Show THREE OPINIONS GIVEN Each Supreme Justice Wrote One in Herrhmm Irrigation Cass Judgment Judg-ment Ordered Modified The Supreme court yesterday rendered ren-dered a dcrlHlon III the case of the Tler I rlman Irrigation company versus O W Kiel F I Kiel and the BIll trlle1l1 Mining company lit volvl ag certain valer rights in I Bill I tllield creek The case Is remanded with directions to modify the Judgment of the lower court An iimirnuil feature of the decision was that each of the three Supreme Judges found II necessary to write a acpnrale Opinion giving the reasons for the conclusions con-clusions reached by h him The same conclusions were arrived at by Chief Justice 1 Miner i and Justice Raskin though their proccsncs of reasoning were different Justice 1 Jiurlch was In favor of alllrmlng the Judgment of the trial con It Tho suit was originally brought for the purpose of enjoining the defendants from diverting to their own tine the I water from rtuMcrllcld I I creek which the plaintiff I claimed 1 under a prior appropriation appro-priation The lower court refused to lauif the I Injunction h and decided I that the I defendants were ontllled I to 8P percent per-cent of the water flnvlng Into the creek from certain lunnr > l i nfier allowing 17 per cent I for seepage and waste The Supreme court directs that this Judgment Judg-ment bu modified so fW to allow t the defendants only t2 j per I cent of the water from the tunnels after deducting S percent per-cent for seepage |