WSP12253 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

A suit between the States is but a snbtitute for war. It is the last resort, <<nd should not be resorted to until all avenues of settlement by :compact have been exhausted. It has been sug. gested: that the Supreme Court shonld announce the principle that no suit between States would be entertained without a preliminary shm-ying that reasonable efforts had been made by the complaining tate to compose the differences between it and the defendant St te by mutnal agreement or interstate compact. It would appear that the rule of settlement by treaty of inter. national disput over rivers cornman to two nations should likewise apply 0 settlements of controversies present or pos- sible, between Sates of the Union. The object Of the present legislation is to folJow the inter- national principle of settlement. ' ' ~ , INTERSTATE COMl"ACfl'S RESPElCTING USE OF WA1'ERS OF INTEUSTATli} RIVERS. While, as Je have already observed, various of the States have settled th~~r controversies respecting bbundaries, fisheries, etc., by interst~te compact or by concurrent State legislation, having the sam~ effect, this method of settlement of pending or threatened controversies respecting the use and, distribution of the waters of i*terstate streams for irrigation and other bene. ficial purposes, )Ias not been availed of. The right of adjoining States to the nSland benefit of the waters of the streams common to both States as b.een considered by the court in the case of Kansas v. Colo ado (185 U. S., 125; 206 U. S., 46), in which case it was hel that the respective States were each entitled to an' eqUitableiportion of the waters of the common river, the extent of the u e in each State to be determined upon the facts and circnmstan es of each particular case. In the abote-mentioned case the right of the United States to the usl'j af the waters of the western streams was also con- sidered and detrrmined (pp. 87-93). An equitaqle apportionment or alJocation of the use and distribntion ofJthe waters of western interstate streams maY be best accomplis~ed through the efforts of the States represented by commissianers fully acquainted with the facts and the surround- ing conditionS,) as; well as with the future possibilities of use of water from the streams. . , Principles lof international law are applicable to the use and distributio,1u of waters of interstate streams, and as regards compacts between the States, "the rule of decision is nat to be .cal- lected from thf' decisions of either State, but is one, if we may so speak, of an in ernational character." (Marlett v, Silk, 11 Pet., 1,23.) I ! [ 14 ]