« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »
Appellate jurisdiction of supreme court of issues relating to change of venue, see “Courts,” $14: Of criminal prosecutions, see “Criminal Law,”
Review on appeal or Writ of error, see “Appeal and Error,” $ 6.
Priority of claim for against bankrupt estate, see “Bankruptcy,” $ 5.
Effect of appearance, see “Appearance.”
See “Army and Navy.”
Effect of proceedings in bankruptcy on lien of #" warehouse receipts, see “Bankruptcy,” -
Warehouses for imported goods, see “Customs Duties,” $3.
No such change of possession results by isSuance of warehouse receipts on goods on premises occupied by the pledgor so as to render valid a pledge of such receipts.-Security Warehousing Co. v. Hand, 720.
WATERS AND WATER COURSES.
See “Canals”; “Levees.” As boundaries of states, see “States,” $ 1. Conclusiveness of decree restraining city from constructing waterworks, see “Judgment,” $ 6. Contract with city for water supply, see “Municipal Corporations,” $ 1. Impairing obligation of contract to supply city with water as ground of jurisdiction of United States court, see “Courts,” $4. Laws impairing obilgation of contract fixing water rates, see “Constitutional Law,” $4. Original jurisdiction of United States Supreme Court of actions relating to water rights as between different states or citizens thereof, see “Courts,” $ 9. # to water as between states, see “States,”
§ 1. Subterranean and percolating wa
Determination of rights of Kansas and Colorado to the waters of the Arkansas river held not affected by theory that, because sometimes the entire bed of the channel is dry, there are two rivers; one terminating near the state line, and another commencing near where the former ends.—State of Kansas V. State of Colorado, 655.
Presence of water beneath bed of Arkansas river as it passes through Kansas held not to show existence of independent subsurface river. —State of Kansas v. State of Colorado, 655.
*Point annotated. See syllabus.