Arizona republican., 1913-02-04
Secretary of Interior De. nies Petition of Farmers for Change in Water Rental Contract and Ex- plains His Reasons.
ANSWERS TO BRIEF
 OF CAPT. CHRISTY
Letter is Read in Meeting of Board of Governors, But No Action Is Taken; Opinion of Assistant Atty Gen. Quoted.

The present arrangement for water rent and service is believed to be entirely within the law, fair and equitable, and the petition of the
 Water Users association is accord ingly denied. If in the future it is seen a modification of the present rules is necessary or desirable, it will
 be made.
 With those words, Secretary of the Interior Walter l.. Fisher communi- cated his refusal of the petition Of the Salt river valley Water Users association to the board of gover- nors in regular monthly session yes- terday. In a long letter. in which he quotes largely from the opinion delivered the interior department by
 the assistant attorney general. and explains at some length the reasons for the departments action, the sec | retary sends a complete refusal of ] the demands the Water Users set l forth in the brief presented by Legal | Adviser Christy and brought out in 1 the hearing held here on the occa- 1 sion of his visit here in October. l The letter will be of immense in
 terest to every land owner in the valley, so it is printed in full here l with
 The Salt River Valley Water Users
 Association. Phoenix. Ariz.
 { Gentlemen: Your petition for mod ification of the forms of applications 1 or contracts for water service upon
 the Salt river reclamation project
 as finally approved by the first as- Psistant secretary of the interior Sep-
 tember Is. 1912, has been given eX-
 tended and careful consideration, as | promised when I was in Phoenix, in
 October I have submitted the ques- tions of law to the assistant attorney general for this department and give you his conclusions, in which l con-
 cur. as follows:
 The principal objections to the ap- plications and the procedure therein
 prescribed are to the clause in two
 of the application forms. requiring
 land owners to grant a right of way
 across their lands for the conveyance
 of water to the land of adjoining
 owners and the fact that the charges
 fixed in the applications or contracts
 for the delivery of water are upon
 an acre-f foot rather than an acreage
 basis. It is contended that the
 clause first mentioned is illegal in
 that it seeks to deprive land owners
 of property without due process oi
 law; that the method of charging for the carnage and delivery of water is
 unwarranted in law and in violation
 of the contract between the United
 States and the Salt River association: l 11c hn iC in vi ne bs decree of the District Court of the
 Third Judicial district in the case oi Hurley vs. Abbott. There is also ( contention that as a mater of fac [ the effect of the charges fixed in the contracts will be to secure money il l excess of the cost of maintenance, l and operation for the purpose of de voting same to the construction worI ) of the project.
 t Generally speaking. the water user s in Salt River valley may be dividet . into three classes CD Those lant n | owners who have no vested wate @ rights, who are depending who'll. |. upon water furnished by the Unite, 9 States, are members Of the wate e users association. and who have ap Q piled to the United States for wate Q under the terms of the reclamation f | act: @ those persons who have prio : partial water rights in the natura & flow of Salt river but such rights ar e insufficient to completely irrigat , their lands. with the. result that sue f persons have joined the water users
 association and have applied to tn n United States for an additional Wate v supply under the reclamation act; 6
 those persons who have, through prio
 appropriation and under decree of tn a court in Hurley vs. Abbott, a righ I to sufficient water supply for tn
 irrigation of their lands.
 Three forms of water application v first assistant secretary, one for eac = of the classes described above. The third form of contract, pre- ~ pared for those who have a full wa u ter supply under their appropriatio 7 and the decree of the court cited u does not contain the provision requir : ing them to grant rights of way owe s their lands for laterals to convey wa | ter to the lands of adjoining owner - The contract relates solely to the de u livery of their water. AS to the tW d other classes who seek to acquire 8 l. entire or partial water right from tn l. United States for the irrigation
 their lands. it is perfectly legal an 1t competent for the United States, act is ing as the constructor and operate
 (Continued on Page Two)