The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1902-04-09
2aiTy z aole
DOES THE ARKANSAS RIVER RUN UP HILL?
NJ. NJ. MURDOCH, Editor. :

DOES THE ARKANSAS RIVER RUN UP HILL?
That lawyer who write brief such as win hold
court to its text smarter than all the judges
constituting such court combined Probably the Supreme
Court Of the United the dodger Of all
the judiciary but all Appellate Courts given to the
lodging verdict The average judge of the court
Supreme Appellate otherwise, is looking for Quib-
bic upon which he can hang tangent judgment rather
than for the facts which viii enable him to decide the
case on his merits the Kansas Colorado case,
passed upon by the United Supreme Court day be-
fore yesterday What satisfaction is there to be found in
said decision By anybody? Colorado being left free to
continue to appropriate waters Of the river Kansas
IS not denied or assured of any rights whatever The
very averments proofs which the court announced as
desiring where fact submitted to it. Kansas does not
claim that the underhow mighty subterranean river
twenty miles wide mile deep. rushing along between
well defined banks and along bed. nor yet that the
waters Of the being drawn back up through the
sands Of this valley by capillary attraction to the Rocky
mountains Nothing of the kind But it was plainly set
out that the underhow rapid percoation Of mountain
waters twenty wide, and Of great depth.
through the sandy gravey subsois OF this valley.
And further Kansas only showed that Colorado is
actually threatening but in fact already practically
hausts the of the Arkansas river during the
summer season leaving the visible bed Of the
without drop Of water The IN closing its dodge
declares Of the intricate questions arising
On the record we are constrained to fobear proceedings
until all facts are before the evidence" That is
as clear as mud In other words having proved
original proprieorshp that she then and there
Colorado feoniousy appropng her said riparian rights
bodily and with malice aforethought stealing seQuester
ing divertng carrying away the said Arkansaw river
applying the the propagation Of sugar beets and
Rocky Ford melons financial betterment of the
thief and to the disastrous derment corn that
therefore Kansas had better hire lawyer who knows
how to set forth facts brief before it hope
hearing by the Supreme Court Or in still other words
Kansas mast prove the satisfaction Of the said Supreme
Court that water down hill the presumption being
that Colorado couldn't steal Kansas water from
well defined suberranean rivers running the other
The Eagle took up this question with United
States Senator'S many years ago. when Colorado first
began waters of the Arkansas for irrigation
purposes which subsequent to the settlement
Of this valley and at which time the government was
making annual appropriation the navigabty Of the
river The matter was referred the Secretary
who replied could nothing in the absence
farther legislation way enabling act the
Ike The only effect that the appeal the dscon-
tnuance Of the appropriations for the improvement of
from which all the water had been diverted. And
just where started minus the annual ap-
preparation.
On the face of the report Of the finding Of the Supreme
Court the wire excerpt reaches US, would
that Kansas hasn't really lost anything but time. We
might indeed claim first blood in that the comedies
that the state has right be heard Still neither is Col
orado Ont anything except expense which she afford
for the sake OF the delay gained looks Kansas
must again she shall expect to win and
the starting IN again being doubtful the vested rights
OF colorado become more tangibe and secure