
    Argued January 15,
    affirmed April 21, 1925.
    Re Determination of WATER RIGHTS OF ROGUE RIVER. GEORGE W. LANCE et al. v. EDWARD BOLING et al. J. N. MATNEY v. FRED OFFENBACHER et al.
    (235 Pac. 279.)
    Appeal and Error — Costs—-Decrees Affirmed Pro Forma on Failure to Produce Missing Testimony.
    Decrees in water right suits affirmed pro forma, without costs or disbursements on appeal to either party on failure of counsel for either, after repeated notifications, to produce essential testimony not in record.
    See 4 C. J. 1126; 15 C. J. 256.
    1. See 2 R. C. L. 133.
    From Jackson: F. M. Calkins, Judge.
    Department 1.
    Affirmed.
    For appellants there was a brief over the names of Mr. Gus Newbury and Mr. H. D. Norton, with an oral argument by Mr. Newbury.
    
    For respondents there was a brief and oral argument by Mr. A. E. Reames.
    
   PER CURIAM.

— These two cases were heard on January 15, 1925, on all the issues therein and taken under advisement. On examination of. the record it was discovered that an essential part of the testimony is not in the record, thus rendering it impossible to examine properly the questions involved. Although repeated notifications have been sent to counsel on both sides to produce the missing testimony, all efforts in that direction have been unavailing and the record is still in such condition that no intelligent decision can be framed. For these reasons the decrees of the Circuit Court are affirmed pro forma, but without costs or disbursements in favor of either party in this court. Affirmed.  