The Daily state register. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1870-1872, 1871-12-08

uses such-ss prOpelllng machinery.
But such artificial use must not in
terfere with the rights of other pro-
prietors above or below. The right
is special to none but commonto all.
Justice Story puts this doctrine
in these words Every proprietor
has q right to use the water flowing
in its natural current without dimin-
ution or obstruction :" but no pro-
prietor has the rightto use the water
to the prejudice of another" An
other Judge. equally eminent, says
BY the rules Of the common law
all proprietors Of lands have precise
" the same rights to water flowing
through their domains and one can
never be permitted TO so use the
stream as to injure or annoy those
who are situated on the course of it
either above or below" And still
another: EVER owner OF land
situate upon a stream has a right to
the natural flow of the stream-a
right to insist that the stream shall
continue to run ut c2lr1ere SptebGt;
that it shall flow upon his land in
the usual quantity, at its natural
place. and at its usual hight"
Now applying the law as announc-
ed in this case, to this country, letus
consider the consequences. The
lands of Nevada, immensely valuable
with water, are non-productive and
~valueless without it. Nothing will
grow without ~icriyetton. Water can
not be used without permanent d.
version from the stream, fer Uriga-
ton is a5s,rpio", and absorption
must, of necessity, diminish, and in
truth, in most cases, destroy the
stream. As no proprietoris entitled
to diminish the flow to the injury Of
a proprietor below, and as irriga-
ton cannot go Gu without percepti-
bic diminution, it follows there can
be no irrigation. Thus perishes the
AGRICULTURAL interests of the State.
To illustrate the consequences by
an actual case, Il now pending IN
the United States Court: The Union
Mill x Mining Company own the
Merrimac mill. situate on the Carson
river. and own in fee 100 acres of
land through which the river runs,
and upon which the mill is built.
The company are therefore riparian
owners. and as such, entitled to have
the water flow IN the natural channel
without diminutiOn or obstruction
and to apply the water to milling
purposes as it passes through the
land. But the ranchmen of Douglas
county, as we'll, those upon the main
river as its tributary streams, are
permanently diverting and absorbing
the water for the irrigation OF their
land and are thus diminishing it
to the injury of the mill company
a riparian owner below. For this
diversion many have been, and all
may be, sued, and if the doctrine of
the State court is followed by the
Federal, every irrigating ditch Will
be closed and the ruined ranchmen
will be comnelled to abandon that
which deprived of water no longer
affords them a subsistence.
Nor is this the sumofthe frlghtful
consequences folloWine this decision.
4 riparian proprietor has no more
rightto corruptth water of a stream
to the injury O. another, than to OBJ
struct or diminish it. The intro
duction of any foreign substance
whereby the water is made impure,
or less fit for use, is as clearly for.
hidden by the law as diversion. But
the use of water for mining, and III
many cases formilli"g ores, corrupts
and renders it unit for use. A rip.
arian owner below. desiring to u.s.