Arizona republican., 1906-11-11

that affidavit that those defendants be- Ieve that the judge has a prejudice against them. and have that consider ed sufficient affidavit under the code. Indeed. it has been shown here by the disclaimers. or protests, or whatever they may be called. that these persons who made these ah1davits in reality had no right so to make them for all of the applicants. l believe in order for such a right to be founded unde. the statute. it would be necessary for each defendant applying to make an affidavit personally therefor.
 Therefore, upon a number of grounds the applications must be denied; ana that will be the order in the case as to both these canal applications
 In making this determination. how ever. it does not necessarily follow that l should not grant the relief asked for Of course. it is apparent in this case that no actual transfer of the case should be made to another county the nature of the case. the number of defendants is such that no such trans fer could be made. The code how ever, provides another remedy for a state of facts such as is alleged here and that is by allowing the judge of the district to call in another judge to try the case; and that l assume has been the real purpose of this applica- tiou-nOt that there should be au act ual transfer from one county to an other but that the judge should avail himself of the other provision of the code and call in some other judge to try this case. Now. although this ap- plication has been denied. ] shall fol- low such course. provided I am satis- fII is F.r people in this valley who have an hon est belief that determination that I might render in this case would not be a fair and impartial one. This case is an important one. if indeed it be any such case as claimed by counsel and as generally seems to be under stOod-abOUt which l express no opin- ion-is a very important one to the people Of this valley. is extremely important in my mind. that any de- cisiOH that is made in the case be. if not acceptable to the people against whom it is rendered. at least acquisced in so far as their belief with respect to the fairness and impartiality of the decision is concerned. And I shall do in that matter just what seems to me to be my duty to this community. re- membering that I have the whole com iuulilly 10 consider. as well as the UeO- pie who have made this application. l shall try this case myself. if am con vinced that it is for the best interests of the people of this valley that I do so, irrespective of any natural distas-e that l should feel in trying a case where some of the parties. at least be heve that it will not be fairly decided l shall do in that respect what see lz to me to be my duty in the premise. ] shall not accept a statement of the two men. one made on behalf of the Tempe canal company, and its stockholders 1 and one made on behalf Of the Mesa canal company and it's stockholders that the people, and the defendants therein mentioned, do so believe. that my bias and prejudices against them is sUcn that can not i'm partially try this case as al- legged in the affidavit But if affidavits are submitted to me from the people therein mentioned. or oth- CTS, in which it shall appear that a large number of people in this valley