The herald., 1897-01-14
RIGHTS Of Old Settlers
To Be Tested in a Case
From Azusa
INTERESTING EMDEZZLEhENT Case
Geo. Larrabee Had Two Strings
to His Bow
VERDICT IN A DAMAGE CASE
West Side Water Company Wants q
Right OF Way
To Condemn a Fifty.Foot strip for a
An Opinion on Contractors Bonds-Bad
VERDICT IN A DAMAGE CASE
West Side Water Company Wants
Right OF Way
To Condemn a Fifty.Foot strip for ,
Tunnel
An Opinion on Contractors Bonds-Bad
Man Morales. Who Harbored His
Brother-Case of Spencer
VS.. Spencer Still On.

"A suit commenced yesterday in the
superior court by Harrison Fuller and
his wife, Mary A. Fuller, against the
Azusa Irrigation company and the Of
ficers of that corporation. promises to
develop into an interesting exposition of
riparian rights. The plaintiffs allege in
their complaint that for more than thir-
ty years prior to the commencement of
this action there has been a ditch con-
Meeting with the eastern side of the San
Gabriel river, little below the canyon
which diverted water from that strea m
for distance of five or six miles, to sup
ply certain persons known as "old set
tiers with water for irrigation and do
mestic purposes. and the ditch was SO
used for thirty years. The plaintiff, Mary
A. Fuller, is now and has been for ten
years owner of tract of land under the
said ditch, and her grantors and prede-
cessors in estate have been entitled un-
der the said "old settlers" rights to have
the use of the water from the ditch for
irrigation purposes. When the plaintiff
first acquired poss ession of the land the
water was conducted from the San Ga
briel river by means of the old ditch, and
the plaintiffs, about eleven years ago,
in order to have the use of the water for
domestic purposes at their house, laid
a pipe connecting the ditch, then only
conduit in the earth, with the house, di-
verting thereby a sufficient quantity
of water for domestic uses, and contin-
ued to so use the pipe up to the time
when the old ditch was vacated and a
new ditch was constructed, and the eX-
istence of the pipe and its purpose were
we'll known to all persons interested in
the ditch, and such use was continued
"openly and notoriously. uninterrupted
ly and adversely under a claim of right
so to use the same, until the change in
the said ditch About eight or ten
years ago the Azusa Irrigating company
was Incorporated for the purpose of
holding the rights to the water of the
San Gabriel river by means of the ditch
to manage for those entitled to the Wa
ter, but such management and control
was not intended to have and did not
have, until the wrongs and injuries
complained of, any effect upon the said
several rights of the said parties"
Plaintiffs aver that the old ditch was
so made as to permit the wasting of
much water by seepage, and the growing
settlement required better facilities for
carrying the water, and a new ditch was
the result. The irrigation company made
the new cement ditch and changed its
location to a higher point and most dis
uant from the land of the plaintiffs. AT
ter the ditch was completed the Fullers
again put in the pipe for their domestic
supply of water, extending it from its
former terminus at the old ditch, and
continued to use the water so obtained
The connection was made ard water
used openly, etc. Is In the former in
starce. and with the full knowledge and
consent of the irrigating company, un-
til December 29, 1896, when the directors
of the company ordered their superin-
tendent to cut off the Fuller domestic
pipe. and in compliance with instruc-
tions the superintendent did, on Jaru-
ary 5. 1897. plug UP the pipe and forbade
Harrison Fuller who was there present,
from interfering with it. Since that date
the Fullers have had no water for do
mestic use, except what they hauled a
distance of over mile. The plaintiffs
aver that the action of the irrigation
company directors was malicious and
done to compel the Fullers to execute an
instrument waiving rights on their part
to have the water from the said ditch
through the said ditch for domestic
purposes, and would thenceforth hold
the same only upon a mere license or
permission of the company, and the
company would have a right to put an
end to that license al any time it saw fit.
A paper so prepared. containing the dis
claimer, was presented to the tullersfor
their signatures, but they refused 20
sign it, and the board Of directors took
action as above related
PLAINTIFFS ask for $1,000 damages for
the stoppage of the pipe and for permits
sion to remove the obstruction and that
defendants be erjoined from in any
manner interfering with the plaintiffs
use of the water by means of the pipe.
FOR ALLEGED MENT.