Arizona republican., 1906-11-06
HURLEY VS.
 ABBOTT Fl AL
Latest Phase of the Prior
 fly Suit Controversy
The Governments Reply to Inquiry Regarding Ne cessity of Suit.

ed, it requires no extended introduc- ton. IL refers entirely to the priority water suit known as Hurley versus Abbott ct al affecting all rights to use of irrigation water in this valley.
 Subject: Hurley vs Abbott. Department of the interior, United States Reclamation Service. Wash ington, D. C., October 31, 19O6 MT. B. A. Fowler,
 Phoenix Arizona.
 Dear Sir: Enclosed herewith is copy of a letter signed by H. l. Latham. and a number of others, in regard to the suit entitled Hurley vs. Abbott ad- dressed to the secretary of the interior Report thereon was made by this of flee in pursuance of instructions from the department under date of October 3. copy herewith. 4 copy of this report was forwarded to MT. Clark by the de- partment with letter of transmittal of which copy is enclosed. send you also copy of my letter to MT. Latham on this subject.
 These papers are sent in order that you may be advised of the conditions relating to this matter and of the views of this office and the department.
 Very truly yours,
 (Signed) A. P. DAVIS.
 Acting Chief Engineer
 Phoenix, Ariz.. Sept. 22 1906. Honorable E. A. Hitchcock.
 Secretary. of the Interior, Washing
 ton, D. c.
 Dear Sir: There has been instituted in the district court of this county a suit entitled Hurley vs. Abbott" [" which has for its purpose an adjudi- cation of the rights of the water users who own and claim rights to water taken from the Salt and Verde rivers for irrigation purposes. The impress sion has been made and it is the gen. eral understanding here that this suit has the indorsement of your depart ment, and it is represented that this suit is required by you, and therefore must be prosecuted to it's ultimate end If such is the case, We feel that this valley will be involved in an almost endless litigation and that the entire community will be set every man against his neighbor. It means that the business interests of Phoenix and the Salt River Valley will be the great est sufferers until the end of this liti- gatiOn and it is of such vital import ance to us that we take the liberty of writing you to know if some other method of settling the water rights cannot be arrived at.
 The Salt River Valley Water Users association, through it's counsel, Cover nor Kibbey, is lending its aid and en- cOuragement to this suit and is paying the expenses incident thereto, and as we and many other members Oi this association are opposed to the further prosecution of the suit, We feel that an in justice is being done us in taking our money to further a suit in which we do not believe. We have studied this question at great length and are of the opinion that by proper course this lawsuit might be avoided and a settlement arrived at that would be satisfactory to you
 There are claimants for water at the head of the Verde river who could no doubt be settled with in a manner sat isfactory to all parties concerned. The other claimants to water outside of the association are represented by the Tempe Canal people and others whose lands are included in the reservoir district but are not signed up in the Water Users association. We have reason to believe that a satisfactory adjus tmeHt can be made with them. The next claimant of real importance is for what is known as the Chandler interests near Mesa, who lay claim to the flood waters and we are of the opinion that no great difficulty would be encountered in making a satisfac- tory settlement of this question. An other claimant to the natural flow of the river is some lands that will no doubt be left outside of the reservoir district and are located west of New river and claiming rights to water through the Arizona canal. This in terest is represented principally by MT. w. J. Murphy and as Mir. Mur- phys larger interests are in favor of the progress of the work on the dam and irrigation system. he could doubt less be settled with upon an equitable basis.
 With these interests disposed of. the only other question that would have to be settled would be the individual rights of the present members of this association as one against the other. and as we understand the system of distributing the water after the com pletion of the irrigation system would be by giving each acre a pro rata share of the water distributed, we fail to see the necessity of lawsuit to establish priorities that would afterwards have to be ignored.
 We therefore respectfully urge that you advise us whether or not this suit in it's present form is absolutely neces- sary or if some other plan for the set tlement of these rights cannot be de- vised. The great length of time re- quired and the expense necessary make us view the prosecution of this suit with the greatest apprehension.
 Very truly yours,
 (Signed)
 H. l. LATHAM
 VERNON l.. CLARK,
 And thirteen other water users. Department of the Interior, Washing ton. October 27. 1906.