Arizona republican., 1910-04-04
WATER FACTS
 DISSEMINATED In Conference Regarding
 Purchase of Mesa Canal THE EFFECT ON SHARES
Supervising Engineer Hill Speaks of the Distribu- tion of Water to New Lands Under the Eastern Canal

The report in yesterdays issue of The
 Republican covered in detail the salient
 features touching upon the contract
 submitted by the reclamation officials
 tu the stockholders of the Mesa Canal company at a meeting held in the Mesa opera house saturday afternoon, but
 since there was such fund ot import ant information given out by Super
 viSing Engineer Hill at that meeting which is of vital moment tO the read CTS of the south side it is believed that a general resume will be worth while.
 IL will be remembered by those pres ent that MT. Hill gave out this infor- matian. some of it for the first time, in answer to questions propounded to him Dy stockholders seeking tO learn of the intentions of the government in the event that the canal should be turned oyer The remarks of MT Hill are naturally not connected since they were given at different times through
 out the meeting and on entirely differ ent matters.
 one of the important features brought out was how the basis for s43.- GOO was reached as price to be paid for the Mesa canal system. This ap- peared to be q stumbling block to few of the stockholders and was explained by MT. Hill to the effect that the recla- nation service based the offer an what it would actually cost to excavate the canal or in other words complete
 the canal if the work had to be done from the very beginning to the present time In this connection it was cited that the grand canal had been pur- chased for S204SS. the Maricopa for S26. .00O the Salt for S16,000 and the Arizona for S23j. all of which had been purchased not on what the property might have cost the stockholders nor on what it would actually cost the rec lamation service to complete the re spective canals
 The agreement submitted by the rec lamation service provided that Sl.60 per acre per year would be charged for
 maintenance. In explanation of that feature MT Hill said: We have estab-
 lished a fee of $l.60 per acre per year
 on the north side on the canals owned
 by the government. While this is called for maintainance it is also inclusive of
 improvements in the way of making
 new headgates Of a permanent nature.
 The work we are putting in is of ce- ment and ought to last for fifty years.
 For q while the sum will average $1.60
 per year and then of course as the sys- tenn has become perfected the assess ment will of course become lower. All surplus oyer the actual expenses re- ouired in keeping ditches clean and raHfs naFnf structures goes into a general fund, or rather one fund made up from the surplus of the maintainance of every system owned by the government. IL is true that in the event that the Mesa canal should come into the government ownership that the secretary might in crease that maintainance fund, in fact he has that power but he has always
 been reasonable and have m reason
 to believe that he would increase the
 assessment over the amount l have
 stated"
 Another point brought out was that
 since some shares in the Mesa canal are
 held as security on loans and in the
 event that these shares are deprecated
 in value from $500 to sl07.50 what will
 be the effect. This query was
 answered by MT. Hill from a personal standpoint to the effect that he had
 his own money and had interested some Of his friends in the purchase of realty
 mortgages on valley lands and that he had not considered the loans the less secured since the taking over of the canals by the government The point being made that in the event that the share of stock which carries enough water right to irrigate par ticular tract of land were transferred for stock in the larger government scheme whereby application of water will be made to the same piece of land from the larger scheme wif-not in the | least detract from the value Of the land and consequently will not lessen its ! safety as security on a loan
 In case a stockholder in "the Mesa | canal who is not a member of the wa ter users association should dispose | of his stock to the government. it was i explained that said owner If canal | stock would become a participant in l the distribution of the normal f'oW of | the river but would not be a participant ! in the distribution of stored water.
 Another point that was intimated by | MT Hills. but which was not taken up | in detail was that in the event that the government secures control of the Mesa l system there will be radical changes | made looking toward the perfection oS ! the system and the economical distri- | button of water. This. it was explained, | would probably be brought about by | the elimination of the East Mesa ca |