WSP12253

• File Number: 8200.400.30.C
• Description: La Plata River Compact
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Date: 1/1/1922
• Author: Delph E. Carpenter
• Title: Report of Delph E. Carpenter, Commissioner for the State of Colorado in Re: the La Plata River Compact
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Publication

<'

~

BRn~F OF LAW OF INTERSTA'fE COMPAC'l'S.

(Submitted by Delph E. Carpenter to Judiciary Committee
of House of Representatives, 67th COngress, 1st Session, at Hear-
ing' on June 4,1921, in re H. R. 6821.)

POWERS OF S'l'A'l'ES '1'0 ENTER INTO COIHP ACTS.

Compacts or agreements between the States are recognized
by Article I, section 10, paragraph 3, of the Constitntion of the
United' States, which provides:

"No State shall, without consent of Congress, * * * enter
into a.ny agreement or compact with another State. * * *"

Interstate controversies and differences respecting bounda-
ries, fisheries, etc" have been frequently settled by interstate
compact,

Among tbe many boundary disputes so settled may be men-
tioned the following: Virginia and Pennsylvania, 1780 (11 Pet.,
20); Virginia and Pennsylvania, 1784 (3 Dall" 425) ; Kentucky
and Tennessee, 1820 (11 Pet., 207) ; Virginia and Tennessee, 1802
and 1856 (148 U. S., 503, 511, 516') ; Virginia and Maryland, 1785
(153 U. S" 155, 162).

Of the campacts between States respecting the taking of
fish in rivers forming the boundary between the two disputant
States may be mentioned: Washington and Oregon, Columbia
River; Maryland and Virginia, Potomac River. (153 U. S. 155.)

It is currently reported that recently the States of New York
and New Jersey settled their harbOl> differences by interstate
compact.

Wbile all compacts which would in at,y way invalve the
Federal Government or its jurisdiction, property, etc., must be
made wHh consent or approval of Cangress in order to be bind.
ing, it bas been suggested by the Supreme Court that compacts
made between two States respecting] matters in which the States
alone are interested might be taken as binding without consent
or approval by Congress, (Stea.rns v, Minnesota 179 U. 8., 223,
245; Virginia v. Tennessee, 148 U. 8., 503; Wharton v. Wise,
153 U. S., 155,) .

For a full discussion respecting the rights of the States to
enter into treaties or campacts, with consent of Congress, see
Rhode Island v. Massachusetts (12 Pet., 657, 725-731).

In the case just cited the Supreme Court observed that when
Oongress has given its consent to two States to enter into a
compact or agreement, "then the States were in this respect re-

[ 11 ]