Imperial Valley press., 1925-08-17

best Interests OF American Imperial Valley,
that Mark Rose cannot tell the truth; Mat NJ, w.
Conkng has been attacked unjusty and malicious
ly and that he not connected with the negotia
tioHs between Imperial Irrigation District and the
Southern I'acifc railroad cul:ng ms term of ern
ployment as attorney for the Irrigation District.
In VPnomous and slanderous article pub
lishel over the anonymous signature of HAnti-Re-
call Committee" on Monday, August 10, 1925, an
attempt made to eyade the contentious of
Mark Rose and those who have witnessed the long
and dirty fight 10 thwart the people, by sending
oHt smUtv smoke which in no way vim
dicated Mr. Conkng aud which did not produce
any evidence.
| shall not descend to mean any nasty remarks
or nosethumbing after the manner of small boys.
The issues too serious too vital TO the I'm
peral Valley to take time for such things.
However 1 do intend, if it is possible to do
so. to inform every citizen Of the activities of
NJ w. Conkling as an official of the Imperial r.
rigation District ard an official of the Southern
Pacific Company while those two organizations
negotiating agreements and contracts in
1914 and 1915 for the California Development
Company.
The copy of the Los Angeles Herald article
of Jan. 49, 1909, which was published in the I'M
peral Valley Press recently, telling Of Mr.. Conk-
ling's political Vaccinations at the time of the
election of Mayor Harper of Los Angeles, was not
an attempt to rake up old history out of spite 1t
was. the starting point of an educational campaign
aimed to show just what Mr.. Conkling's connections
were prior to his arrival in the Imperial Valley.
lie was not only legal advisor for the Southern
of its political bosses in Los Angeles during its
political reign in this state.
He came 10 the Imperial Valley, remained the
attorney of record for the Southern Pacific
pany and actually handled their in this
county, attorney Tor the Imperial Irrigation
district during this same period, and was intimate
~ connected with formulating the contracts with
the Southern Pacific company in which more than
$3,000,00O was paid that corporation by the Irri
cation District for the California Development
company ..'
These declarations are authentic. They
supported by the records file in the offices
Of the Irrigation District. The following quota
tions from the inmates of the board of directors
Of the Irrigation, District will tell their own story
] do not need to make any wild assertions call
names. The truth is obvious, Ranchers who lived in
the Imperial Valley at the time the first bond issue
was voted know how bitter the fight then They
know thar VIC paid far too much for what we re-
ceIved and that the original contracts mOd
fled time and again in favor of the Southern Pa
cific company before they were signed Here is
the history of Nh Conkling's activities attorney
for the Imperial Irrigation district:
LET THE RECORDS SPEAK
Dec. Goth. 1913 Page 143 Minute Book No. l:
Motion by Director Hamilton seconded by Direc-
tor Brockman that we employ Attorney NJ. '"
Conlling attorney, at salary of 5000 per
month from January l. 1914. Roll call order
ed and resulted follows: Brockman, Yes; Fer
guson declined to voe Hamilton, Yes; Pound, No
Motion carried
1t may be interesting for the citizens to know
that the law requires that three members of
Irrigation District Board which is composed of five
directors must concur to make any action of the
board legal The vote for Mr. Conkng shows but
two directors in favor OF his appointment. Direc-
tor Peck had resigned from the third division,
there were but four directors at the meeting.
On page IA. Book No !. of the minutes ac-
pears the following motion which carried. It
definitely associates Mr.. Conkling with the nego-
tiations involving the Southern Pacific:
Moved by Director Pound, Director Hamilton
second, that the attorney be instructed to proceed
with the condemnation suit soon he has the
necessary data. This action taken at the
meeting of December 90, 1913.
Nearly year later, November 10. 1914
the following motion carried at a meeting Of
the board. The motion appears page 2o6. Of
Minute Book No. l:
Motion by Director Brockman and seconded
by Director Ferguson that President Hamilton and
Attorney Conkling, in conjunction with w. f.
Holt. obtain from William Sproule, President of
the Southern Pacific Company. definite informa
tion pertinent to the Southern Pacific Company's
fulfillment of existing contract sell its interest
in the California Development Company system
to the district.
It was not until February 26, 1915, more than
q year after Mr.. Copkling had been chief counsel
for the Irrigation District and after the agree
ment and the supplemental contract with the
Southern Pacific Company had been signed arrang
ing payment of 50 ,152, 100000 for the c. d. Company
that John NJ, Esheman appointed assistant at
torney for the district During that period the
most important in the negotiations, Mr. Conkng
took an active part in the Southern Pacific tram
sactions
At meeting Of the board on April 27 1915
Mr. Conkling's salary was voted increased to $4O0
per month, effective Nav J. 1915.
SENT CONKLING-OF COURSE
On August 10, 1915, the board voted to send
Mr.. Conkng to San Francisco 10 confer with the
Southern Pacific officials. The motion as carried
appears page 49, Book No. of the minutes.
1t is as follows Moved by Director Ferguson and
seconded by Director Mcbride that Director Brock
man. in conjunction with Judge Conkling be de-
elgated to interview the Southern Pacific officials
at San Francisco, pertinent to the interest due
bonds covered by contract as between the Southern
Pacific and this district, bearing date February
s, 1918, and such other matters may appropriate
ly come before them at said interview.
On August %, 1915. the minutes os the board
show the following notion Moved by Director
Mcbride and seconded by Director Ferguson, that
the resignation of> Attorney M. w. Conkng be
accepted. Roll call demanded resulting
follows: Bennett. No. Brockman No; Ferguson,
Yes; Hamilton No; Mcbride, Yes.
On August 3l 1915, the following resolution
and amendment presented and voted down:
Whereas, under date of July %, the resgna-