Arizona republican. [volume] (Phoenix, Ariz.) 1890-1930, 1902-06-01
A WATER DAY
To Be Made a Weekly Feature of the
District Court.

The application for Reinforcement
OF the Kibbey decree in the Old case Of
Nj. Wc-nser Us. the Salt River Valley
Canal company. came up yesterday. 1t
is now in the form of 4 motion by ST.
mon N0vinger, \. L. Henshaw ana
other minority stock holders OF the c.
nal, for distribution OF the water ac-
cording to that decision. The motion is
directed in the first place against tEe
water commissioner in an inquiry why
he has not complied with the terms of
the decree, and in the next place
against the Salt River Valley Canal
company, inquiring why it lad
not awaited itself of the de-
cree by which the priority CT Ire
| rights OF lands under that canal VAS
esta blished
The plaintiffs. or minority stockholm
ers. are represented by Col. William
| Herring. o. Tucson who had charge Ct
this particular branch OF water litiSa
! ton in this valley fur the last twelve
! years and by Thomas Armstrong. =.
| The motion VAS demurred to By Cen
! cral AinsWorth for The water company,
o. the ground that the court is without
| Jurisdiction. The demurrer was a!-
| sued all afternoon. There were Two
principal Questions. The fist was
whether the minority Stockholders
could compel the company to take ac-
ton for the enforcement OF the decree
and the next was whether the decree
| could be re-opensd. and the rights OF
ali the parties to it, as we'll as the
rights which have accrued to other
parties since that decree was made,
iadjudicated. The attorneys We're ii
lowed TO present the court authorities
on these points
Near the conclusion OF the hearing,
Judge Kent said he had decided to es-
tablish water day, for the hearing OF
all matters relating to irrigation lis
p;tes. He said he would devote Fri
lays for the next two months TO that
kind of litigation. General AinsWorth
lsaid there was very little more to be
said about the case now before tee
court. Tle court replied that there
was much that he had not heard. Col.
Herring. turning to General Afnswortl,
said. The court has not heard Your
side of the case. Your extreme mo los
~ has prevented al expression Of
your views.
!
the day the making up of the de-
cree OF the court in the injunction
I cases OF TIE SIaricopa and Salt River
! valley canals, against water users. e
tStraining them from interference with
the heaGgc t.es of the canals, was taEen
up. The decree had been prepared by
the attorney Tor the plaintiffs. Objec-
ton was made to a clause. which the
attorneys for the defense believed Vas
ca pable OF a construction that tn aiI
clients had no rights i'll the canals. or
to the water. They offered an amend
, nent, to which the plaintiffs objected
. on the ground that it might BE- con
strued that the rights of the defend
. ants had been established. This dis
; pute was finally adjusted SO that each
. danger in the decree. and ii was c1l-
. tered.
.. In the case of the National BANK OF
Arizona vs.. 81. W. Kales, the demurrer
to the amended complaint was set fcI
argument en- June q. In the case oil
. Vim. Roarke rs. Christy administrator
OF the estate of Jas. Roarke. Q motion
by the plaintiff to set aside The order
. disnissing the case as to Cora Brill, Z
: former administrators OF the estate
. and +. L. Brill. and that o. II. Chrisc1
: oe made . party defendant. vas arg5ai
: and denied. \ demurrer was ARGUED
. ard submitted in the case Of john II
: Jennings VS.. 0. e. Runner. ! demurrer
. was also argued and submitted in tax
case of w. E. Deity against !. ?. Gun
: ther