Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.. pri.y purpose of such compacts is to settle and't property rights. Property <br /> <br /> <br />rights are static in nature, they do not change "absent conveyance. Water rights. <br /> <br />which may also be transferred and conveyed according to state law are likewisa <br /> <br />static in nature. Stability is a necessary element of a water right since it forms <br /> <br />the basis and foundation for expenditures of "money .to I?fovide means of benefically <br /> <br />using and developing that right. <br /> <br />Neither has it ever been suggested that once Congress acts to accept a <br /> <br />sovereign state into the Union that it could by a later act repeal that acceptance <br /> <br />and destroy the territory's statehood.. The acts of Congress involved in extending <br /> <br />statehood. settling boundary disputes and approving interstate water compacts, <br /> <br />deal with matters that are static in substance. These are not ordinary acts of <br /> <br />Congress which may be changed without undue injury. <br /> <br />The Supreme Court interpreted the compact clause in the 1838 case of <br /> <br />Rhode Island v. Massachusetts, supra, at 725; and said: <br /> <br />By this surrender of the power, which before the <br />adoption of the Constitution was vested in every State, <br />of settling these contested boundaries, as in the pleni- <br />tuda of thei~ sovereignty they might, they could settle <br />them neither by war, or in peace. by treaty, compact or <br />agreement, without the permission of the new legis~ <br />lative power which the States brought into existence by <br />their respective and several grants in conventIons of the <br />people. If Congress consented. then the States were in <br />this respect restored to their original inherent sov- <br />ereignty; such consent being the sole limitation imposed <br />by the Constitution, when given, left the States as they <br />were before, as held by this court in Poole v. Flee;er, II <br />Peters, 209, whereby their compacts became ot bmdIng <br />force, and finally settled the boundary between them, <br />operating with the same effect as a treaty between <br />sovereign powers. That is, that the boundary so <br />established and fixed by compact between nations. <br />become conclusive upon all the SUbjects and eitizens <br />thereof, and bind their rights, and are to be treated to <br />all intents and purposes as the true. real boundaries. <br />at 725. <br /> <br />In Washin~ton v. Dreg-on, 2ll U.S. 127, 29 S.Ct. 47 (190B', at issue .....as <br /> <br />whether the Oregon boundary set at the time of Oregon's admission to the Union <br /> <br />was altered by the later act of Congress admitting the state of Washington. The <br />Court said: <br /> <br />"The northern boundary of the state of Oregon was <br />established prior to that of the state of Washington, and <br />it is not within the power of the national government to <br />change that boundary without the consent of Oregon. <br />IT at 47. <br /> <br />-ll- <br /> <br />./1.)0 <br />