OCR Text |
Show by any party, so far as shown by the evidence, to prevent Sullivan using water from Wisconsin creek. Sullivan's ditch from said creek is about two miles long, and its construction by Evans was prosecuted from the time he commenced it, in 1866, with reasonable diligence. And where work of this kind is prosecuted with reasonable diligence, the appropriation of the water relates back to the beginning of the work. Kimball v^ Gearhart, 12 Cal., 27; Irwin v. Strait et al., 18 Nev. 436; Woolman et al. v. Garringer et al., 1 Montana, 535, on page 544. Therefore such right as Sullivan has to water from Wisconsin Creek dates from the fall of 1866. At that time the contestant, Pillsbury, owned a third interest in the Hunter Brothers' ditch, which he testifies was five feet wide and eighteen inches deep, and that said ditch appropriated water from Wisconsin creek in the spring of 1864 and was the first water right on said creek. He further testifies, that he and Sacket & Penn, who owned another one-third interest in the Hunter Brothers ¦ ditch, gave Evans the privilege of taking water from V/isconsin Creek, "but he was not to interfere with our water rights." Two or three other parties also appear to have had ditches conveying water from said creek prior to the time the Evans ditch was constructed. The capacity of these ditches is not shown by the evidence, nor is the quantity of water flowing in said stream during the irrigating season so shown. Nor is it shown, that the two hundred and fifty inches of water diverted from said stream 111-49 |
Source |
Original book: [State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, California, City of San Diego, California, and County of San Diego, California, defendants, United States of America, State of Nevada, State of New Mexico, State of Utah, interveners] : |