Determination of the Rights of the States of the Lower Colorado River Basin to Waters of the Main Stream of the Colorado River, Opinion

Document: 88th Congress, 1st Session, Senate, Document No. 20, Determination of the Rights of the States of the Lower Colorado River Basin to Waters of the Main Stream of the Colorado River, Opinion of the United States Supreme Court in the Case of State of Arizona, Plaintiff, v. State of California et al, Rendered June 3, 1963, Presented by Mr. Hayden, June 4, 1963, page 7217 ARIZONA V. CALIFORNIA. emphatic denial: "the distribution will either be by agreement between the States or under their respective laws." House Hearings, supra, note 1, at 32. The following year he explained that the United States would not dispose of water rights under the bill; it would merely store water belonging to persons acquiring their rights under state law. See p. 3, supra. In 1928, defending the House bill against an Arizona witness' charge that California might appropriate the entire Lower Basin supply, Mr. Swing did not dispute the statement as to California's rights but reinforced it by declaring that Arizona was free to make appropriations too. House Hearings, supra, note 11, at 57-58. He later assured the House that notwithstanding the bill Arizona "still has the benefit of the law of prior appropriation, and she still has the right to the beneficial use of any of the water she is able to put to use." 69 Cong. Rec. 9781. Delph Carpenter, proponent of the § 5 contract requirement, said that it was designed to burden storage water with the Compact, and thus to protect the Upper Basin, and that "[i]t has nothing to do with the interstate relations between Arizona and California."25Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 1,599,141 byte