OCR Text |
Show 200 INTERSTATE COMPACTS ARTICLE VI This compact may be modified or terminated at any time by mutual consent of the signatory States, and upon such termination all rights then established hereunder shall continue unimpaired. ARTICLE VII This compact shall become operative when approved by the legis- lature of each of the signatory States and by the Congress of the United States. Notice of approval by the legislature shall be given by the governor of each State to the governor of the other State, and the President of the United States is requested to give notice to the governors of the signatory States of approval by the Congress of the United States. In Witness Whereof, the commissioners have signed this compact in duplicate originals, one of which shall be deposited with the secre- tary of state of each of the signatory States. Done at the city of Santa Fe, in the State of New Mexico, this twenty-seventh day of November, in the year of our Lord one thou- sand nine hundred and twenty-two. Delph E. Carpenter Stephen B. Davis, Junior NOTES State ratifications.-Colorado, Act of April 13,1923 (Sess. L. 1923, p. 696; Colo. Eev. Stat. 1963, sec. 149-3-1). New Mexico, Act of February 7, 1923 (Laws 1923, p. 13; N.M. Stat. 1953 Ann., sec. 75-34-3 note). Congressional consent to compact.-The "consent and approval" of the Congress was given the La Plata River Compact by the Act of January 29, 1925 (43 Stat. 796), from which the text of the compact set out above is taken. For legislative history, see S. 1656, 68th Congress; Senate Report 554 (Committee on Irrigation and Reclamation) and House Report 1076 (Committee on Irrigation and Reclamation), 68th Congress; 65 Cong. Bee. 9185-9186 (1924), 66 Cong. Rec. 2246-2248 (1925); P. L. 346, 68th Congress. Litigation.-In Hinderlider v. La Plata River and Cherry Creek Ditch Co., 304 U.S. 92 (1938), the Supreme Court, reversing 101 Colo. 73, 70 Pac. (2d) 849 (1937), held that the Colorado State Engi- neer's administration of the stream in accordance with an agreement reached under Article II, paragraph 3, of the La Plata Riyer Compact did not deprive the plaintiff of any rights to the protection of which it was entitled under the due process clauses of the Federal and State constitutions, even though its right to divert specified quantities of water, subject only to the rights of certain prior appropriators in Colorado, had been adjudicated in a proceeding in the Colorado courts in 1898, long before the making of the compact. The Court held, inter alia, (1) that "Whether the apportionment of the water of an interstate stream be made by compact between the upper and lower States with the consent of Congress or by a decree of this Court, the apportionment is binding upon the citizens of each |