| OCR Text |
Show 6003 decide. I would think it would be improper to cut off abso-lutely at the boundaries, probably, in most cases; that some latitude in evidence of that kind might properly be allowed. Buy any latitude that was allowed would only be allowed to the extent that it would have a direct bearing on the question in issue, namely: Is this or is it not navigable water over the stretch in question? Now, I cannot for the life of me see how evidence of conditions in Colorado, or conditions within the State of Utah far removed from the section of the river in question, could have any bearing on the matter of navigability here. With reference to counsel's suggestion about having an aid to the Court in the trial of the issues, I think that is more plausible in its sound than it is in any substance it has. On the same theory, you would have as properly receivable in evidence conditions with respect to every section of the river from its source clear down. Well, now, of course, the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the fact that a stream is navigable in one place does not in any degree tend to prove that it is navigable in another place. The question is , as the Supreme Court has repeatedly said, What is the condition |
