In my testimony and opinion given on behalf of the State of Texas in the Medina case, I spelled out these doubts, but argued, in the main, that the classical Roman law of water rights was not appli cable in the Indies, having been replaced by the requirement of ex press irrigation water rights as at least implied by the Recopilaci6n of the Indies. This argument relied, of course, on the authority of Valmont as to the requirement of express grants, and drew much support from the opinion of Santiago Onate (pm) in that case. The son prevailed over the father in the trial court and (by split deci sion) in the intermediate appellate court. The Supreme Court of Texas, however, found my view (and those first advanced by Santi ago Onate the Elder) more persuasive. With respect to the McCurdy case, it said: