| OCR Text |
Show Tho right to appropriate wator is rocognized by tho laws of the Unitod States, the Laws and deoisions of the courts and tho .customs prevailing In Montana, v/hioh aro now and wore in forco in Montana at the time the agreement was made with the Indians, and these appellants havo shown that they acquired title to their lands under the grant from tho Government and mado valid and prior appropriations of tho waters to reclaim such lands. 0O0 Mr. Assistant Attorney General Sanford and Mr. Assistant Attorney Genoral Van Orsdcl, with whom The Solicitor General and Mr. A. C. Campbell, Special Attorney, wero on the brief, for appellee: Tho decroo below adjudging the complainants' right to the flow of tho waters of wilk River as against all of the defendants before tho court, ic a joint decree within the moaning of the rulo that all parties against whom a joint judgment or decree is renderod must join in prosecuting a writ of error or appeal, and that if prosocutcd by loss than tho whole number of such parties, without a sum-ons and severance or other equivalent proceeding, tho appollatc court acquires no jurisdiction of tho caso and tho writ of error or appeal will be dismissed. Owings v. ..inennnon, 7 Pot. 399; I.lasterson v. fiorndon, 10 Wall. 415; Hampton v. Rouso, 13 Wall. 187; Wilson's Heirs v. Insuranco Co., 12 Pet. 140. The dofect of lack of jurisdiction for want of nccoo-a eary parties to the appeal was not walvod by the final decrco ontered by the Circuit Court of Appeals upon the morits without |
