Lincoln County times. (Jerome, Idaho) 1911-1919, 1912-11-21
A est Case Started.
Suit Instituted by the Association tc
Test Out Legal Construction
Of North Side Contracts.
MANY PROBLEMS AT ISSUE

'ho-hone, an action hy William :.
Ransom, contract holder on this
North Side tract, ". the Twin Fails
North Side Land a. Water Co.., and
the Continental Il Commercial Trust |
and Saving Bank, the bank which
holds the North Side Contracts a.
collateral To- the bonds issued on tie
project, To- test out Il number Of inn
portant questions Of difference a. to
the legal construction Of the North
side contracts, and incidentally
affecting all Carey Act contracts in
the State
Fortunately the circumstances
arising under the particular contract
sued ON are such ~ to raise many
questions, all in the one action,
among them:
/. The question Of whether or
not there wa- any interest earned
ON the contract for the years, 1909,
1910 and 1911.
>. Whether or not the principal
payments falling due, Mch. l,l9lO.
1911 and 1872 are in fact due and
payable
3. Whether or not the contract
holder mu-l pay for Land that is too
high. or too rocky to be irrigahle
and tllablc land and for land in
dclrc-~ion- vhi,hcann,t Ic drained
called pot hole-
3. Whether or NOT purchasers
must pay annual maintenance
chargc- on thenon-irrigablc area I'M
cludcd in an entry such a. the land
described ia the preceding para
graph
$. Whether or NOT the Company
can collect the principal sum fo
acreage included in the right-of
way of Company canal-,al-o whcil,"
or mot maiutcuanccmu-t bee paid ol
such acreage.
These are all questions of lcga
con-tru tion which are matters d
honest dispute ictvccn the compan
and contract holders. the Compan
maintaining the principal and inter
est for all Of the years above refer
red to are due and payable, that I'll
settler must pay for full amount
acreage Of his entry and inter"
and maintenance thereon rcgardlr
nf whether it is irrigahlc or not; Il
, settlers maintaining the opp'si
view ON these questions. 1t Is -ll
~ ccrcly to he hoped that the Con
- pany will meet all the ISSUES square
and i'm friendly way and that Il
~ matter may receive final detcrmln
tion b~ our highest count and tn
settle these much mooted question
I'm defense of the various clan
of the Company the Plaintiff allcg'
as 10 interest that 10y the co
!" tract all interest is waived until t
' Company deliver water in accoi
y once with the terms of their &C
-" tract: that that means rcgu
and sufficient delivery from Al
.c. lst to November lst of each ye'
TO that during none of the three yc
he mentioned, did the Company m'
,at such a delivery of water, hence I
is no interest had accrued.
m. ,. a, to the payments ot prn
m pal. the plaintiff alleges that in
lnS feet. this is storage PROJECT |
w. if is necessary that in order to :
rin .plv water during part of J'
ing August and September OF dry y''
that water he stored and that
tine Company agreed to provide 5
Ics, storage and has wholly failed to
md so: that they have not compl'
ran the system in other respects
hat that the time limit of five years
rye vidcd 10y the contract and Statut
cial which to finish the project has
mn pired; that by reason OF sad Il
ILL the Company under the law
,ry. forfeited their contract, that