New Britain herald., 1930-10-09
FINALS IN RIVER CASE

Connecticut's objections to the action of Massachusetts in utilizing waters from the Swift and Ware rivers for a watershed to feed the metropolitan district of Boston now has reached its final stage-a spirit ed attempt to convince the Supreme Court of the United States that the report of Special Master Mum on the case should not be accepted. When the special masters report was presented in the high court the other day the special attorneys for the state imm ediately filed brief taking exceptions to the masters findings.
 An early verbal argument of the case is anticipated, the court being expected to set date for this argu- ment next Monday.
 So much for the legal battle still under way. From a practical stand point, nothing much has been achieved by the attorney generals department of Connecticut so far. The case has been under the juris- diction of MT. Averill, the assistant attorney general, and the powers that be were apparently so dissatis- fled with the case-among others that they did not consent to his re- nomination. So far as Connecticut Is concerned, it would be considered an amazing thing if the high court were to turn down the report of the master who gave the preliminary decision after due hearings.
 Massachusetts apparently regards the case as good as won. Millions in money have already been expended by the Bay State upon tunnels re- quired by the diversion. and the work continues to be rushed and will probably continue all winter. Massachusetts evidently thinks that possession is nine points of the law. It would be something of a sensation in the Bay State if the Supreme Court were to turn down the masters decision and give the vic tory to Connecticut
 Judging by remarks that have appeared in the Massachusetts papers from time to time, sentiment in that state, from distin guished lawyers down. has been that legally Connecticut never had leg to stand in. So far events have borne out this conclusion Government en- gineers, in their observations, ap- parently have borne out the opinion of Massachusetts that the diversion would not affect the Connecticut river in any practical manner; and incidentally it is claimed by the Massachusetts editors that Connecti- cut has not done much with the | Connecticut river except to make sewer out of it.
 We do not, of course, agree with ] all these statements by our friends to the North. but cannot help agree | ihg that there is small likelihood that the Government will stand in the way Of large city finding suffl- | cient water for it's needs. It comes down to this: Is the difference of an | inch or so in the average level of the nnecticut-assuming that there would be such a difference.
 which Massachusetts engineers valiantly deny-as important as the necessity for Boston to obtain suffi-
 cient water to drink? So far the | large CltleS nave been ldCllildleu py states in obtaining their sufflciency | of water, and some of them, as for instance San Francisco, and Los Angeles have been aided by the fed
 eral Government in going far atleld 1 in procuring the essentials. Special Master Mum. in the SWift-Ware river case, concluded there was no likelihood of interfering with navi- gation on the Connecticut, and that l is a sign that the federal authority has not changed it's attitude that | the needs of the urban areas must be considered of paramount iA- | portance