(2) That if such decree is not made forthwith, a Special Master be appointed to take testimony and evidence with respect to the issues contained in this petition and to report with respect to the time, method, and manner in which the State of Illinois and the Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago shall comply with Paragraph (1) of this prayer, and with respect to whether the Court should appoint a Permanent Master invested with such authority as he may require for the purpose of maintaining surveillance over the operation of the sewers, interceptors, and other sewage and water collecting facilities and the sewage disposal and industrial treatment plants and works operated by the Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES October Term, A.D. 1958

STATES OF WISCONSIN, MINNESOTA, OHIO and PENNSYLVANIA, Complainants,

STATE OF ILLINOIS and the SANITARY DISTRICT OF CHICAGO,

STATE OF ILLINOIS and the SANITARY DISTRICT OF CHICAGO,

STATE OF ILLINOIS and the SANITARY DISTRICT OF CHICAGO, Defendants.

No. 4 Original

BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF AMENDED APPLICATION OF THE STATES OF WISCONSIN, MINNESOTA, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, MICHIGAN AND NEW YORK FOR A REOPENING AND AMENDMENT OF THE DECREE OF APRIL 21, 1930 AND FOR THE GRANTING OF FURTHER RELIEF.

IV

V

VI

Damage and Injuries Inflicted Upon the Com-
plainant States by Reason of the Lowering of
the Levels of the Great Lakes Caused by De-
fendants' Abstraction of the Domestic Pumpage
at Chicago
Damages Sustained by Complainant State of New
York Related to Interference with the use of
the Waters of the Niagara and St. Lawrence
Rivers for Power Development

Solution of the District's Sewage Disposal Prob-
lem Propounded by Complainant States

A. What is "domestic pumpage"

B. The Sanitary District Has No Right to Divert
Its Treated Effluent into the Sanitary Canal—
It Should be Made to Return Such Effluent to
the Great Lakes Basin

VII This Court, Through a Special Master, If Necessary, Should Inquire into and Find Answers to the Following Questions

VIII The Diversion of "Domestic Pumpage" into the
Ship Canal is Not Necessary to Maintain Navi-

gation Therein

IX Conclusion

INDEX TO CASES CITED

Wisconsin et al v. Illinois et al, 273 U.S. 642, 650

Wisconsin et al v. Illinois et al, 274 U.S. 488, 712

Page

4-20

20

Wisconsin et al v. Illinois et al, 278 U.S. 367 3-4-5-6-14-16

Wisconsin et al v. Illinois et al, 281 U.S. 179, 696 .5-6-14–23
Wisconsin et al v. Illinois et al, 287 U.S. 578

6

Wisconsin et al v. Illinois et al, 289 U.S. 395, 710

7-15

Wisconsin et al v. Illinois et al, 309 U.S. 569

8-14

Wisconsin et al v. Illinois et al, 313 U.S. 547

8

Wisconsin et al v. Illinois et al, 340 U.S. 858

8

9

Wisconsin et al v. Illinois et al, 352 U.S. 947, 983

Wisconsin et al v. Illinois et al, 2 L. Ed. 2nd 526

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

October Term, A.D. 1958

STATES OF WISCONSIN, MINNESOTA, OHIO and PENNSYLVANIA, Complainants,

V.

STATE OF ILLINOIS and the SANITARY DISTRICT OF CHICAGO,

STATE OF ILLINOIS and the SANITARY DISTRICT OF CHICAGO,

No. 3 Original

STATE OF NEW YORK,

Defendants.

Complainant,

V.

STATE OF ILLINOIS and the SANITARY DISTRICT OF CHICAGO, Defendants.

No. 4 Original

BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF AMENDED APPLICATION OF THE STATES OF WISCONSIN, MINNESOTA, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, MICHIGAN AND NEW YORK FOR A REOPENING AND AMENDMENT OF THE DECREE OF APRIL 21, 1930 AND FOR THE GRANTING OF FURTHER RELIEF.

BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF AMENDED APPLICATION OF THE STATES OF WISCONSIN, MINNESOTA, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, MICHIGAN AND NEW YORK FOR A REOPENING AND AMENDMENT OF THE DECREE OF APRIL 21, 1930 AND FOR THE GRANTING OF FURTHER RELIEF

I.

INTRODUCTION

Pindar, the early Greek lyric poet, in his Ode to the Greek Games, some five hundred years before Christ, wrote: