OCR Text |
Show X S' THE SALT LAKE TRIBUNE, ; WEDNESDAY MORNING, JANUARY ta accordance with ths priority of appll- cations made by their reapeet.ve citizens, he was more nearly In accord, but agreed that such a fuling should not Ignore the federal title. The fact that state laws as recognise priority of appropriation the rights of the citizens hat governing no bearing, he argued.- - Stats-laega apply only to the citizens of a particular state, and the laws of cna state s of an. cannot be extended to the of Claims Parties in Colo-rado-Wyom- ing Litigation Heard by U. S. Court i Federal Government Case as Intervener Argued , V , ... byAttorneyW (Metal to The TrIPuna. Argument In o ,,.i,ihs..WyomIng-CoIoradcase, fnvolvlng the use of the water of Laramie m tt for lrr gation purposes, was concluded before the supreme court late this afternoon. The case now Will come before a conference of the judges, and when an agreement Is reached among them, or when a majority come to a common conclusion, the case will he assigned to cne of the judges, who will prepare the opinion: Judgment Is not expected in the Immediate future, considering the Importance of the litigation and the fact that the case has Just been argued for the third time- - To all the judges save Chief Justice Taft the facts were more or less familigr; to Justice Taft the entire case wag sew. and no judge on the bench followed the arguments mors closely than WASHINGTON, Jan. 10. 11, 1921 1 1 .? F other state. Our contention," said Mr. Riter, "1 that what would be the practical effect of Wyoming" Volution Is the proper re-- I suit to be accomplished, v.i . to adhere f to the rule of priority of appropriation t and. disregard state lines, thereby giving, fell effect and proper validity of ex- - ; Istlng appropriations and uees In ac- rordanoe with the actual priorities, but that It should be done, not upon some erroneous theorv that the states actually face each other, as full. Independent eoveretgns and ultimate landowners, but upon the theory that the water rights granted In both states come from the fame source; the federal government, and that that fact Is controlling. The particular divers on made in Colorado and, complained of by Wyoming should not be enjoined unless It dees or - will wPh prior appropriation;- but If It does or will so Interfere, it should bo enjoined to that extent." I Decisive Ruling Sought. The bulk of Mr. Rlters argument "to day was not addressed so much to the case at issue as to the pr nclpl the government seeks to have laid down by the supremo ccurt In the hope of settling once for all the question, raised by government counsel, namely, federal owner-shi- p of waters In Innavtgabls streams of the west; and this argument drove home the somewhat astounding fact that nowhere In the federal constitution or in the federal statutes la there any clear, specific definition of ths ownersh.p of these waters. From the early settlement of the west to the gweseht there has ben no absolute, specific definition of the title to what Is probably the most valuable of the resource of the west. In support of his argument In favor cf government Ownership of water, Mr. Riter maintained that upon the acquisition of the territory now comprised within the western states ths United States did he. became vested with all property rights are 8o far as Wyoming and Colorado in that territory, except vested private concerned, the argument centered around Colorado's contention that she may use the states were unless suoh formed, the wafers within her boundaries regardspecifically passed to the states less of the effect upon the flow of the rights admission. he argued, Tbs upon states, stream In the lower state, and Wyoming s have no greater control over water right contention that the waters should be di- In over veststream than Innavigable vided between the states In accordance ed rights in land. The state have, how' with the of applications, , regardpriority to individuals ever, the control power less of the state line. In their use of water. now In Water r.ghts others devested Basic Principle Involved. rive their existence like title to land, stand-point, from acts Of congress, according to the But, from the general western the contention of the federal gov- government contention, and all Interest ernment greatly overshadows the con- In water not so granted necessarily retentions of either state, and shoqLd the mains In ths Uh'ted States, Congress, government be sustained by the supreme it was maintained, has net granted title court, the prevailing theory of state con- to these western waters to the states, trol of water would be upset, and an and the"bnare ratification of stats era of undisputed federal ownership and such as Colorados, asrtlng control wou'd follow, for the governownership of water, does