White Bluffs spokesman. [volume] (White Bluffs, Wash.) 1907-1938, 1934-06-28
Seek To Force
District ToNeW
General Levies
Twelve Landowners Ask
Court To Issue Writ of
Mandamus

trict levy assessments on all lands in
the district for the purpose of raising
revenue for the retirement Of the out
standing bonds, suit was filed in the
Superior Court of Benton county by
c. F. Wooten ct al versus the Priest
Rapids Irrigation District on June 20.
Hearing of the suit which asks for a
writ of mandamus, was called for July
5th, at $50 am. in Prosser, but the
irrigation district has asked for
potponement, due to the fact that their
attorney Is in the east and will be
unable to be present at that time. No
alternative date has yet been set by
the court.
The plaintiffs in the case are G. F.
Wooten and wife Charles Mack, w. l..
Enyeart and wife, B. Salvini and wife,
Ben c. Root and wife. Robert Mac
Donell and wife, Mary A. Fonda, II. Fl.
Boie and wife, j. p. Crimson and wife,
S. Garsi, Ida Hartmann, and G. F.
Wooten as administrator of the estate
of John Losen. Defendants are the
Priest Rapids Irrigation District, d.
S. Wilkinson as secretary of the dis
trict, w. j. Kincaid, w. S. Weber
and G.. T. Slavens as directors of the
district, Harry Forsyth, county trea-
surer, and Ira Hawley, Robert Evans
and Jay Perry, county commissioners
Ask Mandamus Writ
In the complaint filed by the plain
tiffs mandamus writ Is asked OF
the court to order the defendants to
prepare assessment rolls and levy as
sessments upon all Of the lands situ-
ated and included within the irriga-
ton district for each and every year
since the issuance OF the bond issue, as
required by the laws and statutes of
the state of Washington; and that the
plaintiffs be given credit for their wa
ter rights and for excessive water
charges heretofore paid by them.
Reviewing the circumstances Of the
case, the plaintiffs point out in their
complaint that in the Adamson decree
the court ruled that the Black Rock
Power and Irrigation company and
the Consumers Ditch company held
illegal title to said property In trust
forever for the use and benefit Of the
water right holders and the beneh-
| Charles of said trust" and that the
| final decree in the receivership pro-
ceedings recognized and confirmed this
trust as to all of the instrumentallties
and properties in favor of the said
beneflciaries.
Bonds Obligation Against ALI Lands
The plaintiffs state that at the con-
firmation proceedings In the Superior
Court of Benton county, upheld in the
appeal before the state Supreme Court,
the court ruled that said bonds and
each and all Of them are hereby de-
clared to be subsisting, valid, general
obligation of the district payable from
the revenue derived from annual as
sessnents levied against the lands
within and under the operation OF
said district in the manner provided
by law and from such other revenues
as may be authorized by law and
that each and all Of the lands within
the district have been and are hereby
declared to be specially benefited In
excess OF the aggregate amount OF the
principal and interest required to pay
said bonds in full"
The complaint states further that
there is a total of approximately $4,000
acres of irrigable land within the dis
trict and that of this acreage approx
mately 1000 acres receive irrigation
water from the irrigation district; and
that the defendants have refused tc
levy assessments against all the lands
, of the district to provide revenue FOL
the payment of the bond issue, which
action has caused the irrigation
; charges against the 1900 acres to be
grossly excessive. To alleviate this con-
dition, they ask the court for a Wrl'
of mandamus to compel the defendant:
> to levy such an assessment.