OCR Text |
Show GREAT LAKES LITIGATION 653 In increasing the diversion from 4,167 cubic feet a second to 8,500, the Sanitary District defied the authority of the National Government resting in the Secretary of War. And in so far as the prior diversion was not for the purposes of maintaining navigation in the Chicago River it was without any legal basis, because made for an inadmissible purpose. It therefore is the duty of this Court by an appropriate decree to compel the reduction of the diversion to a point where it rests on a legal basis and thus to restore the navigable capacity of Lake Michigan to its proper level. The Sanitary District authorities, relying on the argument with reference to the health of its people, have much too long delayed the needed substitution of suitable sewrage plants as a means of avoiding the diversion in the future. Therefore they can not now complain if an immediately heavy burden is placed upon the District because of their attitude and course. The situation requires the District to devise proper methods for providing sufficient money and to construct and put in operation wdth all reasonable expe- dition adequate plants for the disposition of the sewage through other means than the Lake diversion. Though the restoration of just rights to the complainants will be gradual instead of immediate it must be continuous and as speedy as practicable, and must include everything that is essential to an effec- tive project. The Court expresses its obligation to the Master for his useful, fair, and comprehensive report. To determine the practical measures needed to effect the object just stated and the period required for their completion there will be need for the examination of experts; and the appropriate provisions of the necessary decree wTill require careful consideration. For this reason, the case will be again referred to the Masfer for a further examination into the questions indicated. He will be authorized and directed to hear witnesses presented by each of the parties, and to call witnesses of his own selection, should he deem it necessary to do so, and then with all convenient speed to make report of his conclu- sions and of a form of decree. It is so ordered. Wisconsin v. Illinois 281 U.S. 179 (1930) Suits brought originally in this Court by the States of Wisconsin, Minnesota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and New York, against the State of Illinois and the Chicago Sanitary District, to enjoin further taking of water from Lake Michigan for the purpose of carrying off the sewage of Chicago and vicinity through a drainage canal. Pursu- ant to the opinion reported in 278 U.S. 367, the case was referred for the second time to Charles E. Hughes, Esquire, as Special Master. The Master was directed to take testimony on the practical measures needed to dispose of the sewage without the unlawful diversions of water, and the time required for their completion, and to report his conclu- sions for the formation of a decree. The decision now reported was rendered after a hearing upon exceptions to the Master's report under the second reference. |