not dfvsat ths ment's contention is revolutionary, and Un'ted States of It property rights In as set forth In the government brief, such waters. Usa down th'a assertion: "The United States retains Its origi- Old Law Invoked. nal plenary ownership of the right of Primarily the government's retention use of nav" gable waters in the western rests upon the act of Ju'y it 1868. wh'oh states, egeept In so far as it has parted was entitled An act granting the right with It through acts of congress; and thla property, Ilka tes.pmp V'lnY'for public lands, generally Is wholly Immune pose," whloh was in realltv the rur first from state Interference or control. The to supersede law, pas-e- d general mining state power affeots only those rights the codes laid down miners' by meetings been which have grantd by congresa' I.att Rogers closed the argument for In the early dava of the west before Colorado this morning and was followed there was snv federal law provld'ng for bv Assistant Attorney General William the acquisition of property r'ghte from This old statute was D. Riter of Salt Lake for the "government, the government declared to be the feundat'on of all wa- as Intervener. The-ri- i nir -a-rgument-was madsr"1ry prior appro John W. Lacey for Wyoming. On the recognizes the principle of but, according to the govern. facts today, as yesterday, counsel for the priatlon, ment's the federal also establishes view, two states disagreed, Colorado again conas minerals. tend nr that there ta ample water tn the ownership of ws(er as wellaccord leg station, ng to normal flow of Laramie river to satisfy Mr.Subsequent the theory the prior rights established tn Wyoming, that Riter, does not support congress recognises the states In-as anfl to vet permit the diversion, of 71 000 any ownership or control of acre-feto the Greeley-Poudr- e project having navigable streams. The desert laqJ act ln Co'orado. of 'MarrnJrTrr"Vn"dned si sustaining the government's claim in the present Riter Makes Argument., lratanee, for In that law congress laid In reply Colorado contended, first,, that down certain stipulation regarding the the contemplated divers on would ma- appropriat on of water by desert entry-met, and reThe timber and stone act of the terially- exceed 71,000 verted to the testimony of the engineer following year was said to bs a clear of the Greeley-Poudr- e that the source of water project to xiphoid recognition h s contention that Colorado was seek- rights Ig the United Plates The forest ing to use aa much of the flow of the reserve act of June 4, 1897, was also cited ramie as its works would permit, re- - a upho ding the theory of government elect on rights ownership, rardless of the on the river. Judge Lacey, in closing, asked the supreme court to Federal Rights Assumed. rule on this dispute as though no etate The national reclamation act Itself asline crossed the valley of Laramie river sumes that the water is subject to the In the to stream as rule entire though use and disposition of the g( vernment " controversy lay within a single state, and section 6 of that act was held clearand to uphold the doctrine of prior apcontention, while In jo establishlhls plication and use. Earlier Wyoming had ly section B of that law congress undertook asked a decree that, would prohibit the to water create rights and define them. diversion In Colorado of waters of LaraLegislation by congress with regard to mie river Into another watershed. water rights, according to Mr. Riter. all Attorney Genoral Riter followed his main argument on prmclpe, dealt also centers o;on, and laInIntended toofpreserve, 1868 of with the Issue between the states, point- the policy adopted to the ect unreserved use.the granting the right ing out that both stales are seeking United waters of State the proprietary on based solution the Idea that the states in accordance with local are full sovereigns. Colorado's conten to lndlvlduas water of law. system right tion that she may use the waters within Later enactments .adopt the plsn for her boundaries regardess of the effect granting permits or censes under exupon theflpw In the loner reaches of ecutive the Laramie river In Wyoming, he said, without regulation Instead of easements regulation and substitute direct would be untenable, even If the two states were full sovereigns The proper dealing between the federal government division of the waters of this river, he and the grantee for the loose. Indirect by the law of 16. declared to be a Justiciable matter to be procedure permitted such a pJan been sdoptd as to wadetermined by the supreme court. Colo Had ter or for thee rights had redo, also, he said, seems to contend beenrights, as In thepatents case of mining rights, glvn for a pioprietary ownership In herself of Innavigable waters within her bor it Is net likely, said