The Anaconda standard., 1899-06-06
THE. WATER RIGHT CASE.
q
Verdict in Favor of Hendrickson
for $3.50.
THE FINDINGS OF THE JURY
George Perkins Had Appropriated the
Waters of Perkins Creek and Had
Used the Same for Irri-
eating Purposes

The jury in the Hendrickson- Wallace
water-right case found verdict on
Saturday evening, as announced in yes
terday's Standard, in favor of the
plaintiff for the sum of $3.50. The find
ings in the case were as follows:
Did George Perkins appropriate any
of the waters of Perkins creek and
use the same for irrigating the lands
known as Perkins ranch, and if So in
what year, and how many miners
inches?
Answer-Yes. from 1867 to 1872. APP
proximately so inches.
Did Mrs. Perkins, widow of George
Perkins, use the waters of Perkins
creek for the purpose of irrigating the
Perkins ranch, and if so, when, and
during what years?
Answer-Yes. From 1872 to 1878.
Did the plaintiff or his predecessors
in interest ever appropriate and use
any of the waters of Perkins creek?
| Answer-Yes.
If your answer to the foregoing
| question be yes, state in what way
such appropriation was made?
Answer-By conveying it to his land
| by means of bitches for irrigating and
| domestic purposes.
| If YOUR answer to this inteTrogatory
| be YES state what amount of the wa
ters of Perkins creek was so approprl-
| ated.
Answer-Approxima so inches.
If YOUR answer to this interrogatory
be yes, state what was the capacity of
| the ditch dug by the plaintiff or his
predecessors in interest, that is TO say,
| how many inches of water would 1t
| carry?
Did the defendant, William Wallace,
appropriate in the year 1873, and use
| thereafter. up to the time of the com
! mencement of this suit, the waters OF
| Perkins creek?
Answer-No.
Did the defendant in the year 1898
and before the commencement of this
action, divert or use any of the waters
of said Perkins creek to which the
| plaintiff was entitled?
Answer-Yes.
If your answer to the foregoing III
terrogatory be yes, state what. IL an!
damage the plaintiff has suffered bS
! reason of the diversion or use by tnt
: | defendant of any of the waters OF salt
| Perkins creek to Whlch the pldiil' Al
was entitled? So,
| lars. 80 .'l5-< ..
Did the defendant and his predeces
sors in interest use the waters OF Fer
kins creek openly, notorlousiS contli'
uousIy and adversely and against IN
righths of the plaintiff and his pfeoe
cessors in interest for five years mex
nreceding the 1st day of July. 1895?
Answer-No.
Did the defendant and his predeces
sors in interest use the waters OF Fer
) kins creek openly, notoriously, contin
: uously, adversely and against tn
, rights of the plaintiff and his predeces
sors in interest for period OF tel
| years Immediately next preceding TN
commencement of this suit?
1 Answer-No.
2 Did William Wallace and his predc
!. ressors in interest use the waters g
Perkins creek during each year, and fo
more than five years prior to the Is
n dav of July 1895 claiming the same a
v his, and holding the same adversely
;, all the world?
n Answer-No.
:, Did the plaintiff or his predecessor
n interest abandon what right, II an
they ever had, in and to the Wate1
of Perkins creek?
n Answer-No.
>. Who had the right to use the Wate1
: Of Perkins creek during the season
1898?
AnsWer-Plaintiff.