The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1901-05-25
ooLoRADoIs DEsIaNs en- KAN-


Two facts stand out prominently in
the Kansas vs.. Colorado irrigation suit
that intensihes its interest to Kansas
beyond that already made clear in the
published reports Of the causes Of and
arguments in the litigation When they
are understood the sour grapes aspect
that some would put upon it is dispelled-
It is not accepted at the first blush
that the sister state Of Colorado plots to
/ turn a goodly portion of southwestern
Kansas into an arid desert The mere
statement must be followed by proof,
or conclusive argument at least, that
there is genuine cause for alarm. One
Of these facts goes a long way toward
doing that. This is the fact that Colo
RADIO has gone in for state ownership
and control of irrigation canals. It has
entered upon this enterprise on a large
scale since its original start ten years
ago. And when a state makes appropri-
atoms for public works and starts in on
an enterprise it does not do things by
halves A great canal near Canon City
is owned and controlled by the state Of
Colorado.
The state authorizes its employees to
divert water into this canal to the
amount of seven hundred and flfty-six
and 28-1OO cubic inches OF water per
flow of the river and it is continued dur
ing the entire season within which an
nual crops are grown and matured in
Kansas when the water is the most
needed in this state. Colorado's 1egis-
lature has authorized the construction
of other canals of this kind along the
river and no halt can be expected to
its continuance to build more unless this
suit is won by Kansas.
1t Is sacredly believed by the entire
wheat belt Of the Arkansas Valley that
to the sheet of water that stands under
the soil for miles on either side OF the
river which is popularity known as the
s'underfiow," and its presence and in
fuence is scientifically admitted, the
regions enormous wheat crops are due
II Colorado absorbs the entire Arkansas
river the '.underf1ow" win be destroyed.
This is a fear of alarming proportions
and enough in itself to justify the con-
tention.
Another fact in this suit that differen-
tiates it from any other water contro-
versies is that Kansas has a direct claim
for damages to state property. Two big
state institutions are situated on the
banks Of the river. The Soldiers Home
at Dodge City and the Reformatory at
Hutchinson, consisting Of over 700 acres
III.
Of Missouri vs.. Illinois. on account OF the
Chicago drainage canal, the state was
acting to protect its people. Kansas is
acting to protect its personal property,
if a commonwealth can be considered to
own personal property, as well as the
rights Of its tax payers
The language of the bin of equity filed
in the United States supreme court
charges these things direct. yet the
words are not strong enough when the
enormous interest at stake are consid-
cred. The state of Colorado is now
preparing to construct" the bin reads,
intends to construct and unless re-
strained therefrom will construct, vast
reservoirs within which to further store
and hold the natural and the flood wa
tiers of said stream; and it is the inten-
ton and expectation of said state 50 to
store and withhold and divert from the
channel of said river all of the water
thereof And your orator states, upon
information and belief that surveys for
such reservoirs have been made, and
plans and specifications are being pre-
pared for the construction Of such reser-
voirs, and the state is preparing to en-
ter upon the construction thereof. If
said reservoirs are so constructed by
the state of Colorado, vast and enormous
QUANTITIES. OF WATER WHICH WOuAQ OtuGI-
wise flow in the river into the state Of
Kansas win be taken and held and will
be sold and used for the irrigation OF
arid and non-riparian lands not now
irrigated, and win be forever lost to said
river and the state of Kansas. Such an
event viii cause great distress in the
state of Kansas in said valley, and win
cause a vast and ruinous decline in agri-
culture and great diminution in the
wealth and revenues of the state OF
Kansas. and a great diminution in its
population and prosperity. And your
orator believes, and so charges the
facts to be, that it is the intention of the
state of Colorado to divert absolutely ali
Of the water that does, can or might flow
down the Arkansas river into the state
Of Kansas SO that all Of the water shall
be used in the state of Colorado. and
none whatever, either above or below
the surface. that may by any possibility
be utilized. shall cross the line into the
state of Kansas, all to the great profit
and advantage OF the state of Colorado;
and to the great damage and injury Of
the state of kansas