OCR Text |
Show -122- courts of Texas * * * or that, in the end, there must be a trial of physical strength between the Government of the Union and Texas." 143 U. S f 621, 641 The court held that it had jurisdiction to entertain the suit between the United States and the State, primarily upon the theory of the separate sovereignties of the parties litigant While the peaceable method of settlement of the boundary contro- versy by compact failed ^ nevertheless,' a consideration of the entire his- tory from the time of the first joint commission down to the final decision in the case, leaves no room for doubt that compacts between a State or States arid the United States are as appropriate and desirable as compacts between States. See United States vs. Texas, l43 U. S. 621 s 162 U. S.lo Undoubtedly all natters respecting navigable rivers and the use of waters thereof, may properly be considered and settled through the in- strumentality of joint compact commissions constituted by the United States and the Interested State or States. In fact it would appear that before any great; works are constructed with Government funds on certain of our western rivers., for generation of power or the reclamation of arid lands, compacts respecting jurisdiction and use of the waters of the river should firr.t be made between the United States and the Interested State or States, While some time would necessarily be consumed in the formulation cf such compacts, the fact that by this method the respective rights to the use and the allocation of the water of the streams involved would be settled in advance of large expenditures of Government funds (with full and free opportunity),for concurrent or subsequent development through private ven- ture), would sesm to oomnend some such procedure as more prudent snd con- structive than that followed during the r?ast whereby it seems to have jean the settled policy of the Reclamation Service to discourage private development, on those streams upon which Government projects have been constructed,.by denial of rights of way over rmblic lands, irrespective of the rights of control of water supplies by the States, upon alleged ground of fears of water depletion but with the actual effect of almost complete control of the streamse ' • We conclude this section by venturing the assertion that had the officials of the United States insisted upon a compact between the United States and the States of Colorado snd Wyoming prior to construction of the Pathfinder Reservoir upon the North Platte River, whereby the respec- tive rights of the States and of the United States to trie use and disposi- tion oi' tlie waters of that stream would have been settled in advance, the past, present and future controversy and friction between the United States and tliose States would have been avoided, irrigation development within thore Sta-tes by means of private capital would not have beer, almost wholly prevented through refusal by Governmental departments and. bvreaus to obey the spiri-fc of the laws of the United States respecting the granting of rights of way for these private projects over public lands, and the irri- gation development v.dthin both States by use of the waters of that stream would haves proceeded through expenditure of private as well as of Govern- mental funds,, without injury to the Government project and to the substan- tial benezfit and general welfare of both the States and the Hatioru We |