AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The Decree of the Lower Appellate Court does not give plaintiff any declaration with regard to the water. We think that plaintiff ought to have a
decree, that he is entitled to the reasonable use of the water in the channel, provided he does not interfere with the right of Government, as a
riparian proprietor lower down. We do not think we ought to declare his right is limited to the irrigation of a single field, as decreed by the District
Judge. But he will not be at liberty to appreciably diminish the customary supply of water to any of the riparian proprietors lower down the stream.
The decree will be amended accordingly.
As appellant and respondent each claimed more than he was entitled to, we direct that each bear his own costs in the 2nd appeal.