Imperial Valley press., 1928-10-29
EXPLAINS
HOOVER, S
POSITION
Attorney Childers Proves
From Records Candidate
FavOrs Boulder Dam.
EXCELLENT SPEECH
Greene Urges Necessity
of Protecting State By
High Tariff.

High Iarl11.
Backing up his every assertion
with facts taken directly from con
gressional hearings on the Swing
johnson bill, and the printed find
ings of the commission appointed to
investigate the Colorado river, At
torncy Charles J.. Childers proved
TO crowd of several hundred per
sons in City Park Saturday night,
that Herbert Hoover is emphatically
in favor of the Boulder Dam legis-
lation.
As chief counsel for the Imperial
Irrigation District, Charles l.. Chill
ders has been in the closest touch
with every development of the Colo
RADIO river legislation. His qualifi-
cations to speak authoritatively on
the subject cannot be disputed. His
speech Saturday night left no doubt
in the minds of those who heard him
that he was giving them plain, un-
vanished facts, uncolored by side
issues or suppositions.
After declaring that having sat
isfied themselves that other things
being equal, Californians should be
proud to vote for one of their own
eitizens for the highest office in the
land, Childers launched into his ad-
dress, quoting frequently from print
ed federal records.
Starting as far back as 1921, re
showed that Hoover was on the first
commission to make survey of the
Colorado conditions, and reported
mt that time his opinion that n high
dam should be built to serve three
fold purpose of flood control, wa
ter storage, and development Of hy-
dr0- electric power.
He recountcd the steps taken by
the various states in the Colorado
basin, resulting in the so-called
Santa Fc compact, at which meeting
Hoover again advocated n dam as
specified above.
Referring to the congressional
record of testimony taken before
the house irrigation committee, Chill
dcrs again quoted Hoover as testi-
flying favorably in behalf of the
Boulder dam legislation. He again
quoted from the hearings before the
Senate committee, calling particular
attention to an interruption in the
testimony by Senator Ashurst of
Arizona, which brought from Hoov-
or the flat declaration that he is for
high dam in the Colorado.
Democrats Mixed
This reference to Senator Ashurst
caused the speaker to divert a mo-
ment to point out the proof Arizona
is furnishing, that Hoover is for the
Boulder dam legislation. He quoted
Senator Ashurt az saying a few days
ago in Tombstone, that if Hoover is
elected president, Arizona's hopes
of blocking the Boulder dam legisla-
tion are lost. In other words, while
Democrats in California are telling
the people that only the election of
Smith can bring the Boulder dam
project to success, the Democrats in
Arizona assert that the election of
Hoover means the dam will be
built.
"Both cannot be right said
Childcrs. "Either the Democrats in
Arizona are correct, or the Demo
Gratis in California are. Certainly
Senator Ashurst, who led the sue
cessful filibuster in the Senate last
winter, should know whereof he
spcaks.'
Returning to the main topic At.
torney Childers quoted from House
and Senate records i'm 1926 and 1928,
when again Hoover declared himself
favorable to the Boulder dam legis-
lation. He quoted further from
Hoover's Los Angeles speech few
weeks ago. again declaring himself
for the legislation.
He supported the statements read
from the records with his own ex-
perience at Washington, when he
worked side by side with Congress
man Swing and Senator Johnson
for the bill and declared that al
though he and others called on Hoov-
cr time and again for advice and
information, they never found him
too busy to lend them every aid in
the battle.
"The opposition says Hoover is
straddling the issue because he does
not specify the legislation by the
name Swing johnson bill, Chill
ders declared. He then proceeded to
show that the name of the bill is
only n convenient one. Legally it
has no such name, being known in
the Senate and House by numbers.
For Mr.. Hoover or anyone else to
specify the legislation by name
might be misleading, he said, be-
Fcause the SwingJohnson bill as it
now stands, is not the SwingJohn-
son bill of several years ago, and