The Courier. (Genoa, Nev.) 1899-1904, 1903-06-05

twelve days, and he had sandy and
some wet land like others. 1t is inn
possible to use water economically and
keep a ditch running full the entire
irrigating season. 1t is notorious that
better crops are raised when there is
an average season for water than when
there is an excess, and that farmers
generally use too much.
1t is the object of the defendants IN
Diamond and Dutch Valley and Long
Valley TO turn ali the water they pos
sibly can from the West Fork to the
East Fork, and it is threatened to make
large canal out of the Millich and
Gallinar Ditch. H. II. Springmeyer,
who testified for defendants, has re-
Gently secured about 5000 acres of land
in Long Valley and upper benches of
the East Fork. He is more interested
in getting that water and in the result
of this suit than any of the defendants.
The water diverted by the riparian
defendants does not return to the
river. On or about September IA, 1898,
A. J. Chalmers, civil engineer, measur-
ed the West Fork at point opposite
Merrills point 10), below the Diamond
Valley ditch, and found about 457
inches flowing therein, and there was
not drop flowing in said river at a
point mile above the State line, and
the lands of the plaintiffs were dusty
and dry on their meadows and hay
and grain fields at said time. So, the
theory of L. F. J. Wrinkle, civil en-
gineer, who testified for defendants,
that it made no difference how much
water riparian defendants turned on
their lands, because it all Immediately
returned to the river, cannot stand
against such facts. The physical facts
demonstrate that the water used by
riparian defendants sinks and reap
pears in sloughs and depressions north
of the lands of plaintiffs, on the west
side, and that plaintiffs cannot avail
themselves of any of its benefits.
Mr.. Wrinkle uses false basis to
calculate the quantity of water used
by plaintiffs and defendants on their
lands. He was given certain picked
pieces of testimony to read, and he
testified that from that testimony the
defendants use of the water was not
excessive. Defendants engineers,
Kirk ard Coleman, were taken to the
head of defendants bitches, with a
committee of defendants, and the CON-
mittee estimated and guessed for the
engineers the relative quantity of
water then flowing as compared to the
usual flow, by saying, for instance,
"there is now flowing one half or one
third as much as usual" and then the
engineers would calculate by weir
measurement how much was then flow
ing, and if the estimated quantity was
one-third, multiply the quantity found
by 3, and wisely announce that the
ditch averagely flowed so much water.
These results were given to Mr..
Wrinkle, and then he figured that such
quantity flowing certain number of
months in the year would amount to a
fair use of the water for year. This
ought to have been enough deception,
but defendants went further. They
informed the engineer, Wrinkle, that
the defendants irrigated only about
five months in the year, and that plain
tiffs irrigated about eight months.
Then defendants counsel gave engi-
neer Wrinkle the complaint to show
how much water plaintiffs claimed,
and upon that basis and the further
information that they irrigated eight
months in the year, Mr.. Wrinkle was
enabled to testify that plaintiffs use of
the water was excessive, and defen-
dants' use was moderate. But the
testimony shows that defendants use
the water two or three months after
the plaintiffs are high and dry. But, to
get out such evidence before the
Court, it took two combinations of
engineers and a committee of de-
PENDANTS, who guessed at the quantity
of water flowing, and we all know how
farmers guess at flowing water.
The undisputed testimony is to the
effect that it is great saving of water
to use it in point of time. On the
East Fork, whole communities meet
and divide the country into districts
and appoint agents to divide the water
in point of time, and by SO doing al
ways get along.
TO be continued