Arizona republican., 1912-09-29
Reclamation Service Gives Ultimatuum; No Sigma ture on Contract No Wa ter''; Action Will Be Backed Up
SIGNING CONTRACT
 NO PREJ JUDGE
To Possible Suit in Court If Further Fight Is Made; Next Years Crops More Important Than This Years Squabble

I
 Acting Secretary Adams sees no reason for changing the form of con- tract for the Salt River valley water users" is what Louis c Hill told the committee of ten appointed to frame the protest of the joint meeting of the governors and council which met yes terday at the water users building. MT. Hill also gave his reasons for be- lieving that Adams action would be final. and that neither his superior. l Secretary Fisher nor President Taft. himself would think of taking any other action than to back up the first 1 assistant in charge of reclamation. Previous to the meeting of the com mittee Hill gave orders that applica- | tions for water, which have until yes terday been accepted without any money along with them. would now be l taken, and the final signed water con 1 tracts issued. All day the offices of the l service department have been crowded 1 with farmers making out their con- ] tracts and up to closing time a great number of agreements had been made ! and the money paid. Action in the meeting of the joint committee finally l resolved itself into the passing of a resolution asking MT. Hill to find out
 from Washington whether or not con- tracts might be signed with the clause, l Signed under protest"
 The committee of thirteen was pri- marily appointed under the misunder- standing that Secretary Fisher of the
 
 | tober 10 It was discovered that the ! Fisher referred to, was not the sec retary. but the committee continued to | act. in preparation for submitting the | protest and it's accompanying data to l the authorities. wherever they might | be found. The meeting yesterday was l called to take advantage of Hilfs pres 1 ence. At the afternoon session they | discussed with him all the phases of | the matter, and listened to his views | regarding the clauses, which have 1 been made the basis of all the pro- | tests. The gist of the protesting reso- 1 lutions, which were mailed to Adams l last Tuesday, was transmitted to him | by wire from the Phoenix office of the | reclamation service. Hill cOmmunicat- 1 ed with the director in Washington, l and from him got an expression of 1 Adams position, one of absolute un- | bending from that outlined in the let l ter of transmissaI of the modified con | tract.
 | Tn explaining the situation, MT. Hill | said, 'The farmers greatest mistake 1 has been their idea that they have a right to the water in the reservoir. If l , ;c y,Io l the decision of Judge Kent in the Hur- | ley versus Abbott suit, the water us | CTS can be deprived of all the water
 from the reservoir. which is now being | given them under no cOmpulsion on 1 the part of the reclamation service to | do so. Not one drop must be dellV- 1 cred at the dam. Today there IS 1 enough water in the rivers to 1rrigate l about 10000 acres. onTT the normal flow, which is covered by the Kent 1 decision being deliverable under rig | i'd interpretation. There are approXl- ! mately 10000 acres now being 1rrl- gated which could be deprived of wa
 ter. which the government does not | have to serve. That is outside of the | land under the Tempe, San Francisco
 and Utah ditches.
 "But aside from that, the farmers in l this valley do not know how well they l are off If must be remembered that | all the experiments and observations | upon which the new water toll was 1 based, were made on land which was | being served under a more or less | wasteful system. If it is true that | farmers could get along with the | amount of water determined by the eX- l periments. under a new system that l urges economy they will be able to get off much more lightly. Thelr ac- ] tuaI assessment per acre under the new 1 contract will be found, I think, less than under the old. As to section flVe' IT had a talk with Secretary Adams
 long before the contract was proposed
 for the Salt river valley. l told hlm
 there would be a strong opposition to
 the clause but he assured me that the
 same provision is included in the con
 tracts of every irrigation company
 whose books he had examined as at
 torney for large bonding company
 prior to his connection with the rec . | lamatiOn service. All other proJects
 have that right of ways provision, ano in most of them the right of way must i be ceded not to the neighoor, but tc the company itself, just as was the case of the old canal companies 'C whose rights, the government succeed F cd when the ditches were taken over Finally MT Hill assured the com
 
 l