Mr. HUDSPETH. As I understand, Mr. Hayden, your people have their principal interest in obstructing or regulating the flow of that water, and not in hydroelectric power?

Mr. HAYDEN. There are three purposes to be served: First, flood protection on the lower river, including the Yuma Valley, Second, the storage of water for irrigation; and third, its utilization for

power.

Mr. HUDSPETH. Are your people for all of those purposes?

Mr. HAYDEN. All of the three purposes should be served. The contention in Arizona, by a group of our citizens whose influence was sufficient to defeat the approval of the compact, is that the merits of the dam site at Glen Canyon have not been properly investigated. They say that the Reclamation Service sought only to find the best place to protect Imperial Valley from floods, and that they merely went up the river to the first place they could find, and located the dam at Boulder Canyon, and that the merits of the higher site at Glen Canyon have not been thoroughy investigated; until that is done they will not be satisfied.

Mr. HUDSPETH. Now, I have that information. Now, if the dam is built at Boulder Canyon, will it be sufficient to protect your people against that overflow and afford irrigation for the crops?

Mr. HAYDEN. There is no question but what Boulder Canyon will afford flood protection.

Mr. HUDSPETH. The advantage, then, is in the power proposition, that it will furnish more power at Glen Canyon than at Boulder Canyon?

Mr. HAYDEN. Glen Canyon has greater ultimate possibilities for power; some engineers say in favor of that site that it will equally well serve the purposes for flood protection.

Mr. SWING. Not the Government engineers; that was somebody in Arizona. The Government engineers have said as to that dam site that it is not satisfactory; that the rock foundations are soft; and that it is not comparable with the Boulder Canyon site; it is 350 miles further from the market for power; it leaves exposed 50 miles of drainage area, etc., and soon ad infinitum. There is a report on file of the Reclamation Service, signed by five or six men. among them geologists and engineers, showing that is not a suitable site.

Mr. HUDSPETH. I am taking all of Mr. Lineberger's time. Well, Mr. Hayden, if the dam is constructed at Boulder Canyon, it would not interfere with the construction of a dam at Glen Canyon either, would it?

Mr. HAYDEN. A dam can be built at Boulder Canyon without interfering with a dam several hundred miles up the river; physically, there is no interference.

Mr. SINNOTT. How far is Glen Canyon from Boulder Canyon? Mr. HAYDEN. About 270 miles.

Mr. SWING. In a straight line; by the river it is over 300 miles; nearly 350.

Mr. LEATHERWOOD. I am interested in this question. I would like to find some statement as to how an engineer can justify, in discussing the desirability of dam sites, going down 150 feet, through loose boulders, in order to get to bedrock, as against a site where that condition does not exist?

Mr. LINEBERGER. Well, Mr. Chairman, if I may be allowed to proceed without entering into the controversy, which is an old one, as to where the dam should be lovated, as an engineer, or one who was educated as an engineer and who practiced that profession for a period of 10 years, I should like to make this general observation: That in locating a power plant or a dam for irrigation and flood control it is always assumed that-provided a satisfactory site from an engineering standpoint can be had, one where it is practical from a construction standpoint-that dam should be located at a point which is the shortest distance from the various lands and centers of urban populations which it is supposed to serve. Now, the lands to be protected from flood control are largely in Arizona and in California, below Boulder Canyon, and the urban centers in southern California alone contain or will soon contain over 3,000,000 population.

I assume, without even attempting to point out on the map, that Boulder Canyon is nearer to those lands than the other location. The great present urban center of population, and one which will be of ever-increasing magnitude in the future on account of natural conditions, is going to be the coastal plain and the valleys of southern California; and if you propose to transmit power there and sell it for industrial purposes, of course, a dam 300 or 400 miles nearer to that center of population would be more desirable than one that much farther away. It seems that this permits of no argument.

If you are going, as we hope you are, to serve us with a potable water supply in future years which is absolutely necessary for the existence of a large urban population, realizing the immense expense involved in the construction of adueducts, etc., for carrying that water, of course, 300 or 400 miles is an immense item. I dare say that that phase of the situation was covered by Mr. Mulholland. who is much more capable and better informed than I am to express an opinion on this phase of the subject.

Mr. RAKER. Mr. Lineberger, would you permit an interruption right here? Is it your view that it is necessary to the construction of a dam on the Colorado River that the Colorado River compact should first be ratified?

