Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />00258f) <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />(25) <br />(26) <br /> <br />public. . .D subject to appropriation Din <br />accordance with the laws of the State." <br />That is not, of course, equivalent to any <br />declaration of State ownership. and in no senSe <br />tantamount to a grant from the United States. <br />This was followed by the Congressional Joint <br />Resolut1on or August 21. 1911, 37 Stat. 39. <br />which required certain amendments to the New <br />Mexico Constitution, but the amendments did <br />not involve anything on the subjeot of water. <br />Following the adoption of such amendments the <br />President proclaimed the admission on January <br />6, 1912. 37 Stat. 1723. <br /> <br />See Footnotes 17 and 28. <br /> <br />The situation oannot,of course, be present in Texas beoause <br />Texas was never a "public land" State, as previously noted. <br />But the Desert Land Aot was never extended to Kansas, <br />Nebraska, New Nexioo and Oklahoma. <br /> <br />325 U. S. 589 (1945). <br /> <br />Four oases, 357 u. s. 275, June 23. 1958. <br /> <br />The Xvanhoe Irri~ation Distriot and the State of <br />caliTornia v. Mc racken. et al. <br /> <br />The Madera Irrigation Distriot and the State of <br />Ca11t"ornia vs. Ste1ner, et aI. <br /> <br />(27) <br />(28) <br /> <br />The Madera Irrigation Distriot v. Albonioo <br />and <br />The Santa Barbara County Water Agency v. Balaam, et,al. <br /> <br />(29) Example: Federal Power COllllDission v. Oregon, 349 u. S. 4'5 <br />(1955). <br /> <br />(30) Arizona v. California, 283 U. S. 423, 451 (1931). <br /> <br />(,1) In Federal Power Commission v. ore,on, 349 U. s. 435, the <br />Court empllaSized that these Acts d d not operate as a grant <br />to the State, but were effective only "for purposes of <br />private aoquisition". The pertinent sentences are: <br /> <br />UThe purpose of the Acts of 1866 and 1870 was govern- <br />mental recognition and sanotion of possessory rights <br />on pUblio lands asserted under local laws and oustoms. <br />Jennison v. Kirk, 98 U. s. 453. The Desert Land Act <br />severed, for purposes of private acquisition. soil and <br />water rights on public lands, and prOVided that such <br />water rights were to be aoquired in the manner prov1ded <br />by the law of the State of location. California Oregon <br />Power Co..v,. Beaver Portland Cement Co., 295 U.S. 142. <br />See also, Nebraska v. vlyom1ng, '25 u. s. 589. 611-616." <br />LJ::mphaSiS suppl1ed.7 <br />-,= <br />