
| necessary or convenient for the con-
struction and use of the works herein
authorized and for carrying out the
purposes of this act"
With. these clauses in the Swing
| johnson bill, and Arizona bound, as
| she probably would be bound, by the
express waivers contained in para
graph ten of Article Xxx Of her con-
stitution, it is quite possible that con-
gress and the secretary of the interior
might be allowed, under the pretense
| of Matchmaking the Colorado river, to
Californiaize it, and disregard Arizona
| in its development and in the division
of it's benefits to the full extent that
Secretary of the Interior Work has re-
4 Gently threatened.
! The supreme court of the United
| States has definitely held that the
| federal government may not enter a
| state and improve by irrigation or
| otherwise even government land with
in its boundaries, except by compliance
| with the laws of such state. Unfor-
tunately, in the light of her. constitu-
tional acquiescence in the broad reser-
vations to the United States, Arizona
would likely be precluded from taking
advantage of this just rule, and until
1 her constitutional acquiescence is re-
pealed no valid law could be enacted
i in conflict with it. On the other hand,
with the provision in question elm
mated. the federal government would
have no right under the reclamation
law, to ignore or override the laws OF
Arizona. which in conformity with
i the states sovereign political powers,
provide a method for the appropria-
i tion of the waters Of the state.
H Another phase Of the situation
/. practical if not legal-is that, mas
. much as it is the California belief that
u Arizona is bound by the restricting
provisions of her constitution, anC
that the SwingJ Johnson bill embody-
: ing these provisions will be driver
l Ii oil
likelv that her representatives vii
consent to any just agreement relating
: to the Colorado river until one OF two
: things, or both, occur-vlz: the strlk
; ing from the Arizona constitution o.
I the provisions relied upon, or the defl
t mite and final defeat Of the Swing
! Johnson bill.
e The Colorado River Commission
t hopes that an agreement may be Ell
4 fected between all of the states of th'
e Colorado river basin and with tn
' United States by which the rights O
Y each will be recognized and preserved
and under which the Colorado rive
may be comprehensively and ade
] ouately developed, its floods controlle'
: and its vast potentialities realized. I,
= such an agreement, this states legiti
e mate interests being safeguarded
4 Arizona would unquestionably an
y readily subscribe, and the amendin
a of the constitution would thereby b
It rendered needless, but in view of tn
: determined effort being exerted b
It California interests for the passag
o of the Swing-J Johnson bill, to whic
e Arizona can not subscribe, the possi
/ bility that just and equitable agree
e ment may not be effected must
'e seriously considered,