Haas v. Hutson

It is evident from a reading of the foregoing statement of facts that the initial question for the court’s determination is whether or not the proposed drainage scheme, if carried out, would destroy navigable waters of the state. If it would, then it must be abandoned, for *408navigable waters of the state cannot lawfully be destroyed through a drainage scheme. In re Dancy D. Dist. 129 Wis. 129, 108 N. W. 202; In re Horicon D. Dist. 136 Wis. 227, 116 N. W. 12; Merwin v. Houghton, 146 Wis. 398, 131 N. W. 838; Att’y Gen. ex rel. Becker v. Bay Boom W. R. & F. Co. 172 Wis. 363, 178 N. W. 569.

Our…