Grand Forks herald. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1916-1955, 1922-01-07
JOHNSON TAKES
UP FIGHT IN
!: DRAINAGE CASE
Famous Action Of N. ID.
Against Minnesota May
Be Settled Soon.

Bismarck, N. D., Jan. Attorney
General Sv%einbJorn johnson. fourth
Of the line of North Dakota attorney
generals to take a part in the original
action Of North Dakota against Min
nesota concerning the outlet OF waters
from the Traverse Lake Drainage
District, Is completing the record in
the case by getting the testimony of
engineers and drainage experts con-
corning the best way OF d%isposing of
the surplus waters coming from the
big Minnesota drainage project. This
specific testimony was asked for by
the United States Supreme Court and
attorneys interested in the litigation
believe that the end Of the famous
case is not far distant.
3 viii Set Precedent.
New p~reccdcnts in state relation
ships and new rules for drainage laws
are expected when the final decision
of the Supreme Court is handed down.
One OF the points involved in this case
is the right Of one state to bring an
original action against another be-
cause OF damages to the citizens of
the suing state because of damages
ACQUIRING from either the laws of the
actions of the defending state. The
second large point is that the decision
may indicate that dra mage projects
in the future must take care of the
water of a drainage system in such Il
way hat it will not do harm to the
residents Of other communities or
other states. Thus far, all drainage
laws have been passed. with but one
idea. that OF getting rid of the surplus
water upon a certain lapd area, and
d~i""harging the water into a natural
waterway.
VI 1nhnCrp'c ~11nSf Of {h> ~r0cort
time is in answer to the requests Of
the supreme court Of the United
States when a partial decision was
had and the case was renlanded to
the docket for the purpose OF taking
additional testimony, the court spe-
officially desiring proof of the, best
available near of disp< ng of the
surplus water accumulated by the
Minnesota project in question. En-
gineers have tentatively pointed out
that four ways are possible: making
Lake Traverse a delaying basis by
holding the water there by a series of
dams until it can safely be allowed to
run into the Bots de Sioux; erecting
! a series of sluice dams in the drain
e. area itself that will prevent the
rapid election of water in the Mus
tinka river; cutting an outlet over
the divide or watershed to the south
of Lake Traverse and allowing the
waters to 90 south to eventual
ly join the Missouri or cutting a
canal to a river north of the drain
age project. and allowing the water
TO reach the Boies de Sioux well north
of the present trouble point. That
the supreme court has asked for this
testimony is taken to indicate that a
decision. in some ways ia>Gahle to
North Dakota will be forthcomins
with the tina decision Of the cas-
i rho Lake Traverse Drainage pro-
ject, the cause of the present Ii j
ton is in western Minnesota. almost
due east OF Wahpeton. North Dakota.
1t is the second of a series of drain
age projects there, the first havine
drained higher ground and deposited
the water in the present. Lake Ira
verse district. The inundated Mime
sofa farmers appealed TO the Mime
sofa legislature, praying for relief
The result was the establishment OF
the larger drainage district in which
the waters Of a large territory were
gathered into the Mustinka river
running southwest and finally reach,
ing Lake Traverse close to the lake: