12 Third Annual Report of the 



in the Assembly the vote was nonpartisan in character. It had 

 the support of Democrats, Republicans and Progressives alike. 



Accepted State Policy 



We may fairly conclude, therefore, that the underlying prin- 

 ciple of the Murtaugh bill is now the accepted policy of the State. 

 To that underlying principle, the Democratic, the Republican, 

 and the Progressive parties stand committed by their platforms. 

 To that underlying principle, Senators and Assemblymen, regard- 

 less of party, assented, thus passing the Murtaugh bill by a great 

 majority in both branches of the Legislature. To that underlying 

 principle, the then Governor, in his memorandum vetoing the 

 Murtaugh bill, made no dissent or objection — declaring on the 

 other hand that " my sympathy is now and has been strongly in 

 favor of the purposes of this bill." 



Governor Sulzer's chief objections, he said, were based on 

 doubt as to the sufficiency of water at Crescent and Vischer 

 Ferry at certain seasons of the year; fear that the Capital Dis- 

 trict plan might cripple the efficiency of the Barge canal, and 

 belief that the first development should be at the Long Sault 

 rather than at Vischer Ferry. These and all other objections 

 have been met severally and collectively, over and again, during 

 the progress of the Murtaugh bill through the Legislature. 



Subsequent independent investigations have sustained the Com- 

 mission's views on these matters in all respects. 



Inconsistency of Opponents 



Those who opposed the Bayne bill on the ground that it took in 

 too much territory, opposed the Murtaugh bill on the ground that 

 it took in too little territory. Those who opposed the Murtaugh 

 bill on the ground that there might not be enough water at 

 Crescent and Vischer Ferry — despite all the engineering evi- 

 dence to the contrary — would no doubt oppose a bill for a de- 

 velopment at Long Sault on the ground that there would be too 

 much water there. 



Equally absurd is the plight of those who in the same breath 

 inform us that State hydro-electric development " will never 



