OCR Text |
Show 5999 The Special Master. That was Mr. Kolb's testimony that it came up in connection with. Mr. Blackmar. I established by Mr. Hoyt, a hydraulic engineer, that in considering rivers it was necessary to con-sider the whole of the river. The Special Master. Well, of course, that is not so, Mr. Blackmar. The Supreme Court has ruled in the Rio Grande case that part of a river may be non- navigable, even for interstate purposes, and the lower portion of the river may be navigable; so that it clearly does not necessarily follow that a river is navigable in one spot because it is navigable in another. If you were seeking to prove that this river was navigable south of Lees Ferry, the fact that it was navigable north of Lees Ferry would not necessarily prove it, and vice versa. Mr. Blackmar. I think Your Honor is correct on that. But at the same time, whenever the question of navigation comes up, whether it is on this section of the river or on another section of the river, it is necessary for the Court to have before it a complete picture of that river. The Special Master. Well, do you claim that, if a question arose as to whether the Rio Grande was navigable at Brownsville, that testimony that it was non- navigable in New Mexico would be relevant? |