Mr. LINEBERGER. I think it would be highly desirable-very highly desirable. I think, then, that the least resistance would be encountered. With this out of the way, the major obstacle would be overcome. The fact that the compact only failed by 1 or 2 votes certainly is indicative of the fact that there is a substantial countersentiment in Arizona in favor of the proposition; and it was ratified by all the rest of the States. I understand.

Mr. RAKER. Would the failure of the compact have anything to do with the Government proceeding

Mr. LINEBERGER. No; I do not think it ought to, if there is any possible legal way to overcome that opposition which now holds up or hinders the proposition. I am not a lawyer. I think this proposition is so great, so big, and means so much to the future life, happiness, and prosperity and security of so many people that all smaller considerations, all obstacles, ought to be swept aside ultinately by the Federal Government, if any legal means whatsoever exists, provided it can not be arranged amicably by adjustment. I do not know whether that is possible, Mr. Raker, but that is my idea,

that no State or local opposition should be allowed to stand in the way of a great proposition of this kind if it is in the power of the Federal Government to prevent it.

Mr. RAKER. Is it your view, then, that the Government should proceed as rapidly as possible with the authorization of the construction of a dam at Boulder Canyon for the purposes named by you, irrespective of whether the compact is ratified or not?

Mr. LINEBERGER. My thought is this: That this committee ought to hold the most thorough and exhaustive hearings possible, so that there will be within the committee and within the Congress-as there must be-a crystallization of sentiment in favor of this project. In the coming State elections this fall I believe this question is going to be again the main issue in the State of Arizona; and, of course, feeling as I do I think it will prove to the greater interest of Arizona as well as the Nation-which will watch this contest very closely to elect a State administration and legislature which will quickly ratify this compact and thereby remove the ever-increasing suspicion of many that petty politics is holding up a great project in which millions of American citizens are vitally interested.

And with the moral effect that such a favorable crystallization— of opinion in this committee and in the Congress would have on those people opposing in Arizona, it is to be hoped that they will see the proposition in its proper light, and that a ratification will take place.

If such ratification does not take place, in view of this settlement, then I think Congress and the committee should proceed to remove, by whatever legal means are possible, the obstacles which are placed in the way of this gigantic proposition, meaning so much to so many citizens of the whole country. I do not think that a small number of men-a small majority in one State-ought, morally, at least, to be permitted to hold up a great proposition of this kind, and if necessary, I would like to see the Congress go the limit to prevent it.

Mr. RAKER. If the committee and the House came to the conclusion that the dam should be built by the Government, then it would be wholly immaterial what might be the result of the elections in Arizona or elsewhere this fall relative to the ratification of the compact, would it not? Having once determined it, it would make no difference what they did following that?

Mr. LINEBERGER. Well, I understand that even the Federal Government might be subject to injunctions and things of that kind that would operate to actually obstruct or stop the construction work unless these differences could be ironed out; I do not know: I am not a lawyer.

But what I see here is a great proposition one of the greatest in the country, affecting millions of people; affecting their prosperity. their health, their happiness- a great national asset. And it seems to me that all small obstacles, all pettifogging objections, ought to be removed; and that this great proposition ought to succeed.

Mr. HUDSPETH. May I ask you a question right there?

Mr. RAKER. Let me just ask this question first: What objections do you consider as petifogging so far in this matter?

Mr. LINEBERGER. Well, I think that the stand of Arizona—and I say this with all due respect to the gentlemen out there who are

opposing it; I have not gone into it in detail, but in a broad aspect I believe that they are standing in their own light, and I think Arizona is no small element in the situation. I believe this proposition if they would get in and and cooperate and put their shoulders to the wheel, would prove of such a great advantage to them that any local objections would be obliterated and all compromise fully justified when the great proposition was once on its way and its great benefits more fully appreciated. They can not have all they want, and we know here that in our legislative experiences reasonable compromise is the basis of all achievement. And I think that there are going to have to be compromises right down the line; there will have to be a spirit of give and take. And I think in such a big proposition that Arizona may come around to see it that way.

I am not criticizing them with any spirit of ill feeling; they have their own local interests in mind. But this does not just affect them locally; it affects half a dozen different States; it affects four or five million people; and it must be looked at in its broader aspects.

