52 
In the management of small ditches the officers act without compen- 
sation, and the ditch riders receive perhaps $50 per year, the only time 
w hen tlic\ are on duty being when the ditches are being put in repair. 
It is seldom that the other officers receive compensation. It is only 
whin the consumers are not the owner- of the ditch and where the 
carrying of water i^ expected to return interest on the investment — 
where, as it is generally stated, water is "sold" by a ditch corporation 
to the consumer— that the cost of administration and distribution is any 
considerable item. In that case the manager, secretary, bookkeeper, 
treasurer, and a regularly employed attorney, as in any corporation. 
seem to be necessary, and are of course expensive. The cooperative 
ditch needs no such complicated machinery, and the success of cooper- 
ative ditches where corporation ditches have failed is largely due to 
this fact. 
TITLES TO WATER. 
Nearly all questions that come before either the administrative 
department or before the court- resolve themselves into the rights of 
the parties and their titles to the water. The title itself depends upon — 
(1) The construction of canal and use of water, and the regularity 
of procedure in perfecting rights. 
(2) The relation to other appropriators and their rights, including 
the right of transfer and sale. 
(3) The nature of the grant, when issued, and of the privilege- 
granted. 
(4) The good faith shown by the grantee. 
(5) His compliance with the provisions of the grant and nonaban- 
donment of rights. 
These five will include nearly every case in the conflict. 
The right to the use of water for beneficial purpose- was recognized 
by Territorial laws as early as 1861, and affirmed by Congress in 1866. 
The constitution of the State, adopted in 1876, declared water to he 
public property and subject to appropriation. These declarations 
were deemed necessary, as riparian rights had been upheld in the 
older States, and might by inference have become attached to 
Colorado. 
At first water was taken from the river and used without thought 
of its ever becoming scarce or of there being a conflict for it- posses- 
sion. The lands then considered farming land- were so limited that 
there was apparently more water than would ever be used. Even at 
the time the decrees were granted many still entertained this opinion 
and did not enter their claims nor examine into the claims of other-. 
In effect this does not deprive them of the right to water, but in the 
distribution the water commissioner ignores their claims, thus forcing 
applications for decrees. Prior to 1871* there was no requirement in 
