44 



(lioation : that in going beyond this it was granting rights, which it had 

 no power to do. From this j^reniise the court reached the conclusion 

 that the owner of such a canal had the right, dating from the time of 

 beginning work as fixed in the adjudication, to the full amount to which 

 the board had stated right would be acquired if it was put to benefi- 

 cial use within the time fixed. In other words, the decision was that 

 the board could not grant a right, but that it did grant a right which 

 was good. Not only that, but the court declared vested rights which 

 the board had made conditional upon the beneficial use of the water. 

 Very few of the large canals which were uncompleted at the time of 

 adjudication have yet been extended to water the area specified, j^et 

 under this decision they hold rights to the full amounts stated in the 

 findings of the board unless it is proved that the rights have been 

 abandoned. The secretary has not, however, issued certificates to 

 the holders of such rights, and when requested to do so he merely 

 certifies to what the records of his office show. 



ACaUIREMENT OF RIGHTS. 



The party wishing to acquire a right to water in Nebraska applies 

 to the secretary of the board. The requirements for this application 

 are as follows: 



Said application shall set forth the name and post-office address of the applicant, the 

 source from which said appropriation shall be made, the amount thereof as near as may be, 

 location of any proposed work in connection therewith, the time required for their comple- 

 tion, said time to embrace the period required for the construction of the ditches thereon 

 and the time at which the application of the water for beneficial purposes shall be made, 

 which said time shall be limited to that required for the completion of the work when prose- 

 cuted with diligence, the purpose for which water is to be supplied, and if for irrigation a 

 description of the land to be irrigated thereby and the amount thereof and any additional 

 facts which may be required by the State board. 



If the application is in any way defective it is returned to the appli- 

 cant for correction. The secretary has the right to approve the appli- 

 cation for a less amount of water than is applied for, for a less area of 

 land or may limit the time for completing the work. He is required 

 to refuse an application if there is no unappropriated water in the 

 source of supply or if a prior appropriation has been made to water the 

 same land or if it is deemed detrimental to the public welfare. Appeal 

 may be had from the decision of the board to the district court. In a 

 recent case, where it was reasonably sure that an appeal would be 

 taken whichever wslj the secretary ruled, the board took up the origi- 

 nal appHcation before the secretar}^ had acted on it and decided the 

 case. Appeal was at once taken to the court. The case of Farmers' 

 Irrigation District v. Frank, cited above, was also an appeal from the 

 ruling of the board. In that case the question was whether the board 

 could approve an application for the irrigation of land which was 

 covered by a previously approved application, and the court held that 



