The Idaho Republican. [volume] (Blackfoot, Idaho) 1904-1932, 1909-07-23
BIG LOST RIVER WATER GOES TO
SPEER

Big Lost River Land C Irrigation
company, yesterday morning won a
victory over the Mackay Irrigation
company, when State Engineer Steph-
enson handed down decision in the
celebrated contest case on which rest
ed the fate Of the project, embracing
100, 900 acres of land.
No sooner had the findings of the
lengineer been announced than Speer,
through his attorney, N. M. Ruick,
filed suit in the United States dis
trict court to quiet title to water UNI
der his Lost River permits, as against
| the alleged claim of the Mackay COM
lpany. This action was taken to head
off an appeal from the engineers
decision to the district court, and
was instituted in the federal jurisdic-
ltion owing to Speer's residence in
the state of Illinois. This action, Mr..
Ruick stated, had been Instituted to
settle all possible questions affecting
the water rights.
| NuSnng COnSCrucSlOn
The effect Of the decision Is to still
further assure the success Of the pro-
ject for which contract has been
awarded to the Corey Bros. Construc-
tion company OF Ogden and which 1t
lis estimated will cost $4,000, 900.
Construction gangs are now at work
and a sub-cOntractor is employed on
every mile OF the main canal, dis
lance Of rs miles. Water, it Is stated,
will be ready for distribution to set
tiers next season.
The contest was instituted under
the statute which provides construc-
ton work under permit, or filing
upon waters, must be completed
within five years and one fifth of the
work within two and half years
or right Of subsequent appropriation
shall obtain. This provision Of law
| was held constitutional in recent
! opinion Of the supreme court grow
ling out Of this proceeding. 5
First Cost Small
The original Big Lost River Land
& Water company procured two per-
mits for the diversions of waters of
| the river, 1907 and 1748, aggregat-
| ing 1900 cubic feet of water The
cost of works was estimated at $105,-
1000. This was In the spring of 1905.
Two years later, or at a time when
I$80,000 worth OF work had been done
the plans were enlarged and permits
1amended, the amended permits giving
| 100000 as the cost of the works.
The contention Of the Mackay COM
pany was that the construction work
should have at the end of two and a
half years aggregated one7fifth of the
lcost Of the works as given in the
amended permits.
| Subsequent to the filing of the
amended permits, Notwithstanding the
| Big Lost river company own the res.
eryoir sites, canals and right-of-way
and had entered into contract with
| the state land board for the segrega-
ton and reclamation of 5000 acres
| of land, the Mackay Irrigation COM
pany filed an application to irrigate.
the identical land covered by the Big
points of diversion adopted by that
company. This was at time when
the Big Lost River Land & Irrigation
company was in financial straits and
the apparent purpose was to take the
project up in case the old company
fell down.
Taken Over BY Speer
In February it's affairs were taken
over by George S. Speer of Chicago,
vice president of Trowbridge & Niver,
who reorganized the company and
resumed construction operations and
still further enlarged the project to
include 10000 acres more land.
The decision of the state engineer
follows
'Mackay Irrigation company, linz
tied, corporation, contestant, VS..
G, s. Speer and the Big Lost River
Land & Irrigation company, limited,
a corporation, contestees:
after due consideration of the pc
tition of contestant in the above en-
titled action, together with the aft
davit and other papers filed therein
by the contestee, George S. Speer, the
contestants petition for the cancella-
ton of permits Nos. 1907 and 174S
is hereby denied for the following
reasons, towit:
THAT from contestants petition
and from a personal examination
made by me of the various diversion
works set out in the permits in ques-
tion and in the application upon
which said permits were issued, 1t ap-
peared that the holders of said per-
mits had duly expended upon the con-
struction work under said permits
the sum of $50 100000 on the various
diversion dams, canals and laterals re-
ferred to in said permits and fur
Their sum Of $40, 900. 90, upon reser-
voir and DAM
That one-fifth of the construction
work required under said permits and
each of them had been done within
one-half of the time allowed for the
completion of the works called for
in said permits.
For which reasons 1t is thereby
held that the terms of the permits
hereinbefore mentioned and each of
them have been complied with as to
the completion of one-fifth If the
work within one-half of the tifS e al
lowed for the entire completidh OF
said works and that the contestant |
shall take nothing nv raasnn IF &fS |