Mr. SINNOT. Mr. Lineberger, what would you think of passing this legislation subject to the approval of the compact by Arizona? Mr. LINEBERGER. Well, I had that thought in mind-that you would thus squarely place the responsibility on Arizona. Of course, if Arizona did not approve of it, we would have to look for some other means of bringing it about. I look rather favorably on that thought, but, not being a lawyer, I do not know. But as a business man I know that in business if you can get it narrowed down to just one thing, and then make a conditional agreement and put definite responsibility squarely on an individual, sometimes, when he is thus brought to realize the great responsibility that is resting on him, he will come in and play ball, where otherwise he would not.

Mr. SINNOTT. Then, if they refused to ratify the compact, a subsequent Congress might amend that feature of it?

Mr. LINEBERGER. That is my thought, sir; I hardly wanted to go that far, but, inasmuch as you have suggested that thought, I will say that I have given that proposition considerable thought.

Mr. SINNOTT. Well, I am not suggesting it. I gathered from your general talk that you had something of the kind in your mind. Mr. LINEBERGER. Well, I did have that idea.

Mr. HUDSPETH. I have asked this question of Mr. Mulholland, who was not prepared to answer it at the time, and the answer may have been given later; but if so, I was not present: There is no question but what your people in Los Angeles and Long Beach need more water and more power, is there?

Mr. LINEBERGER. We have got to have it.

Mr. HUDSPETH. Now, can you give me information as to how much of the construction cost of this dam you would be prepared to pay back each year for this water and this additional power?

Mr. LINEBERGER. I think if we were permitted to buy power there that the city of Los Angeles and the county of Los Angeles could amortize this whole thing in a period of 40 to 50 years, just from power alone.

Mr. HUDSPETH. Pay back the entire cost of construction?

Mr. LINEBERGER. I do not doubt it. The city of Los Angeles today has nearly 1,000,000 people; we have nearly 2,000,000 people in

the county. Why, a goodly portion of the whole county is subdivided into city lots; it is not any longer a proposition of getting water for irrigating orange groves, sugar beets, and truck; it is a question of putting a spigot on a 50-foot lot and supplying a citizen with enough water for his home and family and for irrigating his little garden. The county of Los Angeles is going to be a great city in the not distant future. We are even now starting talking about taking the whole county into a county and city government, with the so-called borough system.

Mr. HUDSPETH. Would the city government now be prepared to give a guaranty to that effect?

Mr. LINEBERGER. I do not know. Mr. Criswell, who came here representing the city government of Los Angeles, I believe had something to say on that line. I am not authorized to say just what could be done. But so far as power and potable water are concerned I am satsfied that our people would go the limit to assure themselves of this additional supply.

Mr. SINNOTT. Well, Mr. Lineberger, does the city contemplate getting potable or drinking water from the Colorado River?

Mr. LINEBERGER. That is in contemplation; yes, sir. Did not Mr. Mulholland testify on that the other day, Mr. Swing?

Mr. SWING. Yes.

Mr. SINNOTT. What is the distance from the city to the Boulder Canyon?

Mr. LINEBERGER. I should say about 250 miles.

Mr. SWING. The plan was not to start the canal at Boulder Canyon, but to use the river channel itself down to a point above Blythe; and from there to Los Angeles would be 10 or 15 miles shorter than the present Los Angeles aqueduct to where Los Angeles gets its present water supply.

Mr. LINEBERGER. It would be about 240 or 250 miles.

Mr. LEATHERWOOD. I would like to ask Mr. Lineberger a question or two, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Certainly.

Mr. LINEBERGER. If I can, I will answer them.

Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Mr. Lineberger, where does the city of Long Beach get its water supply from at the present time?

Mr. LINEBERGER. We are getting it from artesian wells. But the water is getting lower and lower all the time. A great many wells which formerly flowed now have to be pumped. Our present water supply was predicated on and acquired at the time we had about 17,500 population; that was about 1910. We now have 135,000. And we have great difficulty even at the present time in getting waterMr. LEATHERWOOD (interposing). Does the city of Long Beach Low get any water from the Owens River?

Mr. LINEBERGER. No; they do not.

Mr. LEATHERWOOD. What do you consider to be the most paramount need at the present time of the people of your city and Los Angeles electric energy or water?

Mr. LINEBERGER. Well, it is hard to say. If you had asked me that question two years ago, I would have said undoubtedly electric energy. But to-day I will say that with the sure growth that we have, plus the tendency to grow, which will be restricted and re