Mountain Home maverick. [volume] (Mountain Home, Idaho) 1906-1911, 1911-06-29
MOUNTAIN HOME CASE is UP
Supreme Court Must Settle Questions
of Vital Importance.

BOISE. June ga case which
not only is one of the most import
ant proceedings in the history of lit
dcation involving irrigacion enter
prises in general in Idaho, but also
vitally affects the whole future Of
The Mountain Home project, is that
of Henry Hewitt Jr.. plaintiff and
appellant. against the Great West
-ern Feet Suga~ c0mpany ah9 t'tu;
100 others as defendants and re-
appeal was filed yesterday in the su-
preme court. The respondents include
an army OF water right holders, mort
gagees and mechanics lien claimints.
Two big questions must be settl-
ed by the higher court, which will
form important precedents In irri-
CATION law, not only for Idaho, but
Tor the whole country in which such
projects are prosecuted.
The main question, however, which
is Immediately vital, arises out of
the following situation: After Hew-
itt took his mortgage and it was
placed on record the company pro-
ceeded to sell water rights as 1t had
before The question arises as to
whether those water rights must be
recognized by Hewitt as being claims
superior TO his mortgage.
Briefly explained, the conditions
with relation to the future of the
project are as follows: 1t appears
that John H. Garrett, he prime NOV
.es in he Great Western Beet Sugar
company originally, mortgaged the
system to Hewitt, the amount be-
ing about $4,000. Then Garrett
went ahead and sold water rights
in some instances at far lower cost
than what they we're worth. For in
stance. it is said he would sell $40
water right for $40 or $40 or IS ac-
cording to the gravity of the extrem-
tiles in which he found himself at
the time when his plans were going
to pieces. He sold out the capac-
ity Of the system, and there was
enough water for only small part
of the rights sold
Now. it is averred that it the wa
Ter rights sold subsequent to the ma
king of the mortgage are held prior
claims to the mortgage, the whole
system will go to pieces and any sat
isfactory reorganization would De
impossible, for the reason that no
investor would come in at the sher-
ifs sale, under foreclosure OF this
mortgage, and take over the sys-
TEN. If he had to reorganize all OF
the water rights sold indiscriminate-
1y by Garrett. for the simple rea-
son that in most cases the amount
Maid for these rights was only a
small fraction of what the rights
were held for. And for that reason
ii is said. no investor would take
over the system and develop 1t ana
extend It's capacity, because 1t would
be only a white elephant" as far
as he was concerned
In its present state most of these
water right holders have nothing
ANYWAY. because there is no water for
and so their land is useless. A COM
pnomise has been suggester where
by such right holders might get cred
II on new water rights sold under a
plan which assumes starting with
clean slate. But It is held by some
that the only adequate remedy would
be to absolutely wipe out all OF tnose
water rights sold after the mort
rage was recorded. Then an invest
or could take over the system oe-
velon II. extend the caDacity, sell
OF cost of construction and still make
a profit.
Inasmuch as such a proposition
is simply hard business matter ana
ho4 a humanitarian philanthropy II
annears to some that this plan to
wine out such water rights and start
anew is the only feasible one at pres
ent. it is said. =
IA Wit loyal
sues at stake. as well as the serious
matter of the future Of the Mpuh-
tain Home project, and the conseIN-
ing of the rights of innocent wafer
right purchasers, and the great mum
her of interested parties, TINS case
has attracted considerable attention
and the great array of counsel nam,
ed in the transcript for the lOO anu
more respond dents promises nerce-
" contested proceeding IN tne su-
preme court.
Attorneys A. N. soliss, ]. H. Rich
ards and o. o. Hqga appear LOT
Hewitt, plaintiff and appellant. Inc
numerous counsel for the array OF
defendants and respondents lnciuo-
IS Charles c. Cavanah and Jonn >,
blake. Judge K. 7. Perky Harry ana
Frank Wyman. E. M. Wolfe, Danlel
Mclaughlin. J. M. Owens. j. l.. NJ
day. Carl NJ Davis, Ira r. bsnDei'
T. G. Watts. B. F. Grifhth' SulilVan ,I,l
& Sullivan, Charles f. hoeison'
Green & Green, Page & EnglerO'
Besides the Great western De-
Sugar company the defendants anu
respondents include the Ioilowins =
Adolph Aus. William SpangenDeIs B.
G. ]. Peterson. Jacob Ottennelm,e,,' y,
NJ. Charley Ball. Ludwig Larson, u
ana Mageau, John M. zemlicK' Neis
~ NeIaon. r. F. Chase, Charles HeT,-
ert G. N. Peters John Westpnal FL
Szabeth M. Wilson H. Perkins JOS
snb Novack w. H. Mark George ".
Caldwen John Owens joseph l.. Kerr
a