23 



permit (see p. 30). as weW as those resiiltins; from adjudications. The 

 reports of the engineer from which these iigures are taken do not 

 separate these. 



Number of certificate)^' of appropriation issued by board of control. 



Year. 



Num- 

 ber. 



Acres. 



Year. 



1891-92 993 203, 658. 00 i 1899-1900. . . 



1893-94 548 55, 442. .36 i 1901-2 



1895-96 1,010 113,270.41 190.3-4 



1897-98 947 108,980.71 



I ! I Total. 



Num- 

 ber. 



379 



632 



1,098 



Acres. 



65,579.82 

 81,685.60 

 198,901.98 



5,607 827,524. 



From the time the law was enacted there were persons who for 

 various reasons refused to submit testimony to the superintendents, 

 and their rights were therefore not included in the orders of the 

 board. The State engineer in his first report recommended that 

 some provision l)e made for forcing such parties to come into the adju- 

 dications in order that they might be complete, but nothing was 

 done regarding this until 1901. In 1900 such a case came before 

 the State supreme court, « where it was held that under the law as 

 it stood a party refusing to sul)mit his claims to the board of control 

 did not thereby forfeit his right, since the law attached no penalty 

 to such refusal or failure, but the court intimated that it would be 

 competent for the legislature to make the penalty the forfeiture of 

 all rights to water. In 1901 such a law was passed (Laws 1901, 

 p. 70). It provided also that those who prior to that time had failed 

 to join in adjudications must within one year apply to the board 

 for a hearing or forfeit their rights. This year extended from Febru- 

 ary 16, 1901, to February 16, 1902, and during that time thirty-six 

 petitions were received. Two were received after the expiration of 

 the year. 



Most of the smaller streams of the State have been adjudicated, 

 and some of the larger ones, but the large streams generally have 

 not yet been taken up. There is as yet unappropriated water in 

 these streams, and the pressure for a settlement of rights has not 

 been so great as on the smaller streams. In some cases rights on the 

 tributaries have been defined, while those on the main stream have 

 not, although these rights may be interdependent. Under such 

 circumstances, when all the rights have been adjudicated, the board 

 is to give notice of times and places for placing on inspection all the 

 evidence and its findings, when any finding may be contested by 

 anyone not a party to the original adjudication in which it was made. 

 After this inspection and hearing of contests the board is to make 

 one decree covering the stream and its tributaries. No such case 

 has arisen yet, but will when the North Platte River is adjudicated. 



a Farm Investment Co. v. Carpenter, 61 Pac, 2.58. 



