Rocky Ford enterprise., 1909-09-24
TWIN LAKES co. ANSWER.
Charge Conspiracy By Members of
Bob Creek Association.


of the Twin Lakes Land and Water
company and to wrest the control OF
the big irrigation system from the
owners is charged and demand
made for $2so,ooo damages in a cross
complaint and answer filed Friday in
district court by the defendant COM
pany in the case of Fred Bass and
others against the Twin Lakes Land
and Water company. The cross
complaint is one of the most sensa-
tional ever filed in the Arkansas val
ley and charges outright as direct
allegation that the conspiracy was
Matched by few nersons and that it
is the intention to have everybody
concerned in the case brought oint
court in order that those who it is al
legged are responsible may be reveal
One of the demands made by the
company is that the plaintiffs, who
are users of water under the Bob
creek canal, be compelled by order
of court, to disclose the names of
members of the Bob Creek Farmers
Protective association, and also the
names of all others similarly situated
whom they represent in the suit to
the end that, they may be made par
ties plaintiff to the COMPLAINT and par
ties defendant to the defendants
cross complaint.
In the early part of last June, Fred
Bass. D. X. Waugh. A. F. Enyart
and others of Olnev, on behalf OF
larly situated. filed suit in the district
court of Pueblo county, against the
Twin Lakes Land and Water conf
pany, in which they set up, among
other things, that the water company
had not properly MANAGED and con-
trollcd the canal through which the
plaintiffs and others were drawing
water to irrigatc their lands, and that
through its carclcssness and neglect,
it han allowes the canal to dcterio-
rate and fill with debris to such an
extent as to impair the fater rights
owned by the plaintiffs and others.
They asked that the court appoint a
receiver to take over the affairs OF
the company, and that the receiver
be empowered to do many things;
-actically to take full charge Of the
company's business.
In RESPONSE to the plaintiffs COM
plant, the defendant, the Twin Lakes
Land and Water company. filed its
answer with the clerk of the districi
defendant denies generally the alle-
cations of the plaintiffs complaint.
and sets out that in January. 1900
there was a similar suit commenced
AGAINST it, in which case certain par
ties attempted to ret control of the
company's business and take over the
management of its affairs, just as, II
is charged. the plaintiffs arc trying
to do in this case. and it points out
certain portions of the decree or
Judgment entered In that case. which
show that the court denied the plain
tiffs the relicfe asked for and held
that the company was wholly compe
tent and able to manage its affairs
and distribute water to the water con-
sumers under the canal. and that ev-
cry water consumer was getting his
pro rata share of the water from the
canal. as provided b" his deed: that
the COMPANY was managing the ca
nal in a proper manner. and that af-
ter it had done certain construction
work on the canal il would have the
right to sell water to new consumers
the full capacity of the canal. which
the court found to be 833 cighty-acrc
water rights Of I.8 cubic feet per sec
ord of time. drawn from the Arkan.
s-s river. In substance, the court in
this former case, as is alleged in the
defendants answer. denied the plain
tiffs the relief asked for and sus-
tanned the defendants contention.
In addition to the answer the de-
fendant company filed a cross COM
plaint against the plaintiffs. and all
of their associates and those whom
they represent. 1t is alleged in the
cross complaint that the defendant
became the owner of the canal in
controversy and about 10000 acres OF
land. in February. 1899. and that it.
title was subject to certain water
deeds outstanding: that it has ever
since managed the affairs OF the COM
pany in proper way and from time
to time sold additional water rights
and land: that the water rights and
lands of the plaintiff and all other
property have rapidly increased in
value until at the present time they
are among the most paluable water
rights and lands in the Arkansas val
lev.
1t also sets out that the Twir
Lakes reservoir. located near Lead
vile. Colo. is a part of the system.
and supplies water to the lands un-
der the canal in times of scarcity:
and that Lake Meredith, a large bod"
of water south of Sugar Citv. is also
part of the system. and is used as
a supplemental suppl" during times
of scarcity.
Charge Conspiracy.
As direct allegation against the
plaintiffs and others the defendant
sets out in its cross complaint that
they have formed an unincorporated
association and are conspiring and
confcdcrating together to usurp the
control OF the affairs of the defend
ant company. and to get the same in
their own hands. and are doing many
things to hinder. cucumber and delay