Arizona republican., 1917-07-18
JUDGE k|bbEY
 GIVES PENALTY
 IF FREPUD|ATOR
Those Who Have Signed Up For Water Stock But Who
 Do Not Apply For Water Right Are in Bad Light

Today is the final day for applying for water rights from the government under the reclamation project. Most of the subscribers to the stock of the Water Users association have signi- fled their acceptance of the extension law and filed their applications for water rights. In commenting upon the matter yesterday afternoon, Judge Kibbey of the association, said:
 There has, I am advised, been some discussion of the question of the status | of a subscriber to the stock of the | Salt River Valley Water Users assO- 1 citation, who neglects to apply to the government for a water right under the provisions of the reclamation law. | T have been told that some are claiming that such a failure relieves | the subscriber of any obligation and will subject him to no inconvenience, whatever. I am not advised that any subscriber really intends to repudiate or to attempt to repudiate the obliga- i ton of his subscription, and it may be that notice of the discussion of the | question is wholly unnecessary. How ever, I have been asked by several subscribers, who themselves have no intention of attempting to repudiate the obligation. what the situation might ! be-
 Every subscriber is interested in l having every other subscriber promptly come to the discharge of his obliga- tiOns. If it were possible for any sub
 scriber to release himself from his 1 obligation by repudiation of it. the effect would be to impose an addition al obligation upon those who do un- 1 1 Every subscriber to the stock of the association solemnly agreed to apply and pay for the government water right i in the manner prescribed by the Recla- nation Act, whenever the government was ready to receive such applications. The government has announced it's readiness to receive the applications. | The question whether a subscriber may refuse to apply and pay up his water right and absOlve himself thereby from 1 any legal consequences, admits of ! precisely the same answer as if it were asked whether a man may refuse to pay his promissory note without sub 1 jecting himself to any legal conse- quences.
 The repudiation of the obligation in
 either case is simple dishonesty. It
 has been suggested that the only ef-
 feet in this instance of the attempted
 repudiation, is the forfeiture of the
 stock subscribed for. In other words | the subscriber would be discharged from any obligation by his simple re- 1 fuSal to discharge it. He cannot hope
 for exemption from the force of his contract, by dishonesty refusing to discharge it. The forfeiture provided
 for is for the benefit of the associa-
 (rQrn ant ir1er cl1a abal l
 it alone may take advantage of it. The forfeiture is at the option of the asso-
 citation, not at the option of the de-
 faulting subscriber-in such case the
 wishes of the defaulter are not favor ably regarded by either law, morals or public sentiment.
 But the forfeiture, if it were de manded by the association, is of mucf
 more far reaching effect than is gen | orally supposed. It involves the for fejture by the defaulting subscriber o
 any right by him to the use of water i whether from normal flow of the rivel | or from stored water.
 Tt has been suggested that the pro- | vision of the charter of the associa
 tion. that a subscribers prior vested
 right cannot be affected by the arti-
 cles, or by the fact of becoming
 member of the association. Of cours.
 this does not mean that man ma,
 enjoy his right and refuse to discharg,
 the obligations that are conditions O
 it's continued existence. The signint , of a promissory note by a man doe : not affect his vested right to his prop
 erty-but his failure to pay the not may result in his losing that property A man can't enjoy a right and refus, , the discharge of obligations unon whicl } it is dependent.
 , When a number of people join to
 gether to effect a particular thing, al in this case, (the construction by tn government of an irrigation works) l and they join in an agreement to pro
 portionately pay the cost of the thini
 to be done, the obligation is not onl,
 to the association or the gvernmen , as in this case, but to every other mem Der of the association, and courts vii
 not permit the repudiation by any o them as it would otherwise injurious
 ly affect all
 But aside from the fact that n, | subscriber can successfully tsVade in