The Caldwell tribune. [volume] (Caldwell, Idaho Territory [Idaho]) 1883-1928, 1905-04-29
THE BIG WAFER sui.
Farmers Cooperative Ditch Co
Wants Boise River Water Rights
Adiadicated.

One of the most important water
suits in the history Of Idaho is now
in progress before Judge Stewart.
Ii is suit brought by the Farmer
Cooperative Ditch Co. against the
Riverside Canal Co, ct al. The
others interested in the case are
various ditch, canal and irrigating
companies-about $50 in all
which fuse water from the sBo1se
river. The suit is brought to have
the water rights of the various
companies adjudicated. Proceed
1 ings were first instituted in August
1902. At that time Judge Stewart
appointed N. M. Reuicl, of Boise,
referee to hear the case. Before he
could do SO he was appointed United
States Attorney for Idaho. The
case for one reason or another was
postponed and delayed to the present
time. AS shortage of water is
feared the Farmers Cooperative
Ditch Co. has been very anxious to
have the case tried at once. Some
of the others were not in such a
hurry.
Monday the case was taken
up and it will probably be several
days before the case is concluded.
The attorneys for the various com
panies met in Messrs Rice & Thomp-
sons Office and agreed to the follow
ing stipulations:
First. It is stipulated by the
respective parties to the suit that
all the lands affected by this liti-
cation under the several bitches
and water rights are arid in charact-
er and require artificial means for
irrigation.
Second. It is hereby stipulated
that all parties to this suit are the
owners Of the respective bitches
claimed by them. as shown by the
p1eadings; but this stipulation shall
not apply to the capacity of said
ditch or bitches or the date OF dates
of their construction or the date of
diversion of water therein.
/ Third. 1t is further agreed that
each party hereto claiming in its
pleadings to be corporation shall,
for all the purpose of this case, be
admitted and deemed to be a cor
poration as alleged, without evil
dence of such corporate existence.
aas Fourth. 1t shall not be neces-
sary for the respective parties to
prove a chain of title of their re-
speetive water rights after the
diversion, location or appropriation
has once been established; but such
title shall be presumed to be in
the party now claiming same in the
E absence of showing either by
cross examination or otherwise of a
break in the chain of title.
Fifth. That corporations or
associations who are parties shall
each be treated as a unit or single
claimant, and that the lands Of
their stockholders, patrons or users,
under rental system or otherwise,
shall be regarded as part of the
lands for which their appropriations
were made, and in making proof it
shall be necessary for said corpora
tons or association to show only
the capacity of the diverting works,
the date of diversion, the date OF
dates and extent of engagements
and the total amount of water
diverted and used for beneficial
purposes by their stockholders
/. patrons and users, under the renta
system or otherwise, through and
v from said corporation or association
3 canals, without showing owner
ship of the particular tracts of LAND
II to which said water has beer
applied, 1t is agreed that this
stipulation does not cover or waive
proof in any case Of the date o
appropriation and extent of use fo
beneficial purpose, or the amour
of water required TO irrigate thu
land for which it is claimed.
Sixth. An exception taken BY
any attorney in the cause, to any
~t,Isurr ~ %la So,,~S edo1I ka 5aar,aI