OCR Text |
Show ARKANSAS RIVER LITIGATION 511 valley it has worked little, if any, detriment, and regarding the interests of both States and the right of each to receive benefit through irrigation and in any other manner from the waters of this stream, we are not satisfied that Kansas has made out a case entitling it to a decree. At the same time it is obvious that if the depletion of the waters of the river by Colorado continues to increase there will come a time when Kansas may justly say that there is no longer an equitable division of benefits and may rightfully call for relief against the ac- tion of Colorado, its corporations and citizens in appropriating the waters of the Arkansas for irrigation purposes. The decree which, therefore, will be entered will be one dismissing the petition of the intervenor, without prejudice to the rights of the United States to take such action as it shall deem necessary to pre- serve or improve the navigability of the Arkansas Biver. The decree will also dismiss the bill of the State of Kansas as against all the defendants, without prejudice to the right of the plaintiff to institute new proceedings whenever it shall appear that, through a material increase in the depletion of the waters of the Arkansas by Colorado, its corporations or citizens, the substantial interests of Kansas are being injured to the extent of destroying the equitable apportionment of the benefits between the two States resulting from the flow of the river. Each party will pay its own costs. In closing, we may say that the parties to this litigation have ap- proached the investigation of the questions in the most honorable spirit, seeking to present fully the facts as they could be ascertained from witnesses and discussing the evidence and questions of law with marked research and ability. Mr. Justice White and Mr. Justice McKenna concur in the result. Mr. Justice Moody took no part in the decision of this case. Colorado v. Kansas 320 U.S. 383 (1943) Original suit in equity by Colorado against Kansas and the Finney County (Kansas) Water Users'Association. Mr. Justice Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court. This suit is the latest in a series of litigations between Kansas, or her citizens, and Colorado, or her citizens, concerning their respective rights to the beneficial use of the waters of the Arkansas River. The river has its origin in central Colorado, and is a mountain tor- rent for 130 miles to a point near Canon City where it enters a foothill region ending near Pueblo. Thence it traverses the high plains of eastern Colorado and western Kansas. In the areas mentioned the stream is non-navigable. In 1901 Kansas brought suit against Colorado in this court for an injunction restraining the latter from diverting, or permitting anyone under her authority to divert, waters of the river within Colorado, and for general relief. Kansas v. Colorado, 206 U.S. 46.1 [The Court's summary of the bill and answer is omitted.] 1 The court overruled a demurrer to the bill and required Colorado to answer. Kansas v. Colorado, 185 U.S. 125. |