Mountain Home maverick. [volume] (Mountain Home, Idaho) 1906-1911, 1910-04-28
NEVER HAD
ANY WATER
DECISION FROM LAND OFFICE
AFFECTING WATER SOLD
by LOCAL COMPANY.
Many Claims IN This Vicinity Invali-
dated As Result of Ruling Against
Great Western Beet Sugar Com
pany-No Construction Contract.


BOISE. April 22.-Water rights
sold by the Great Western Beet Sugar l.,
company are insufficient upon which
to offer proof upon desert claims un-
less it can be shown that the COM
pany actually had a right to waters
decided, according to a decision
handed down by the register and re-
ceiver of the Boise land Office yester-
day, and which it is estimated will
invalidate many claims in the vicin-
ity of Mountain Home. The decision
sustained upon appeal, result in the
cancellation of a large number of
entries in connection with which /
claimants paid actual cash for water
rights, for the reason that such pay
ment can not be considered as monies
actually expended for the improve
ment of the land.
1T is a we'll established principle
the decision states, that persons
making a purchase of this kind are
charged with knowledge of condi-
tions affecting the validity Of that
which they thus seek to secure
If this water right is not such a valid
right as is required by law in desert
land cases. then this expenditure was
not valid, even though the contestee
may have made the payment in entire
good faith. We are satisfied,
however. that the case itself, when
considered as whole, presents a
situation which justihes the conclu-
sion we have reached.
NEVER HAD ANY WATER
1T will be observed that the abb
, stract of title does not show that the
j, Great Western Beet Sugar company
had any water whatever to deed IL
+. issued a deed to Altschul, and Alt
schul issued deed TO Dearinger The
o supposition, Of course, is the company
% at some time had some water, but
~ il appears from the testimony in this
case it never had enough water to
irrigate the lands Of those who were
relying upon it for crops they had
a planted. It does not, therefore, seem
= possible that it could have had sufii-
oient water at the time it issued this
deed to supply land that was not only
outside the comparatively small culti-
=, waited section, but was far beyond the
reach of any constructed canal sys.
TEN. IL will be observed that the
company issued a warranty deed &c
Altschul-$8OO for 4O-acre right
and that Altschul made quit claim
deed to this contestee for half tn,
= right, charging her 5000 in cash.
"a 1T will further be observed tha
10 Altschul declined to state whether
g, or not he paid the Great Western
Beet Sugar company in cash. He die
not make a statement of any kinC
= to show in what form. if at all, h'
made that payment. He further testi
fed he was stenographer for Mr.
n Howie at one time. and it is eviden
he must have been familiar with th'
:, methods of this company, whateve
they may have been. II is therefore
somewhat significant that he shoul,
have quit-claimed to this coDteste'
a portion Of that alleged right. whicl
- he secured under warranty from thi
IL company.
MUST SHOW ACTUAL PAYMENT
81 Under the regulations in effect
desert entrymen, If they rely upoi
the purchase of water rights in tn
- making Of annual proof must shoV
conclusively by the voucher Of th
y company selling the right that the
- made cash payment Of the amour
claimed as expenditure They mus
i, also produce a sworn statement fror
the company of the amount Of tie
controlled by it, and of the -oun
iai # has disposed Of IN other rii
ip' # is not proposed that paper ] ht
shall be used in making proof un'es
las those rights have absolutely va'i
is foundation.
I'm this case there is nothing I
ng show that the company had anythin
INT to sell at the time it sold to Al
he schul. Altschul refuses to state tn
character of the consideration give