Laserfiche WebLink
<br />(15) <br /> <br />(16) <br />(17) <br />(18l <br /> <br />(19) <br /> <br />(20) <br />(21) <br />(22) <br /> <br />(2;3) <br />(24) <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />002585 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Eg., United States vs. Texas, 339 U. S. 707 (1950). <br /> <br />The exceptions are: <br />Texas: The Texas situation differs from all other <br />States because of its immediately prior <br />independence and its retention of "all the <br />vacant and unappropriated lands lying within <br />its limits, . . ,". The United States never <br />owned any "Public Land"; as distinguished <br />from "ecquired land", in Texas. <br /> <br />The Idaho Constitution of 1889, Article I, <br />Seotion 14, and Article XV~ contained exten- <br />sive provisions related to water. Idaho was <br />admitted by the Act of July 3, 1890, which <br />"accepted, ratified and confirmed" this <br />Constitution. <br /> <br />Idaho: <br /> <br />Wyoming: <br /> <br />New Mexico: <br /> <br />The Wyoming Constitution of 1889, Article I, <br />Section 31, and Article VIII, contained <br />extensive provisions related to water. <br />Wyoming was admitted by the Act of July 11, <br />1890, which "accepted, ratified and confirmed" <br />this Constitution. <br /> <br />The situation here is less clear. The New <br />Mexico Constitution of January 21, 1911, <br />Article XVI, declared, inter alia, that the <br />"unappropriated water" belongecf"1l"to the <br /> <br />-2- <br />