The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1897-03-03
SEWER COUNTY.
Big Irrigation Suit With a History
is on at Richfeld.

DIS A4AlSdl4OA Ou1J Will d a1SIOI y
is on at Richfeld.
Richfield, Utah, March 2-The district
court met here yesterday.
Richfield Irrigation company VS.. An
nabella Irrigation company ct al, was
! taken I'D. The history OF this case
is long one. Richfield was settled in
1865, and the settlers took out small
ditch from the Sewer river. Year by
/ year this has been enlarged till it is
/ now an immense canal. But few other
I bitches were taken out of the river I'M
Ill the early 70's. Most of these bitches
! were small at first and were enlarged
a little each year. Thus went on the
digging of canals until there was no
water to fill them, and just the year
that any company had a specific num-
Der of inches seemed hard to tell Ar
bitration was decided upon, and for a
long time representatives of the vari-
GUS companies were meeting first in
one town and then in another. These
meetings were known as water con-
ventions.' The plan of a friendly
suit was soon decided upon with the
Richfield Vermillion and Rocky Ford
companies as plaintiffs, and all other
companies in the valley as defendants
But the Rocky Ford company never
depends upon the main stream in the
that raises below other dams, and for
many years the Vermillion people had
been compelled to depend upon the
same source. So the Rocky Ford and
Vermillion companies were left out. At
Ytorney S r. Thurman was hired to nut
the suit through.
But Richfield was accused by-enany
OF taking advantage. All water being
used in 1873 was to be considered "pri-
mary water" and they said that year
was decided upon for Richfield's bene-
ut. Vermillion, too, began its use of
wafer in 1877. and wanted to be a
party to the suit. But Vermillion was
not needed. and the case was set for
hearing in June, 1896; but when the
time came three men who own a small
canal TO the southwest of Monroe
hung out and the case was postponed.
November was the next date set for
trial In July or August the Annabella
and Brooklyn Irrigation companies de-
clded to leave the friendly suit. An
nabella took out it's canal in 1872. and
had never since enlarged it, so il had
better right than most other bitches.
Monroe and Vermillion were soon in
duced to join in the suit, amended
answers to the complaints of the Rich
neld company were soon made, and the
case was in readiness a week ago, but
was postponed till yesterday.
When the case came up Yesterday
the array of legal talent was the largest
ever seen on one case here The plain
tiffs were represented by Thurman &
Wedgewood and V. Rapp Jennings and
Snyder represented the Annabella,
Monroe and Vermillion, while Stewart
and Collins appeared for Elsinore.
After a squabble regarding the min
utes of the last session, and another
regarding the cost of postponement.
Thurman and Wedgewood moved to
amend the complaint by dating all
water rights from 1865. This was
stoutly resisted by Jennings and the
motion was overruled.
Some time ago Jennings and Snyder
had filed cross-complaint for the Yer
million company, and the attorneys for
the Richfield company had failed to
file an answer. and VermilIion's at
torneys had obtained a default. The