The Glenwood post., 1912-11-30
SUI Engiao9 suggssts Nevd
Ma fe Setting N
Water Disputes
FAvoRs UNIFORMITY

COlor2do should nave an lTrlgatl0a
court, which might more properly be
called . commission, Of three members,
to have sole jurisdiction over all irriga
before which all existing decrees could
be reopened and readjudieated, asserts
State Engineer C. w. Comstock relative
to probable irrigation legislation ut the
next session of the legislature.
II have given this matter eonsidera
Bile thought and shall incorporate it IN
my report for the year.
"Plaeing such things in report does
not give them sufficient prominence
and have been urged to draft q bill
containing the provisions experience in
the state engineers Office has taught
me would be good thing for the
state.
''sueh court as would suggeet
should be composed of two attorney.
having q comprehensive knowledge of
irrigation law and of the practical
working of irrigation systems. The
third member should be q competent
hydraulic engineer. Then all water
matters brought before the court would
be certain of intelligent consideration
and disposal.
"Sueh court should have sole jurik
diction over irrigation matters and all
contests and disputes should be filed
With Il. 4
---"xs ptepsrssshe-aso x6G,ts Asve
~ -.saun1 N Z EilaIii =
Asfij6is conflict Of opinion in the de-
eisions handed down. One case in par
ticular I have in mini. 1t is ease
where contest arose over water rights
Two separate suits were brought in sep
arate courts. One district court ordered
me to do one thing and the other or
dered me to do just the opposite.
Whichever obey leaves me no escape
from being declared in contempt of the
other court.
"NO such situation could arise
should an irrigation court or commits
sion with judicial powers be created.
"Then, too, such a court would assure
= case being decided according u the
law. Take for instance an irrigation
suit being brought before a district
court in some soated district where
there has been no water contest for
years. The judge OF that court has not
been paying particular attention to il
riGation law or decisions in irrigation
eases. He 10 not cOnversant with tha.
element of judicial procedure and there
fore his decision is more than likely
to be faulty in some particular and
leave an opening for an appeal to =
higher court.
The number of appeals from an ir-
rigation court would be small, because
the members Of the court would make
that speciality and would be empower
ed to sit in any section Of the STATE
where q case might call them. =.
81 believe that the water DEGREES of
all dates should be thrown open and
readjsdicated because some Of the early
DEGREES are greatly in excess Of the
amount Of water which the owner could
possibly use to irrisate his land. Thess
deerses should be revoked and tie vest
"a rights Of irrigatisnis>s Who have
ussd ths excess water givea snder enc
u these decrees shsald Be- asds aAso-
lutsly legal ey tAs issuance Of ether
Aeesses eating lswa The excess and
irving that excess to the other lani
eWneI.
"Nnch Of the fraud wAieh creeps
into irrigation enterprises is given a
certain standing which Psrnits the
fsssa BY reasoa Of tAs prenstsrs Of The
fss.lslsnt company or district u re-
erveir esspsratisa purchasing sxesss
water frsa n old asereS a.A forcing
swnsss Il jsnise diteA deessss q j.nisr
vssesa risAts 70 taks ~ natter -
es.xt, With . eenrasatively snalI
chance T. via tAeir protest.
"Fsr eAaple: A Creep Il psesaeters
ssuaaise to baila . rsssrvsir aal issi-
eats . few tAsssaaa sesss - ~ Net
Aavi.g wsesr riGAts ~ = -. ysAas.
- - = sasly waess s1Ae noiF ~
- = ~ s1ssa ~ ~ - -
syss - usas ~ 49, e. - !! : :
= - i =. "a x. ssSs & : 49, =