Rocky Ford enterprise., 1910-09-02
WOULD STOP USE OF WATER.
Arkansas Valley Irrigation compan-
les Charged With Conspiracy.

famous rrNdHSas-SolOTduO case 1alleu
to do, suit in equity was filed in the
United States circuit court at Denver
on Saturday. The United States 1r-
rigating company, the owner of sever
al irrigating canals of considerable
size in the state of Kansas, taking
water from the Arkansas river, seeks
to establish the rights of said canals
to water as against bitches and canals
taking water from the Arkansas river
in Colorado. AS defendants to the
complaint there ARD joined the princi-
pal corporations taking water from
the Arkansas river in Colorado.
Those corporations owning bitches
of size which enable the diversion
OF water to any considerable extent
are made parties defendant: among
the more prominent being the Gra-
ham Ditch company, the Colorado
pany. the Lamar Land and Canal
company, the Ft. Lyons Canal COM
pany, the Oxford Farmers Ditch
company, the Rocky Ford Canal, Res
crvoir, Land, Loan and Trust com
pany, the Catlin Consolidated Canal
company, the Rocky Ford Ditch COM
pany, the X. Y. Irrigating Ditch COM
Dany, the Marvel Canal. Reservoir
and Improvement company, the Twin
Lakes Land and Water company, the
Twin Lakes Reservoir company, the
Canon City, Florence and Pueblo
Water company. the Bessemer Irrigat-
ing company, the Holbrook Irriga-
ton company. the Otero Irrigation
| district, the Arkansas Valley Sugar
Beet and Irrigated Land company.
and the Colorado Southern Irriga-
| ton company.
| Colorado and the water commission
| crs of the various water districts from
| Bucna Vista to the eastern boundary
| Of the state are also joined as defend
| ants and are charged by the bill OF
complaint as conspiring with the cor
/ Dorations who are defendants. in the
| fixed plan and scheme of taking all
of the waters OF the Arkansas river
out of that stream before such water
reaches the Kansas line.
The complaint is broad in its scope
md sets out that the United States
lrrigating company is the owner OF
Two large irrigating canals construct
ID in the year 1881 and that these ca
nails are capable of divcrting from the
Arkansas river total OF $50 cubic
ieet of water per second of time; that
the water was so diverted by these ca
/ VI years dHu was usCu III
the irrigation of manS thousands OF
acres OF land lying in the western part
| II Kansas in Kearny and Finuey
counties. and being near the towns
If Lakin and Garden City in that
state. The complaint alleges that at
ier enjoying the water for many years
| he amount of wafer in the river COM
| ncnccd to dcpreciatc about the year
| 1905 to such an extent that the ditch
IS could not receive the full amounts
| If water 20 which they were entitled:
hat the acreage issisatcd from the
litches was lessencd in amount: that
people living in the vicinity of the
li,chcs moved away; and operations
ii the company then owning the
Iitchcs became so embarrassed that
oward the close OF the year 1879 the
affairs OF the company were placed in
he hands of receivers; that these
iitches eontinasd IN the hands fof re-
| .cIvcrs until about 1909, when II
Gems the United States Irrigating
company took hold OF the canals and
conjunction with another corpora
ion knows as the United States Su-
gar and Land company. DsSare the
owner OF these bitches and the water
Iupply and of many thousands OF
Icres Of land in western Kansas.
| The complaint goes on TO allcgc
hat about this time the state ui Kan
.,as instituted its proceedings against
he state OF Colorado; and that or
hat account. and for other reasons
assigned. suit was not brought by the
Individual companies; that since the
,uit brought by the state OF Kansas
Ias failed. the plaintiff in the case has
1ccn busy preparing TO- tiIp bringing
OF this suit.
| In short. the owners of bitches in
western Kansas take the position
hat the state OF Kansas failed in its
suit because as q state it failed to cs-
;ablish any injury to II Hs Il state SUI
icicnt to justify the relief which it
sought to obtain from the supreme
court OF the United States as against
he state of Colorado. This point can
not be raised. it is said, as against the
corporations owning irrigating ditch
IS in western Kansas for the reason
that they can establish the very SER
| ious injury which has resulted to them
| jy reason of the ever increasing di-
version of water from the Arkansas
river in the state OF Colorado.
Particular attention Is directed by
| the bill of complaint against the new
er irrigation companies and schemes
that are entering into the field of ir-
\ rigation along the Arkansas river; the
| plaintiff alleges that all the water both
IN normal and food conditions of the
river has for many years past been
over appropriated; and that notwith-
| standing this fact new companies arc
| formed claiming the right to take ad-
| ditional waters from the river and
that no such filings should be made
1