The Twin Falls times. [volume] (Twin Falls, Idaho) 1905-1916, 1913-04-22
SUIT TO REVOKE
DEED IN COURT
Twin Falls Canal Company De-
sires Clear Title.
SUIT UP FOR HEARING IN FED
ERAL COURT ON TITLE TO DAM.
Rrlef History of Legal Battle Over
Deed Issued by Twin Falls Land &
Water Co.

The case OF the Twin Falls Canal
company VS. the Twin Falls Land and
Water company and the Twin Falls
North Side Land and Water company,
involving the right and claim of the
Land and Water company to reserve
rights of way through the canal sys-
tenn In its deed to the Canal company,
and also involving the ownership and
control of the Miner dam, was heard
in Boise on last Friday before Fed
eral Judge F. s. Dietrich A. NJ. Bow
en- appeared for the Canal company
and NJ. ]. Sweeley and H. G. Edwards
of Salt Lake appeared for the Land
and Water company, while 8. H. Hays
looked after the interests of the north
side companies.
In 1907 the Twin Falls Land and
Water company assigned to Mr.. Kuhn,
who later assigned to the north side
companies all it's rights then held by
it to irrigate lands in Lincoln county
on the north side of the Snake river.
This included the so-called Miner
segregation, embracing the lands pro-
ytded In the original contract with the
state under which the south side can
ais were constructed. The deed to Mr..
Kuhn also attempted to convey pro-
portionate interest in the Miner dam
The state land board approved OF
these transfers and entered into new
contract with the Twin Falls North
Side Land and Water company for the
irrigation of not only the Miner seq
regation but about 100000 acres oi
land additional on the north side.
The validity of the Kuhn deed and
the right OF the Twin Falls Land and
Water company to assign to any per-
son or corporation, other than the
Twin Falls Canal company, any part
of the Milner dam is questioned In the
suit just tried.
The other phase of the case grew
out Of the form Of the deed given by
the Land and Water company OF the
canal system. When the system wal
ordered transferred to the Canal com
pany in 1909, form of q deed was
fagreed upon between Mr.. Voight, man
lager Of the Land and Water company
and the attorneys for the Twin Fall'
Canal association. The Land and Wa
ter company, however, refused to ex
ecute this deed but instead delivered
to the Canal company, which was thel
controlled by the Land and Wate
company, deed to the system. bu
/ perpetually reserving to itself q RICH
| to enlarge any canal or lateral at an,
] time and to use the same as so en-
! larged without compensation.
i The recording Of this deed arouse'
some feeling among the settlers ant
the Twin Falls Canal association
brought a suit In the name Of P. h
Smith to cancel such deed and to com
pei the Land and Water company t
j execute and deliver one without sucl
reservations. When the Canal com
pany passed into the hands Of the set
tiers In 1910, the present suit was file
and the Smith suit dismissed.
4 The claim of the Land and Waite
company to make such reservation
was denied by Judge Dietrich som
time ago upon demurrer, and at tn
trial IN Boise on last Friday, the al
torneys for the Land and Water com
pany expressed . willingness to hav
] q proper decd executed In this resnec
+ The ownership and control OF th
Idam was not finally decided. Fac
side was allowed fifteen days withi
(which to file briefs upon the legf
questions involved. =
1t Il probable that the case will 3
/ appealed to the United States circu
court OF appeals at San Francisco, b
one party DfNanother. regardless OF th
ldecieion OF Judge Dietrich.