| OCR Text |
Show the invasion of the pestilence.'* CLASSIFICATION OF COMPACTS WITH REFERENCE TO SUBJECT MATTER Settlement of Boundary Disputes and Cession of Title The earliest occasions for the use of compacts, antedating the adoption of the Constitution and continuing with but few exceptions until the early 1900's, were the settlement of boundary disputes coincident with the cession of title. It soon became apparent that boundaries were not susceptible to judicial settlement, and where attempts in that direction were made the results were unsatisfactory. In Washington v. Oregon, 2li|. U. S. 205, decided in 1919* and in Minnesota v. Wisconsin, 250 U. S. 273, decided in 1920, the Supreme Court went so far as to suggest the use of an interstate compact as a more desirable method of running a boundary line than litigation. Control and Improvement of Navigation The first real departure from the boundary type of compact occurred in 186l when Congress gave its consent to joint action on the part of the states of Arkansas, Louisiana and Texas for the removal of raft on the Red River. Cases of joint interest in waters of contiguous states were among the first situations to which the compact method of settlement was applied. Under the Articles of Confederation an agreement was concluded by the Commissioners of Virginia and Maryland in I785 which dealt with the regulation of navigation and fishing and the Exercise of jurisdiction of the-waters of the Potomac River. Similar navigation difficulties confront us today and it is probable that the need for interstate adjustment by the compact method will not decrease as time elapses. The Colorado River Compact of I92I4. and the Port of New York Authority Agreement of more recent date are further examples of the efficacy of interstate agreements in this field. In each of these instances the problem was regional and political control was divided between two or more states and the United States. It was apparent that the action of one state without the cooperation of another was useless and that joint action of the states without federal co- operation was likewise inadequate.. The solutions were finally found by resort to joint state action with the Congressional consent required by the Constitution. Flood Control and Soil Erosion ViTithin the last few years a large proportion of federal funds has been allocated or specifically appropriated for flood control. This fact alone should be sufficient to convince the most skeptical that there is a dire need for defi- nite action, along this line. An analysis of these problems indicates very strong- ly that it is probably not so much a federal as a regional problem. |
