The Lamar register., 1901-10-16

1877 females.
Among the applications refused by
the state board Of pardons We're the
following: Pat Ryan. murder, Lake
county; Norman Salsman assault
Boulder county; John l.. Conley, as
sault, Lake county; Alexander Zesch,
forgery, Arapahoe county; John hlu-
borg, grand larceny, Arapahoe county
Thomas Robinson, robbery, Pueblo
county; W. w. Dawson, murder, Lake
county.
The state board of pardons met Octo-
ber 4th and considered about sixteen
applications for pardons ana twenty
one parole eases, but could not see us
way clear 10 prant n pardon, ana oniy
issued paroles in four instances. Inc
list included five new applications for
pardons and about n dozen postponed
ones. Among the latter were two VINO
have made several attempts to nave
their sentences reduced. Among the
new cases was that of George Bonu,
sentenced from Denver for ten 10
twenty years for killing girl in River
Front park.
Governor James b. Orman has thir-
ty-seven coloncls on his staff, eXclud-
ing Adjutant General George #. Car
diner The personnel follows In order
of appojntmcnt: George Il. Gardiner,
!. Il. johnson. T.. b. Russell, Denver;
ID. ii. RobcsonX Georgetown; H. u.
Paddock, Boulder; w. ii. Combs, Den
yer; j. A. Shinn, Leadville; G. g. Mar
tindale, Crccde; John ii. Fox, Trini-
dad; ]. Il. Eizcr, Pueblo: John ). MOS
by, Jr. Denver: II. II. Carpenter, VIC
tor; Charles Pfaillin, William Is. nut
tie, Denver; J. ii. Peabody, canon
City; II. B. Tedrow, Cripple Creek;
George S. Newman, Aspen; Ben n.
Block, George +. Sanger. Denver; j.
w. Campbell. Central City; ii. II. Nc
Clelland, Dan G. Osmun. Jr., IL. j.
Newman, Denver; Edwin Arkell, Col
orado Springs: J. o. ID. Kelleher. Bald
Mountain; Leonard G. Jones. Denver;
Dan C. Hartnett. Pueblo; w. Il. Or
man, u. ]. Hutchinson, Frank Towers,
Denver: b. B. Calvin, Silverton; John
j.. McCombs, w. w. Grant, Denver
George Bauer, MIancos; Perl I. Gates,
Lake City: II. Il. Warner. w. ID. Van
Blarcom. Jr., G. Il. Stubbs, Denver.
The protest of the Laguna Ditch
Company against the sale of state
reservoir site on the line between Bent
and Otero counties to the Fort Lyons
Ditch Company was heard October oth
by the state land board. The stare
owns II natural site covering about 40
acres northwest of Las Animas. APP
plication was made for the lease by
| the Fort Lyons company some time
ago and it was then granted, but on
protest of J. T. Holbrook of the La
! runa company the lease was not
| signed The Fort Lyons people wish
| the reservoir site rs an accessory TO
their ditch, which traverses the coun-
try south and east of the site. The
| state owns about 10000 acres of farm
| ing land west of the reservoir site, and
the protests of Mr.. Holbrook are made
on the theory of public policy. He
holds that If the reservoir site Is re-
tanned by the state that through the
statutes Of 1897 the state will be able
to get an amount of water equal TO
that stored in the reservoir, and with
| It irrigatc enough of the 10000 acres
| to make the profits from the sale or
| the land several times in excess or
that from the sale of the reservoir site.
The demurrer to the bill by the state
| in the suit in the United States Su-
preme Court of Kansas. plaintiff, VS..
! Colorado. defendant, better known as
| the Arkansas river water right case,
has been forwarded to Washington by
Attorney General Charles G. Post. AS
sociatcd with him in the case are At
| torneys Luther NJ. Goddard, Charles s.
| Thomas, Platt Rogers and Henry A.
Dubbs The defendant states. in sub
stance. the following causes of demur-
rer to the bill of complaint: That the
| Supreme Court has no jurisdiction, be-
| cause the allegations arise between
the state Of Kansas and certain private
corporations and certain persons in
| Colorado: because the suit is brought
by certain individuals living in Kan
| sas on lie banks of the Arkansas;
| that Kansas. in her sovereignty right,
which size has no right to do. seeks re-
| dress Of supposed wrongs of citizens;
that the bill does not show that prop
| erty rights of the state of Kansas are
| in any manner affected by the allega-
lions: that the acts complained of are
not done by the state of Colorado or
under its authority, but by certain pri-
vate corporations and individuals;
that the bill is multifarious; because
| the injuries and acts complained of
consist of the exercise of rights and
the appropriation of water upon the
national domain in conformity with
acts of congress; because the consti-
tuition Of Colorado declaring public
property waters of its natural streams
and sanctioning the right of appropria-
tion was enacted pursuant to national
authority and ratified at the time of
admission of the state into the Union;
because the bill of complaint is in 9th
er respects uncertain, informal and in
sufficient and does not state facts suf-
ficient TO entitle Kansas to the equita-