The Greeley tribune., 1911-10-26

bill be enacted INTO ~" "Ss '~N
er. "Shan reservoirs have equal
preference with bitches - regArd-
rr;ority OF right to divert. - shin
bitches continue TO have the great
er preference, rs they now neve nn-
der the law Of 1901 and aAoef th'
enstom that has been long arising
a> n result OF both the early st"''
ut..s and the practices OF the waite
ws..r. ,hen,selyes"" believe thst
the CARPENTER bill is . demand 10y
,b.. owness Of reservoirs for theiE
long suppressed oostasoaoh''
tights.
so this question is far greater
,hsn the POLITICAL fortunes Of Senat-
cI Carpenter. the professional and
noliticsi differences between him
and Judge Jacobs. the negative or
affirmative language OF the ''verInl-
form appendix, the Psychological
condition of Morgan county farmer
or even the financial welfare Of Mr..
J, Max Clark. 1t is q question that
involves the interests OF every user
of water in every irrigatinx COM
nunity in the state. Thus = tre-
meudous responsibility rests upon
the disinterested voters, and nece>-
.itate. their informing themselyes
As to the merits Of the two siSles OF
the controversy: for they must de-
side il, and must not fail to decide
il right. believe thai, rightly or
wrongly, the two classes are equal
under the Constitutions; and thai
the adoption OF the Carpenter bill
practically reiterates the cOnstitu-
t,onal provision. But l do not eN-
tect those interested chiefly in
bitches to admit this. Nor does ii
take long to come to the conclusion
that those interested cflie4ly in
bitches will be, to man. against
the Carpenter bill, while those SO.
interested in reservoirs will just a.
>olidly support it. AL attempted
logic by which it is sought to prove
the contrary. is. l firmly believe.
counterfeit logic. and most that will
lie thus said will be nonsense.
Now, at the risk Of mourning the
ridicule Of our legal friends, and
also of those who began to frrigate
this valley when l, In 1871, was in
my swaddling clothes on the FROM
tier prairies of Iowa, l am going to
try to show how it came aboat that
not until after about thiFty-live
years did reservoirs put up . fight
for their constitutional rights. As
far as have been able to discover,
the passage of the Carpentse bin is
tie first legislative victory tho res
CrvOirs ever won, and tho Gamble
decision the most important they
ever secured In the courts.
At the time the constitution was
adopted, in 1870, irrigatioa, mostly
II not altogether from ditches I am
informed, had been practiced for
some time. Hence the diversion of
the waters of y natural stream for
irrigation as well as for other pur-
N'ses was . subject Of enough Inn |
I,Ostahte to receive attention In the |
Not y great deal was
said. but, still, enough to make |
clear what its trainers thought |
ought TO be the rule rs to prefer
enW among claimants of the prior
right to divert. II we ignore, for
the purposes Of this discussiOn, do
nAcstic ard nAAnufaetusAng uasos.- &Ae |
rule was that PRIORITY OF AP-
FOR BENEFTCIAL
CSF. should determine who should
have the preference.
The rule seems simple enough for
q child to understand. yet it APP
pears that in practice and In legis-
lntinM it was not followed; so that
much confusion. no doubt consider
able injury to innocent parties. and
now this controversy. have been the
result.
II seems that very shortly after
the pdOptiOn of the constitution the
reservoir question arose, but that
the bitches kept the upper hand. as
evidenced by the law Of 1879. In
Point of development tie reservoir
was. of course. the junior brother
of the ditch: and I am wondering
whether the development of the two
lH.s not gone the ordinary course Of
growing brothers; that of the older
ia Point Of birth lOrding it over the
younger and keeping him from his
actual rights until the younger
grew up. understood his rights and
demanded them; having by that
time become in strength the equal
II not the superior Of the elder.
lie that "a 1t may, as long sgo
rs 1879 statutory provision was
made that the reservoir might store
water WHEN THE DITCH DID NOT
REQUIRE 1T FOR DIRECT IRRI.
CATION. My information is, ttat
bitches have customarily, all thepe
years, kept reservoirs, even thouah
the latter were senior In point of
appropriation and Of court decree. II
from diverting water in the order ~
their priority so long as the bitches
wanted the water for direct irriea.
tion; In other words. that the Iew
OF 70, and not the constitution. no
guided the users Of water as tn tI,e
rights Of bitches and reservoirs to
preference. One wonders If the res.
ervoir owners were unaware of tho
constitution, that they allowed thts
custom to persist and grow, until a.
eliminated in the law of 1o0n
which provided that no reservos,
should impound any water whatever
20 long as such water awas required
in bitches for direct irrigation.
1t is not surprising to me ,ha, ora
have the Carpenter bill before =.
for vnfn made. W0