Shoshone journal. [volume] (Shoshone, Idaho) 1884-1931, 1913-03-28
LAWYER JOHNSON AND THE
CAREY ACT COMMISSION BILL

a lien To secure future payments.
IL then proceeds with the follow
Ing statement:
"Ihe bill as originally drawn by
( w t. Stafford and the board Of
/. directors Of tile Water Users As
: ISOLATION did not contain this
e clause. The bill was left IN
: Tor o. Johnson, who had entire
F. charge II Il II Is the claim Of
The settlers lhat Mr.. johnson in
serted the clause which killed their
niN. and that without consulting
any OF lhem.
There il not particle OF truth
in any portion Of the above state
ment. The bill was not originally
drawn i,y w. H. Stafford. nor by !
I the board Of directors Of the wa
I ter association II was not left IN /
I Boise in my management. nor did I
/ / have any charge Of il whatever
The truth about the bill Is easily
ascerlained. and the facts herein
stated can be verified by any gen
tleman who had any connection
with the bill
Early IN the session Mr.. Finney,
Of the Salmon Falls tract, request
ed Mr. Hadslock and myself to meet
Mr.. Stafford, Mr.. Brown, Mr.. Nj
hart, and possibly other gentlemen
in Boise to prepare Carey Act
Commission bill. ! was sick at !
To Boise, where he met several of
discussed I was then agreed TO l
have a further meeting TO actually L
draft The bill At this meeting no '
one appeared, eXceptMr. Stafford,
Mr. HaddOck and myself. In the Il
mean time Mr.. HaddOck and | had =
lrawn rough draft OF bill and u
we went over this With Mr.. Stat y
ford In this second meeting at "
Boise. We then procured stem d
and proceeded 10 draw UP
he bill, Mr.. Stafford and Mr.. Had al
lock making suggestions. and | did ol
he debating. The bill was COM pi
,leted late that evening Mr.. Stat al
ord and ! obtained it after office u
tours. Al
/ turned the copies over to Mr.. al
stafford and he promised to see al
hat they reached Mr.. Nihart. who ef
gas then IN the hospital ! left TN
iolse that night and never saw ~
he bill until several weeks later
'hen it had been introduced and nj
rinted. | never had charge Of the 60
III and never agreed that | would NJ.
i've It any attent ion in the Leg 60
iature. fo
Mr.. HaddOck and represented frt
ne Twin Falls North Side Canal th'
sers' Association, but neither the ld'
soc latlOn nor any of its officers,
rectOrs or members ever request {
/ or authorized us to do any work
The matter OF spend any of the +
'seiatlOn funds in carfare or no. lets
] bills IN promoting q CAREY Act ans
The work that we For
d was purely voluntary and the
lpenSe Of the three trips. which
as between $50 and $50 were paid y
u of our own pockets. was
Now. as TO the repeal of Section can
20, it was never the intent Of Cur
y Of ms TO repeal this section. In
ing over the bib and writing the "
lie. Mr. Stafford and | discussed F.
ction 1929 and agreed that there ben
Is no reason for repeating it, busi
d it should be left just as it able
IS. An examination of the title by !
the bill as printed shows that n
ctiOn 1929 was not repealed. Each
the sections to be repealed is u.
in the title, but 1929 is c.n,
one of them. NM.
II the body of the bill. Section 49,, ,s'
9 is numbered among the sec ,o,.,
MS repealed. This was a mis- - ~
10 ,ss;,tor GA - 20 ton
lrgeable either to Mr.. Stafford.
d. Haddock or myself. and could ADJ
lily have been overlooked by Mr..
art. The very fact that the IL
Of the bill does not mention m
ton 1929 ought TO show con- DAYS
SNely that the reference TO it indie
he body of the bill was a cler- he :
or typographical error The
he Carey Act Commission bill tn
one of four companion bills are
nded to cover the entire sub prov
IN drafting the commission ing
We were all of the opinion that man;
Ould not be passed. unless II In Il
aimed a provision repeating he what
ions providing for water COM meDf
'ionefs. As the water eonliIlls- unab
erS In many Instances appoint the
p matters was necessary 10 shap,
4ic SAP ny VtHef prov isiVllS. termi
therefore drew a separate DilL 'rl
iding a means for The appOlnt- us In
OF water masters his blll Watt
q TO pass. Therefore, if The some
" Act Commission bill had been nrove
owed. il would have abolished nroie
water commissioners and there an in,
ii have been no means for Con
lntmg water masters. Falls
werner HaineS put the matter nroSp
o ME and after going over the
or carefully. ! told him that 49,,
~ Judgment the Carey Act ~ -,
mission bill would have to be ~
vi or we would be without iaai
+ masters. | know that the 1'le'
rnod' Was very anxious to ap- 's-S'
Z the bill. | nave reason 10 tNa'~
We that il was only by reason De
is personal influence that the ersnt
Was rescued from the pigeon ol
OF the senate sitting commit Twin
md passed. and that the Cover
cry reluctantly vetoed it.
IN unable 20 see that any par en
Ia blame attaches to anyone MI
rnor Haines did his best, Rep NIx
tatiye Nihart did his best, and
cry we'll faut Was unable toll