Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1883-08-14
TINE SWEENEY CASE.
Complete History Of the Water
Litigation.

Litigation.
| For many years past Carson has
been threatened from time to time
with water famines and the water
which runs in the hi Is has always
been . source of contention among
ranchers and others whose business
depends almost entirely upon the
water supply. The imprisonment
| of MIR. Sweeney for contempt al
conrt has causel considerable dis
cussion in this city and the APPEAL
has taken the pins to collect the
d ia bearing upon the case from
the records Of the courts.
| THE FIRST WATER DIVISION.
| In 1872 the ranchers in Kings
Greek and Gregory's Creek Can
yong dividing among themselves
the water fo~ ing Down the canyons.
settling upon a pro rata basis, gov
erned by the amount Of land owned
hy each respectively. In short
time the ranchers began to accuse
each other of appropriating water
unfairly and Phillips brongh, suit
against Welsh and all others who
had water from Kings Cany on
creek. ard Woods brought suit
against Neve,s and al VIII" took
water from Gregor.' Canyon creek.
Sweeney was defendant in the
Phillips case. In his answer to
the Phillips complaint Sweeney
claimed sixteen one-bnndredths OF
the water in Kings Canyon creek
for irrigation purposes, also eight
inche. additional water for sale AMI
distribution through pipes to the
people of Carson.
In the decree of the court Swee-
news claim for sixteen one hnn-
dredths of the water was allowed
and The eight additional inches for
sale and distribn ion denied.
ADRY YEAR
Nothing appeared to have re-
shifted from this decree until 1875.
which was a very dry year. and
water grew precious in Kings Can
yon creek, when the farmers COM
planned that Sweeney was still
using the eight inches Of water
which the court held no. to ba his.
The case came mp in the Distr Ct
Court and it being sh wn that
Sweeney had violated IN order Of
the court in continuing +" use the
water. he was fined 800 for con.
Tempt The fine was not paid.
Later in the same year lie was again
arrested and tried for contempt.
It being shown that he continued
to u.e the disputed eight inches If
water. he was fined $5O'. The case
was removed to tie Supreme Court.
tried once on appeal and once on
habe 8 corpus. In both cases the |
judgement Of the lower court was
No further action was
taken anil the fine remained unpaid.
AGAIN IN COURT
In 1876 there was also dry sea-
ron and the ranchers were again
growing at Sweeney for q scarcity
Of water. Phillips, whose crops
had been damaged to the extent of
over 81 600, again swore out com
p Amt charming Sweeney with TAX
ing water unlawfnlIy. and lie was
again brought before the District
Court and fined $500. The fine
vas not paid.
THE LAST CASE
A few weeks ago water trouble
gain assumed shape mp the can
'ou and Sweeney was again arrest
ID. It was shown that Sweeney
lad leased his eighty acres Of land
With the water rights to a parry
,amed Arthur. In addition 10 the
vater used on this land he was
lsing one fourth Of the water COM
ng down the canyon for sale and
in Carson. Phillips
nd Robinson swore that one night
bout 10 o'cock they lay in wait ,
nd saw Sweeney came up to the
reek on horseback and turn on the
ater into his reservoir. They
nshed mp and when they asked I
i'm Why he persisted in taking the s
'ater he replied that he had {
AIKEN no more than the Carson s
'ity Water Company had. On this {
he was again fined $500
nd The order made that he
llould remain in Jail until the fine {
,as mil