The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1906-12-18
WATER CASE is UP.
S. S. Ashbaugh of Wichita Opens for
the State of Kansas.

Washington. Dec 1S-The supreme
| court Of the United States today contin-
ued It's hearing IN the Kansas-Colorado
irrigation case growing out of the use
of the waters of the Arkansas river.
Attorney Ashbaugh, arguing for Kan
sas, addressed his remarks principally to
the question Of the underfiow water of
the river. He contended that Kansas
had been deprived Of the greater part
of this heretofore most abundant sup
ply and declared Colorado has appropri-
ated 1000 cubic feet Of water per second
which practically takes all the supply of
the stream in the irrigation season. He
placed the total damages suffered by
Kansas in the past IS years at not less
than $4,000. 900. He said Kansas de-
mands a fair division OF the water of
the Arkansas river, which would not be
less than 700 cubic feet per second.
Attorney Loomis, also speaking for
Kansas, cOntended that Colorado not
only claims the right to all the water of
the Arkansas river but actually takes
it all. In support of this contention, he
quoted a number of witnesses who had
been summoned to testify in behalf of
Colorado itself. He also undertook TO
show that there is not now nearly so
much water In the Arkansas river in
Kansas as there was in the early days
and again marshalled a number of COL
orado witnesses to sustain his position.
AS to the Colorado's contention that
most of the irrigation water returns to
the stream through seepage, he de-
clared that tWO-thirds of the water TAX
en- out of the river is either lost by evap-
Grafton or absorbed in plant life. In
conclusion he said Kansas is entitled
under all the laws Of right and justice to
a fair deal Of the water Of this impor-
tant stream and contended for rec
ognition Of this right.
Attorneys Clyde G. Dawson and Platt
Rogers followed for Colorado.
IN its bill of complaint Kansas alleges a
ms terial reduction from the volume OF
the surface stream after it reaches
that state. and also Of the undsrflow.
upon which much dependence has
been placed in the past The case is
an original action and is regarded by
some as the most important suit OF the
kind ever instituted in this court, and
that the court itself does not minimize
its importance was indicated when 2
hours two or three times as much as
usually allowed was set apart for its
neys WhO appear n It. Each OF the
Dar-ies to the controversy, Kansas,
Colorado ard the United States, was
given three and 4 half hours, and the
Individual defendants one and a half
hours The case was not called until
afte- 3 o'clock yesterday and the
hearing will continue until very near
the close of Thursday's s session OF the
court.
In his opening argument Mr.. Ash
baugh dwelt especially upon injury
caused to the immediate valley of the
Arkansas river by the diminution OF
the flow from that stream both from
above and under ground He contend
ed that the state had suffered incalcula-
BILE loss by the diversion of its waters
in Colo-a ado.
A number Of the members of the con-
gressional delegations from both states
we're present at the hearing.
Associate Justice Moody, who partici-
pated in the preparation of the govern
ment's case left his seat when argu-
ment was begun thus indicating his IN.
tention not to take part in the ad-
Indication of the controversy.