Broder

The defendant having shown that prior to the act of Congress of July 26, 1866, it had acquired a right to the use of the water which was “recognized and acknowledged by the local customs, laws and decisions of courts,” that act operated a grant to it of the right of way, and of the ditch through which the water was running at the date of the passage of the act. The subsequent grantees of the United States of tracts through which the ditch ran, took subject to defendant’s easement.

There is no question that the government title to a portion of the lands described in the complaint was acquired by defendant after the passage of the act above mentioned; for the remainder, the plaintiff took deeds from the Central Pacific Bailroad Company, the patents of the United States to that company having also been issued subsequent to the act of Congress aforesaid.

It results from the foregoing statement that the judgment of the District Court must be affirmed, unless the Central Pacific Company had a “ perfect equity” at the date of the enactment of the United States statute of July 26, 1866. As establishing such equity, plaintiff relies on the fifth finding of the District Court, which is,…