The Glenwood post., 1907-05-18
COLORADO WINS
oLoRADo-kANSAS WATER CASE
is FINALLY DECIDED.
SUPREME COURT ENDS CASE
Progress of Agricultural Develop
Ments Along the Arkansas River
No Longer Hindered.

Washington.-The somewhat famous
case of the state of Kansas against the
state of Colorado. by which the for
mer sought to have the latter enjoined
from diverting the waters of the Ar
kansas river for irrigation purposes, or
permitting its citizens to do so. was
dismissed by the Supreme Court of the
United States.
1t is impossible to eNaggerate the
importance of the decision handed
down by the Supreme Court of the
United States in Washington in the
famous Colorado-kansas water suit
The decision of the highest tribunal
in the land is sweeping victory for
Colorado, and all litigation which has
been dragging through the courts for
years. and which has cost the state
hundreds of thousands of dollars, has
been disposed Of.
While the suit was pending irriga
ton projects which had been planned
involving the expenditure of millions
of dollars, were tied up; land invest
ments along the Arkansas river had re
ceived a blow and much valuable land
which had been placed under water by
the investment of vast sums of money
already expended by ditch companies
We're in jeopardy. Now that Colorado
has won irrigation ard land projects will
receive new impetus, and ii is stated
by several attorneys that thousands, if
not millions, of dollars will soon be
invested in the valley along the Ar
kansas river where there has been lit
lie activity for so long.
Attorney Platt Rogs RS. who was en-
i h., i,,t h.a i,,f of
Colorado, and is probably as familiar
with it as any man in the state. said
When the suit was brought by Kan
sas some irrigation projects were pre-
vented from being properly exploited
and investments in the territory in
volved We're practically at a standstil.
AS the suit went on, however, less and
less regard was paid to it and many in
vestors went ahead with their plans,
There We're. however, many timid in
vestors who will now be able to pro
coed without fear of being affected by
| litigation
Irrigation Boom On.
1t is stated at the state engineer 5
office in Denver that there was never
more activity in irrigation projects in
Colorado than at the present time. In
vestors seemed to feel confident that
the findings of the Supreme Court in
the big suit would be in Colorado's S
favor, and as a result, it is said, appli-
cations for irrigation and reservoir
sites are being filed at the rate of
twenty per day.
The Colorado Kansas controversy.
when it was first raised by the state
| of Kansas. excited more interest in le-
gal and scientific circles probably thAn
| any suit that has ever been in, the
| United States Supreme Court. The
most learned and expert legal talent
of the two states were engaged in fight
| ing the case through its various steps
| and the expense to the two states,
which, under the decision. each pays
| their individual costs. will amount to
hundreds of thousands of dollars
A brief history of the suit from its
beginning, as detailed by Attorney
Platt Rogers, follows:
| lust seven years to the day have
| passed from the beginning of the suit
| until the final settlement. On May 10
| 1901, the state of Kansas made appli,
cation to the United States Supreme
Court for leave to file bill of com
| plant against the state of Colorado
On May 20, 1901. leave was granted
and on the same day the complaint
was filed. The complaint set forth that
| the state of Colorado and owners of
| bitches in the state of Colorado along
the Arkansas river were so diverting
the waters of that river that the river
no longer flowed into the state of Kan.
sas and that thereby Kansas lands
were injured principally by lowering
of the so-called underfiow lying under
the entire valley, which in turn de-
prived crops raised in the valley lands
of sub-irrigation, the advantage OF
which they had formerly enjoyed. Va
rious other elements of injury were al.
legged, but these were practically lost
sight of in the progress of the case.
| October Is, 1901, the state of Colo
rado filed its demurrer. together with
briefs in support of same, In answer
to which briefs were filed by the state
of Kansas, and on February "a, 1902
the demurrer was orally argued in
| Washington. These arguments were
particularly able and eloquent. Colo.
RADIOS contentious were argued by Lu.
ther M. Goddard, now a State Supreme
Court justice; Platt Rogers, and for.