Mr. Riter, that proprietary rights of the government dert and - for upholding the applicant the svstem within the state, but as again to the waters would, ever have been .Wyoming desires to have full riparian questioned. Mr. R ter In coneluslon said that the t rights Inso that she can develop her own question ths United States or lands the future and retain a large the states whether the water of Innavigable ownership In the water, the upholding of stream In own the west has never been such a doctrine, said Mr. Riter, would passed upon bv the supreme court, go far to lock up the resources of the but he maintained that In a number of west rases the court Incidentally considered It and expressed the view that the UnitInsists on Federal Title. ed States has a title' and right to the A tor Wyomings contention that the water on its public lands whGUxJnde-pendortf-- .Use ox the water of Laramie river should "Stale permlss'on. In no case, be confined to the watershed of (that so far as he knew, had the court susstream, such a decree would be unwise. tained a contrary theory. The western With Wyoming's contention that a divi- states can show no grant of Innav-Igabsion should be made between the states waters to themy he asserted, so tnev Can net b held to own or control such waters without putting the whole law la that field on a new foundation. lth. ( Overcoat Mfir Or tmecll 5h7 n. scr-fee- 1 1 $25.00 and $30;00'Valde OVERCOATS for r " . . . e i ' . - i . ' $40.00 and $50.00 Value OVERCOATS for.. . . ' f 1 ef -- .e - Four hundred wonderful coats to select from Dont shiver, from cold any longer URGE GOLD BASIS. Jan. 10 Resolutions urging EndsStubbcrnCoughs in a Hurry CHICAGO, that prices on exports from Germany and Austria 4e placed on a basis wars forwarded to Washington toFar real efferflTeneae, this eld e day by the director of the Illinois Manramedr haa na renal, ufacturer' association. trail sad cheaply prepared. The resolutions stated that depreciating curencles in Germany and Austria made it Impossible for either country to Youll never know how quickly a bad sell a large percentage of Its goods for cough can be conquered, until you try export at a profit. Germany and Austhis famous old remedy. tria cannot recover and other countries Anyone who has- - coughed sli dsy end will su'fcy If this condition (ontlouws, the all night, will ssy that ths immediate resolution said, relief given la almost like magio. It takes hut a moment to prepare, ana .MILLIONAIRE DIES IN FLORIDA. ORLANDO, Fla., Jan 10. A. B Coates, really there is nothing better for coughs. Into a pint bottle, put 2 Vi ounces of millionaire mine operator of Virginia, publisher of the Plnex; then add plain granulated sugar Mmn , and owner anddied at his Virginia Enterprise, today syrup to make a full pint. Or you can country near He was (1 this place oity. use clarified molasses, honey, or corn old. Mr. Coate was a pioneer deyeans syrup, instead of sugar syrup. Either veloper of the Meaaha rang In the Lake way.- - ths. full pint saves about Superior district and was one of the of the money usually spent for largest independent operators la the incough preparations, and gives you a more dustry. positive, effective remedy. It keep pertastes pleasant children CABINET- - CONFERENCES-CONT1NU- E, fectly and MjLdRID, Jsn. 19 Conferences of ou can feel thia taka hold Instantly, ministers continued hers throurhout ths soothing and healing the membranes In day, amt tonight tt was reported that a ail the air passages. It promptly loosens solution of the dispute between Minister a dry. tight cough,--an-a soon you --wilt committees had been found whereby the , notics tho phlegm thin out and then discontented elements would be recon diaapnear altogether. A day net' will died. usually break up an ordinary throat or chat void, and It is also splendid for "LETTER CARRIERS TO MEET. bronchitis, eroup, hoarseness, and bronLetter Carr ler of- - Bett tak e-- branch chial asthma. No, Hi will hold en Installation Of ofPlnex is a most valuable concentrated ficers with the ladles auxiliary at I exof Norway o'clock genuine compound pint tonight at room 7. Labor temple. tract. ths most reliable remedy for A program of musical selections will be and throat chest ailments. given and refreshments will bs served. To avoid disappointment ask your DIVORCE IS GRANTED. druggist for 2V4 ounce of Pinex with direction!, and dont accept anything fielva ft. Howard Was given a divorce else. Guaranteed to give absolute n from Mark Albert Howard, a or money refunded, The Pinex by Judge L. B. Wight of the bookkeeper, Third dts- trlct court yesterday. The suit was i Co, Ti Wayne. Ind. , brought on the ground of desertion. f rd heme-mad- home-mad- o -- two-thir- ' 5 253 South. Mala Street Proven4aBaSalt Lakes LeadingGlothier satis-faetlo- 4 |