Imperial Valley press., 1912-02-06
SOME QUESTIONS FOR THE
SOLID THREE TO ANSWER

In your resolution of February 2 you
seek to give No. 1 stockholders the
impression that you are promising to
take no further action against the ir-
rigation district. VIII you kindly ex-
plain to those same stockholders why
you failed to keep similar promise
made several weeks ago.
Fact 1.--You promised to dismiss
the suit against the Irrigation district
if we could furnish proof that a ma
iority of your stockholders were sign
ers Of the petition or the protests.
Proof A.-The following affidavit is
signed by e. E. Forester and L. S.
Handley:
State of California, County of Impc-
rial, SIS:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS, being
duly sworn, deposes and says:
That on Friday, the 10th day Of No
.yember 1911, he appeared before the
board of directors OF mutual Water
Company No 1 in the city of Impe-
rial county of Imperial, state of Cali
fornia, and read the resolution which
appears in the letter annexed to this
affidavit; that he told the board OF
directors that the Imperial Irrigation
district had in their possession at that
time the signatures of the majority
of the stockholders of mutual Water
Company No. 1, which majority was
represented by signers of the original
petition for the organization of an ir-
rigation district or signers Of protest
, against the action of mutual Water
Company No 1 in bringing suit against
the organization of Imperial Irrigation
district;
That President Long of the board OF
directors Of mutual Water Company
No /, in answer, said that from the
books of mutual Water Company No.
/ only forty (40) per cent of the
stockholders showed as being opposed
to such action by mutual Water Com
pany No. /, and that President Long
further stated that if it could be shown
that the Imperial Irrigation district
had such a majority of the stOckhOld-
erS as was claimed either as signerS
OF the original petition or as signers
of the protest against the suit brought
by mutual Water Company No. I, that
he would be in favor of withdrawing
such suit. Director Heber of mutual
Water Company No. / made a similar
statement.
| .--.#..-.... ........
Subscribed and sworn to before me
this 49,. day of ........., H..
.............. ...........
Notary Public in and for the County
of Imperial, State OF California.
| Proof B.-The originals of the fol-
lowing letters are in our possession:
| November IA, 1911.
|
El Centro, Cal.
Dear Sir-President Long requests
that you furnish list of the stock
holders Of Imperial Water Company
No. who have signed the petition
for an irrigation district, or who have
since signed protest against the action
of the board of directors, representing
80 per cent of the stock. The list
will be verified and if found to con-
tain such a representation a special
meeting of the directors will be called
for its consideration. Yours truly,
IMPERIAL WATER CO. NO. I,
Byron H. Cook, Secretary.
November II, 1911.
Mr.. George L. Melton, Secretary,
Ell Centro, California.
Dear Sir-Your letter of the 10th is
at hand. The request for meeting
with the proxy committee on the 23rd
inst. will be taken up with the direct
ors without delay Respectfully yours,
IMPERIAL. WATER co. NO. /,
Byron H. Cook, Secretary.
November 20, 1911.
Nh George L. Melton, Sec,
El Centro, Cal.
Dear Sir: Your communication OF
the 10th inst, to Mr.. Byron H. Cook,
secretary, has been referred to me.
The board of directors will not be
called to consider Your lists until the