Salt Lake Telegram | 1936-05-26 | Page 6 | Compact States Win

I Compact States Win of the supreme court to entertain REFUSAL Arizona's petition for final determination of rights to the waters of the Colorado river would seem to bring the out long qu question stion to its ts semifinal stage The one one holdout when it was Originally sought to divide the stream by agreement agree agree- ment in a state seven-state compact it has s held its I ground stubbornly Resorting to the high court I and failing to persuade it to take original jurisdiction jurisdiction jurisdiction juris juris- j diction one more obstacle is removed and the way opened to further negotiations At the last session here of the representatives of Cf f the compact states such dissension arose that I In some quarters quarters' the fear was vias vo voiced ced that tho the thoI I state six organization might fall apart each 1 state going its own way or two opposing groups forming If either had happened and with Anzona AriI Arizona Ari- Ari I zona Ona remaining aloof from all others there was apprehension that the whole issue might have to be attacked almost from the beginning By good fortune this was forestalled and the compact compact com corn pact states may reach an adjustment of their various claims negotiating with Arizona on that basis The court assured Arizona in its order Monday Monday Mon Mon- day that if any final final- award injurious J to her or granted in excess of the authority of the secretary of the interior or others either It states tes or individuals she might challenge the act in in- in appropriate inappropriate Ju judicial proceeding The likely n negotiation between the seven even states their outcome outcome out out- come and nd Arizona's disposition toward them re remain remain re- re main now as the final stage of the long drawn out dispute While resort to the supreme court by Anzona Arizona Ari An- zona opa was taken because she believed under the Boulder canyon act and California's demand foran for foran an inequitable able proportion of the Colorado river water the the- thes s state te was called upon to suffer an 0 irretrievable loss the two states are not alone In conflict All the upper basin states are equally concer concerned ed Attorney W. W W. W Ray represented Ut Utah h before the court H He made the only argument against granting the petition though not representing the compact states His victory earns him recognition recognition recognition rec rec- and praise for the success of his effort Mr Ray Bay points o out t that if the petition of Arizona had had been granted and its suit rec received ived by the court jurisdiction over the river would be taken from the executive branch and transferred to toA A Athe the courts The c certain consequence would be bep 7 p perpetual and costly litigation The hope hop will now b be that the seven states concerned can reach an i amicable settlement in which no state is dep of at it its just and fair rights i in the river flow w. w