The Courier. (Genoa, Nev.) 1899-1904, 1902-10-24
Carson Valleys Prosperity.
EDITOR COURIER.


The Record of the 18th says:
. The recognized garden spot of Ne
vada with it's luxurious homes is Car
son Valley and the most potential fac
tor in bringing about this condition
was the decree, issued by Judge Haw-
ley in the United States Circuit Court,
giving the ranchers the right to use the
waters of the Carson river for irriga-
ton purposes"
1t is respectfully submitted that the
foregoing is libel upon Judge Hawley,
and if he does not deny it, he should be
credited with being willing to take adj
vantage of whatever benefit he can de-
rive from it, The least the Judge
should claim in the matter of the suit
of the Union Mill and Mining Com
pany against H. F. Dangberg and all
other farmers using water on the east
and west forks of the Carson river in
Douglas county, is that he decided the
case according to the rights of the par
ties TO the action. If he favored the
defendants, he deprived the plaintiff of
I4ShOo uli1u OclOnStu 10 IL.
But did he favor the defendants. as
matter of fact? He gave to the defend
ants the right to use the waters of the
Carson river from July to October l
of each year, and from October to
July he gave them the use of every
thing over 600 inches. There is no
reason for the farmers to be overgrate-
full for that; or to be grateful to receive
their own. But did they get what of
right they were entitled to?
The evidence showed beyond contro-
versy or dispute in any form that the
Mott lands were settled in 1852; also,
the Singleton ranch and Ben Palmer's;
Jones and Squires lands were settled in
1858; Anderson and Christensen in
1854; also the Van Sickle places; Cos
ser's in 1852; Settelmeyer before 1865,
and in short, that there was no bottom
land locatable on the west fork in 1850
The evidence also showed that more
than 1000 inches of the waters of the
west fork was appropriated and used
by the early settlers before the mill
companies appropriated any water
Whatever, their first right being initi-
ated on small scale in 1860, and on a
much larger scale in 1861. The use of
the water by the farmers was contin-
uous and ever increasing from the be-
ginning, and their land improvements
kept pace with it; they never lost an
inch of their rights, but kept right
along improving the same by building
better and more substantial dams, and
enlarging and improving their bitches
and fencing their lands and raising
stock, human and beast. On the other
hand, the use of the water by the mill
companies has always been precarious
and unsteady. They have made no
use of the water, practically, since 1888.
Why, then, did not Judge Hawley,
in his decree, grant to the settlers, ap-
perpetrators and users of water in
Douglas county who were prior in
point of time to the Union Mill and
Mining Company, the first right at any
and all times to use that which be-
longed to them by prior appropriation?
Finally, why extend thanks for get
ting less than belongs to us, and thus
acknowledge that we have something
that does not belong to us, under the
decree, particularly at this time when
we are threatened to be dragged up
for contempt for using the water that
we used before the Comstock was dis
covered, and surely before the mills
ever struck pick on the banks of the
Carson river?
DOUGLAS COUNTY FARMERS.