The Julesburg grit-advocate., 1922-08-03

supplying the citizens Of Denver and
vicinity with water. Later, through
the 9O's. there was further diversion
Of water made by means of pipe lines
further up the river, but below the
mouth of the Platte Canyon; and in
1912 the Water Company began the
construction of what is commonly
known As its sixty inch pipe line,
which takes water from the South
Platte River, above the mouth of the
canyon, and above the intake of the
High Line Canal - perhaps thirty
miles from the location of the well
sank by Colonel Archer. of the Citi-
zens Water Company, at the foot of
Fifteenth Street, as aforesaid.
As stated above. the various diver
sions were made by different COM
panies, and at different times, and
there was no evidence on the ground,
or notice given to the public as to the
City's intention, or as to the inten-
ton of any of the companies to divert
any large amount of water, as the
Law requires shall be done; in fact,
until about 1880 no water in excess
of thirty feet had ever been diverted
for the City's use. Notwithstanding
these uncontradicted facts, however,
the City claimed that the construction
was all one general enterprise for
the purpose of furnishing the City
water, and that the period of construc-
ton, from 1870 to 1915 or 'l6, cover
ing a period Of As years, was a rea-
sonable time within which to make
their diversion, and that they should
be allowed by the doctrine of rela-
ton, to date their priorities back to
1870. the date the old Citizens Water
Company sank its we'll near the juno
ton Of the Platte and Cherry Creek,
and pumped out of the ground from
IN to 3 cubic feet of water!
The Referee, former Gov. Carlson,
agreed substantially with all the con-
tentions of the City, including its
claim to all the water of the Platte,
because of the Grant from the Terri
tory of Kansas, and this, too, in face
of the fact that this Grant had been
declared void by our State Supreme
Court years ago! Judge Sneafor
agreed with the Supreme Court of
Colorado in this, but in no other re-
spect and proceeded to compensate
the City for the loss of the Kansas
Grant by awarding it priorities for 15O
cubic feet of water, for all purposes,
dating back to 1870, notwithstanding
the above state of facts!
In view of the many decisions of
our Supreme Court, and the well set
tied law on the subject. this, in the
writer's Judgment, is the most unfair,
| illegal and outrageous decision on
water rights ever handed down by
trial Judge in Colorado, there being
absolutely no foundation for invoking
the doctrine of relation. Indeed,
there was no affirmative finding of
the Referee that due diligence had
been shown by the City and it's pre-
decessors. AS matter of fact the
Referee has not even completed his
report. Many claimants who had fill
ed claim statements before him, had
not received any findings as to their
alleged rights, so the report Of the
Referee and hearing upon his findings
in favor of the City and the decision
by the learned Judge, in its favor, was
premature, contrary to the provisions
of our statut, and illegal.
All these points, and the Supreme
Court decisions, were called to Judge
Sheafor's attention, but notwithstand
ing that fact he gave the City the de-
cree prayed loi ualihR ~ Ao'u. A'
| affects every ditch in the entire If
rigation division. with DEGREES junior
to 1870. Much less delay than that
of the City and it's predecessors in
completing its diversion works-45
years-has been held to be too long
! time to invoke the doctrine of rela.
ton. Take particularly the case of
The Antero & Lost Park Reservoir
Company v. Ohler, where it was
| shown that the Antero Reservoir work
started in 1891 or '92, upon which
work continued vigorously until about
1897, and was then suspended until
1907, due to variety of unforeseen
and unavoidable circumstances over
which the plaintiffs had no control