Bisbee daily review., 1902-01-31
SAIL RIVER VALLEY TROUBLES

The candt companies III the Sdlt River valley are no doubt very much to blame for the present unfortunate condition now existing in that valley. It is evident that many thousands of acres have been cleared up there and put in a condition to cultivate, for which there is no water to irrigate and make it profitable for crops. Water rights have been sold by the canal companies without regard to their ability to supply stream of water at time when the farmers crops need it. Now these canal companies are crying out for help which they do not deserve. The unfortunate land owner, who holds waterless water rights are to be pitied, and if the government undertakes to provide water for lrri- gating lands which are now arid and non-prOductive, these people should be given relief: but the canal companies who have sold their worthless water rights should not be allowed to share in any additional water supply, or have anything to do with its distribu- ton.
 Last week in Phoenix Mir. F. Nj. Murphy, brother of Governor Mur- phy, appeared before the board of trade in that city and unfolded what he considered feasible plan to insure better water supply for the Salt River valley. The plan. as outlined by MT. Murphy and reported by the Phoenix Republican, is as follows:
 Murphy suggested that an enabling act be procured authorizing the county to issue bonds to the amount of g., 5OO,- GOO, or so much thereof as would be required in the event that the county should decide to build the dam itself. The enabling act, though, should be so broad and liberal that the county would be authorized by it to enter in. to contract with a private corpora tion on some such terms as the follow- ing: Give the county the right to de- Posit with a trust company county bonds to the amount of s1,0OO 900, along with contracts entered into with the canal companies and water con- sumers who would be supplied with water from the prospective reservoir.
 These contracts should represent sufficient revenue to meet the interest on the bonds covering the cost of con- struction of the dam and it's operation and maintenance. The deposit of sl,000, 900 of the county bonds to be a guaranty to the constructing company that the contracts would be observed. If they should be, no part of the de- posit of the county bonds would ever be delivered, but in case of 8 deficit enough of the bonds deposited by the county to be made available to meet it would be delivered and that part of the bonds deposited would for the first time begin to draw interest. The county would be at no expense what ever except in the case of deficit; the dam and reservoir to be in every re- spect in accordance with plans and specifications such as the county would adopt if it were to assume the entire responsibility. Assuming that proper caution had been exercised in the prep. aration of the contracts with the canal companies and water consumers the county should not be called upon to meet any deficit.
 The advantage to the public of this plan over the county ownership of the reservoir was made easily apparent. In case of county ownership the bonds to the amount of the cost of the dam would be interest bearing at once or practically so, and in the event of de- fcit after completion, which would be as likely to occur under county owner ship as under private control, the coun- ty would have to meet it unaided and alone after having expended the origi. nal bond issue of s2 ,5OO, 900, or so much thereof as might be necessary in the construction of the dam. In the case of private ownership under the plan suggested, the county could in no cir. eumstances be called upon to expend more than $1,O00, 900, which would probably be distributed over a period of thirty years or such matter. There is every reason to believe, however, that the county would never be called upon to put up cent.
 Whether the people of Maricopa county feel able to shoulder a bonded debt of s2,50O, 900. under any condition. we are not sufficiently informed to say, but our guess would be that they would reject any proposition of the kind. The people of Yavapai county and of Pima county, have had an ex- perience with the conditional bonds which should cause all Arizonans to steer clear of them in the future.
 We believe the proposition of Mir. Murphy and all other propositions for irrigation enterprises by states, coun- ties or individuals at this time will | tend to embarrase and hinder thoeo