upr000342 130

to be paid solely from the operat- | ing revenues of such district.” Paragraph [7 of Section 1, “To have and exercise in the State of Nevada the. right of eminent do­main,- either .within or without said district,, and in: the manner provided'by law for the condem­nation of private property for] public use, to take any property; necessary' to carry out any of the-objects or purposes of this act, whether such property be already devoted to the spine use by any I district or other public corpora­tion or agency or otherwise, and ! to condemn any existing works ; ;? or'improvements in said district i nor or hereafter used. The power j . . . vested in the board of di-j, rectors of said district either the * 1 . fee simple or any lesser estate lo r interest in any real property jj I which said board by . resolution I shall determine, is necessary for t carrying.out the purposes of this i ;; act. Such resolution shall be \ Iprima-facie evidence that th e; $ taking of fee simple of easement, ; Jj as the case-may be, is necessary.” [[ The right of Clark county to fur- s !nish f»nds, as mentioned in sec- !; tiori 17, fbr;the preliminary or- ; ganization, was questioned. . In the closing arguments, Law ! ; pointed out .that he believed sec­tions of the act ..to be dangerous i f and ; believed, that more - time I, should be taken to study- thej. _________ - ? • '?m:\ [problem and the working out of a new act. Law said, that since it would probably take two years for more to get-;the neeessarjf in-iformation to establish, the set-up, a little longer delay would not hurt. He'Said he did not believe 'that Las Vegas realized the al- |most fanatically devotion of,-t&ei fpedple of Henderson to the plant,; land they would not permit any- • thing to jeopardize it. H Grant closed by saying that'the I project, was necessary and urgent I and that if Nevada did not make I an effort to take the watef al- I "loted .her now, it might be too B late.