Arizona weekly citizen., 1893-10-28

Venuon oy the platform which was re-
ported, 1t has taken a view of the rela-
tons OF the federal government to the
reclamation of the arid lands which will
not find favor with the majority of the
people of Colorado.
The platform declared in favor of
federal interference for the purpose of
regulating the dis ribution of the water
of streams raising in one state and
flowing by natural courses through one
or more other states. IL this view be
carried out to its legitimate conclusion,
it Will place the entire matter of the
distribution of water for irrigation pur-
poses under :be COZ troll of the national
government.
There are some features of the problem
which is presented by the fact that
stream rising in one state flows into
another which seem TO call for national
regulation. But if the subject is more
carefully examined, it is readily seen
that it Is a matter with which the
national government has really nothing
to do, except in so far as 1t may relate
to vested rights. Under the constitu-
ton, congress has jurisdiction over
navigable rivers, and if in any case
river flowing through the arid region is
navigable, congress has right to legis-
late as 20 the disposition of its water.
But these Gases are so few that they
constitute the exception to the general
rule and are hardly worthy to be con-
sidered in connection with the So beet
Of the irrigation.
According to the constitution Of Colo
RADIO all the unappropriated water in
the streams of this state belongs to the
public. In other words, it belongs to
the state. At this point distinction
should he recognized between the
iurisdictional and the property rig Its of
the federal government. The federal
government is the owner of large
quantity of land in Colorado, but it has
no iurisdictional authority ever the land
| except what it acquires through owner
ship. The governmental or jurisdic-
tional authority over all such lands is
in the state. Consequently 10 relation
to the subject OF retaining govern
ment land by irrigation the national
government has no greater claim upon
the water or the stream of Colorado
than any private owner of lard has. If
it wishes to appropriate the water OF
subject to the constitution of Colorado.
1t follows, therefore, that if congress
should attempt to legislate in general
concerning the distribution of the
waters Of our streams, it would come
into direct conflict with the state eu-
thorities, and in all probability the
national supreme court would decide
that congress has DO right in matter
of this sort to step IN and usurp the
place of the state Legislature.
This view Of the situation suggests
that any attempt to regulate irrigation
by federal authority and regardless of
state lines would lead to a very serious
serious conflict. But if in answer it be
said that the supreme court would up
hold congress in its attempt to override
state authority, then We should be
face to face with the fact that it is
utterly impracticable for congress to
legislate intelligently upon a matter
concerning which the great majority of
the members of con gress are and always
will be ignorant. The problem of
water distribution for the purposes of
irrigation is so intricate that men who
are familiar with the subject find it
exceedingly difficult to reach a salts
factory solution. These difficulties
would be almost lnsurmountable for a
Legislative body like congress, which
is SO far removed from anything like
exact knowledge of the subject.
The only practicable solution of this
P3OoiSAh 10 W no iounN III Siou1 VI
the arid lands to the states upon the
condition that the states undertake
the work Of reclamation. IL conflicts
should arise between the irrigators in
one state aud those residing in another,
the matter would have to be settled
in accordance with those general prin-
ciples under which vested rights are
protected. This is a matter for the
courts and not for congress to determine.
Denver Republican.