The Ronan pioneer. [volume] (Ronan, Mont.) 1910-1970, 1913-08-08
POWER NOW
SUPREME COURT
Ownership Of Land Involves
No Vested Right In
Flowing Water.

power. which qualification is not only
understood in advance. but is binding
in the final analysis, and. finally, that
In condemnation proceedings instituted
by the government. compensation under
due process by law" shall be confined
to the actual value of the property.
without consideration either Of the ac-
tual water power lost or of alleged
enhancement due to improvements 10
be made by the government itself In
the future.
The decision. which was announced
and opinion read by Associate Justice
Lurton. covered a group Of four eases
sent up from the United States district
court for the western district OF Michi-
gan: United States versus Chandler
Dunbar Water Power company ct AL.
Chandler Dunbar Water Power CONF
pany versus United States. st. Mary's
Power company versus United States
and Clarence NJ. Brown, receiver, etc.
versus United States.
The essential facts are these:
History Of the Case.
On March 3. 1909. congress passed a
law authorizing the secretary OF war
to take steps to acquire all property
north Of the st. Mary's falls ship en-
nal to the international boundary. on
the ground that its acquisition was
necessary for the purposes of naviga-
ton OF said waters and the waters
connected herewith The law further
authorized the government to take pos
session Of the land prior to determine
ton by the courts as to the necessity
therefor or Of the compensation to be
paid All permits previously issued by
the secretary OF war. under authority
OF congress. for the construction OF
water power plants on the land in ques-
tlor, were declared to be null and void
after Jan. !. 1911. but discretion was
vested in the secretary to permit the
Chandler Dunbar and EdisOn-Sault
Electric companies to maintain their
present works and utilize the water
power In said river ut said rapids. in
SO far as the same does not interfere
with navigation or retard the constrnc-
tion OF government works"
Acting under this law, the secretary
Of war brought suit against the Chan
dler-Dunbnr Water Power company.
the st. Mnry's Power company, the
Edison -Sault Electric company and tho
Michigan-Lake Superior Power COM
pany. The lower court awarded dam
ages as follows: Chandler Dunbar
company. SG5o.3322 Of which $55O.OOO
was the estimated value of the water
power; st. Mary's Falls Power COM
pany, $nI.OOO: Edison Snult Electric
company, $3OO,OOO. settled by stipula-
ton, and to the Michigan Lake Supe-
rior Power company, nothing.
Both Sides Challenged Award.
The government challenged tho
award Of anything whatever on ac-
count of any water power right claim
ed by amy Of the owners Of the con-
demned upland and also attacked the
principles applied by the lower court
In fixing n valuation upon the upland
taken. On the other hand. each Of the
plaintiffs IN error challenged the
awards as inadequate.
The decision OF the supreme court
sustnins the exceptions OF the govern
ment no far as they related to water
power for factory purposes. but holds
that this land hnd n prospective
value" for the purpose OF constructing
n canal aud lock parallel with those in
use, which. 1t says. had passed .'be.
y0nd the region OF the purely conjcc-
tural or speculative"
In the case OF the st. Mnry's com.
pany the supreme court also holds
that. while the company owned an is
land Of admittedly strategic impor-
tance' to the proposed future works OF
the government. that value was purely
speculative" such as could be deter
mined only "by price fixed by the
necessities OF one person buying from,
another. free to sell. or refuse. as the
price suited" The court concluded this
point by saying, but In II col,demnu.
lion proceeding the value Of the prop
erty TO the government for its purticu.
lar use Is not II criterion and held that
the owners were eiltitle,l to compunsa.
ton only for the actual mark table
value OF the land
The decision reverses thai OF the
rOtrt below.