Show W who bo 0 ans 44 the fk A A decision of ot much practical interest just now torching toti tor ching water rights ia la incorporated ji in the S sec seo e e ond volume of Ba sawyers circuit court now going through the pres press water rights have as assumed an importance in this state never known before every running stream and every spring represents alth aith and life ya hejra Ts ago land operators toba lookup up as far ws pbs possible sible sibie all the springs and ha ad of small streams on govern government nent land in order orden ao to boiu holu the iley ilek to thea thes the actuation hud tion the smal smallest leit subdivisions of forty fon for ty acres aeres would often As A spring rin of water then would practically mid wid bold hold ten thousand acres of public land und nobody wanted land laud wit without wa water mining interests have havo largely shaped water rights the tho th 6 system which prevailed wasia liberal one for the miner because the tho water in the thin mining districts had little value vidue except as it might be turned to account by mining men without water they could do nothing with it they could turnout turn out millions of gold but water has bas become komenow mare valuable for hgr agn cultural uses mes in california than n it is for mining pu purposes a although ethl ough in the latter iatter view it lq i still of great greila importance the dase case decided by tb the e I 1 federal cire circuit uit coure court was on a suit brought t by union mill and find mining 0 company meally against F erris ferris and others for diverting the 7 waters itara of the canson carson river the hid had acquired title to a tract of bf land laiad on the niver river and had constructed at a dan oan race and mill for reducing i g ore prior to that time linie the plaintiff had held the possessory right the kp fee being in the united St states aites altes the t entered upon a portion of public land about twenty miles above he the point where the plaint plaintiff lT had erected a in illand liland and finally obtained a put patent nt nor for the land this thia tract of land was arable arabie and the tbd defendant diverted inverted apart a part of the water in the of the abe river rNe and conducted it on ao 10 to his land by means of a alku for irrigating purpose purposes he I 1 used tho the water continuously froni from 1860 until suit buit was wag brought more hore hea jea baratter ea raTter sueh such use bran i the court iri irl d deciding g fe file case cas benore start starts with thel the proposition nopo ropo 1 that beford before fore ford the title to tw these lands was das was acquired i fro from nithe the un united fred ftc d states no occupancy or hr appropriation of bf the wa elther either party no state or territorial legislation ad no rule tule or decision established hy ily the state courts dour tsIn in C controversies 0 i iween between occupants occupant ef of public lands lauds can in any mauner manner qualify limit or restrict the tho operation tf bf the government patent A stream of running water is a part and parcel of the land through which it flows and the use of it as an incident passes with the title to the tha land the right of the government to such sueh absolu absolute to u the ti title titie t le passes wb when en the gran grantee tees takes talles all the govern ment held r the court further held beld that a riparian proprietor may I 1 awfully divert the water of a stream for the purpose pose of irrigating his land to a reasonable extent but in no case maglic may he do this so as to destroy render useless or materially affect the application of water by other riparian proprietors it is held that irrigation is not a natural want wrent in the sense that water is for quenching thirst that a riparian proprietor may satisfy without regard to the rights of others A riparian proprietor is only entitled to take water on W his own iana land and must re rei rel i turn the surplus to the stream before it leaves his boundaries wh what t la is reasonable use is to be date determined by circumstances bu but t a riparian proprietor cannot divert the water and so absorb it on his own ground as as to sensibly diminish mill powers or other water rights below him it would follow that water companies not being riparian proprietors cannot obtain the night right to divert water running over public lands except by iby purchasing of alithe nil all the riparian proprietors or by condemning these r nights rights under the provision of emin ent end domain condemnation involves appeal appraisement lenient and payment of damages to all parties who have a right to the water I 1 if fa a stream or lake laue ivero ivere were taken ou on government laud ld land 1 parties acquiring rights below onether public landsi lands would still have a it right to the water as ds an incident to their title tho ithe the points decided are arc of importance also aiso as affecting irb ird irrigation gation companies streams cannot be diverted divested or dismembered by such companies and the water sold un less the right light to do llo this has been pu purchased of all tho the various proprietors bithe or the right has been acquired red by condemnation and the payment of appraised dar damages nages gages the waste private of water wafer or the conversion to arl avato use beyond a reason reasonable aiji atil e necessity is a violation of the soundest principles principle of bf law water an incident of the heli hell la adl it cannot be separated or turned out of its course by any rights which exist in one or a dozen p proprietors r lors tors it isas laas is as much protected by law aa standing timber or growing crops western paper SK i 1 |