The St. Johns herald., 1886-06-03

any man who shall hereafter place
 cattle on any range in this district
 now occupied, and where the right
 of tenure is fully established and recognized.
 Dallas News: Very dry weather
 is reported in Presidio county.
 There are 85,0OO head of cattle, and
 there is at present only about water
 enough to supply half that number,
 though in any season of ordinary
 moisture the county would support
 three or four times as many as are
 now in it. An abundant supply of excellent water is found during the dryest times at depths varying from 30 to 60 feet, and in year or two,
 when eattlemen get wells, even a longer dry spell than the one they are now passing through will not affect the cattle interests adversely. There are no buyers in the country west of the Pecos, and even if there were they could not purchase at the present rates, as the cattlemen of that region are in very good f. nancial condition and can hold on until there is an improvement in the market.
 Rocky Mountain Husbandman: The question of riparian rights whic has long agitated the minds of the farmers in countries where irri- gation is necessary, has at last been brought to an issue in the supreme court of California, a decision be- ing rendered in favor of the ripa- rian owner. The case in point is one of years standing. Lux & Miller had brought suit against the Kern River Land and Canal Com pany to enjOin them from diverting the water of the Kern river, which flowed through their lands, and have at length obtained decision in their favor. The opinion in the case was written by Justice McKin- stry, and embraced over three hun- dred pages of manuscript. It holds that the water flowing through lands is part of the realty-a principle which Is based on the old common law of England. which it maintains Is still in force. Justices Mckee, Thornton and Sharpstein concurred in the opinion, while Chief Justice Morrison and Justices Ross and Myrick dissented. Thus 1t will be seen that while the decision is final so far as the State of California is concerned, it is not very strong, in- asmuch as 1t is only sustained by a vote of four to three, and will not have much effect upon the country at large, until the question is pass ed upon by the supreme court, the highest tribunal in the land. Should this body concur in the California opinion it will completely upset the title of water rights and render them as worthless as the paper upon which they are recorded. This sub- ject is one of great importance and has been before the people for near ly hundred years, and though rip arian rights were recognized to some extent in the long ago the claim almost become obsolete, all modern transactions having been made OH the basis that water flow ing through land was no part there of, but was an independent realty of itself, and became the rightful property of it's first appropriator, provided such appropriation was continuous and water rights have been bought and sold with the same confidence that has governed land transactions. But if the California decision is sustained the whole ba- sis of water titles is knocked into a cooked hat, and the best water right in the world is not worth fig. Even to the riparian owner it is of but little value as he can only obtain possession of it where it en- ters his land and must return it to its natural channel where it leaves his possessions. But as water is largely consumed by it's diversion from it's proper channel, wesques- tion if its appropriation for irriga- tion purposes, under the riparian I1