Arizona republican., 1911-12-19
The Use of Water.

The western governors who hay, been touring the east. have stoppc at St. Paul on their way home long enough to organize themselves into . congress of governors" and give forth some thoughts on the subject of conservation, with special refer ence to the control of running water The western governors, of course of the control of streams each state has the right to do as it pleases with regard to the waters of a stream within its borders.
 The Republican strongly suspects that there is a lot of buncombe in this conservation business. so far as it applies to the control of running water. It certainly seems the prob lem should not present any such difficulties as the length and violence Of the discussion indicates.
 To this paper it seems that this is a good time for the application of the middle of- the road policy to this vexed and veXing question. This happens to be a case where com promise squares with good sense.
 Few westerners will agree with the by Theodore Roosevelt that the fed eral government should exercise ab- solute control over all streams that happen to cross the boundary line between two states. And probably an equally small number will agree with the Colorado idea that in such case the state is to have the same sort of control which Roosevelt ad- vocates for the national government.
 The objection to the Roosevelt idea is that it is extra constitutional and paternalistic. The objection to the Colorado idea is that it is un- economic and subversive Of the inter ests of vast numbers of people.
 III AaAt bldAAtl oA iitiN leSDiN AANNA'' the federal government exercises absolute control, at least in theory, which is right and proper. Then, if the general government is not to eX- ercise absolute control over non navigable rivers which flow through two or more states. what sort of control should it exercise?
 The right answer to this question carries the solution of the whole con troversy. And the answer is-the government should exercise such con trol. and only such control, as is necessary to the protection of the rights of all the parties in interest.
 This is simply the application of the rule of the common law on a somewhat wider scale. Under the rule that has been in existence in landholder has the right to the use. but not to the abuse. of the water running through his property. It would seem that liberal application of that rule is all that is necessary to the settlement of the conservation question which is exciting the west ern governors just now.
 Here in the west the irrigation question is an extremely vital ques- tion. Suppose a stream runs down from Utah into Arizona: is it not plain that the people of Utah, while they have right to the use of that stream. should not so abuse that right as to render the water useless for irrigation purposes in Arizona And if Utah will not be decent about it. then the federal government ought to have the right to step in and ad- just the matter.
 Each family living in a flat build ing has the right to use the water in that building But no one family has the right to plug up the plumbing and cut off the moisture from all the other families.
 And if he does. the landlord has the right to interfere. But SD lcrg