THE IRRIGATION AGE. 



61 



forestration of denuded forest areas as 

 sources of water supply, the conservation 

 of existing supplies by approved methods 

 of irrigatiun and distribution, and the in- 

 crease of the water resources of the arid 

 region by the investigation and develop- 

 ment of underground supplies and the 

 united ownership of land and water. 



The resolutions embodied a specific de- 

 mand for an annual appropriation of not 

 less than $250,000 for irrigation surveys 

 and maps of irrigable public lands, with 

 plans and estimates of costs of reservoirs, 

 canals and irrigation works necessary for 

 their reclamation and for sinking experi- 

 mental artesian wells by the United States 

 Greological Survey, and of not less than 

 $100,000 for irrigation investigations by 

 the Department of Agriculture of the 

 United States. 



The National Business League is send- 

 ing copies of these resolutions to all the 

 multitude of commercial organizations in 

 the United States, with a request for 

 their endorsement of the national policy 

 set forth therein, and asking for their co- 

 operation to secure the support of of their 

 senators and congressmen for said policy 

 and for the said appropriations to carry 

 the same into effect. 



GUY E. MITCHELL. 



IRRIGATION DECISION. 



The suit of Miller & Lux and the San 

 Joaquin and Kings river canal and irriga- 

 tion company against the Enterprise 

 canal and laud company and others and J. 

 C. Mowry, intervenor, which was submit- 

 ted on briefs in Judge Webb's department 

 of the superior courts several weeks ago 

 has been decided. The suit was really a 

 contest between Henry Miller and Jeff 

 James for the waters of the San Joaquin 

 river and neither of the parties will find 

 much consolation in the judgment, which 

 was virtually against both. 



Miller & Lux, who have defied the law 

 for years by damming up the San Joaquin 



at the point of confluence with the Fresno 

 slough, brought injunction proceedings to 

 restrain James from tapping the river 

 near the old California ranch above-their 

 dam, claiming that they would thereby be 

 deprived of the water. To support the in- 

 junction proceedings they set up two 

 claims (1) that they were entitled to the 

 water by right of prior appropriation and 

 prescription founded upon long continued 

 usei and (2) that their lands were riparian 

 to the river and that the land of Jamesr 

 was npt. The latter contention was sup- 

 ported by the court and the injunction 

 against James was made perpetual, it ap- 

 'pearing that he wished to divert the 

 waters of the river for the purpose of irri- 

 gating lands riparian to the Fresno slough 

 but not to the San Joaquin. Judge Webb, 

 however, emphatically denied the first and 

 most important part of the Miller & Lux 

 claim, that they had a right to the waters 

 of the river by prescription. 



The various parts of the decision are as 

 follows: 



"First That the plaintiff, the San 

 Jcaquin and Kings river irrigation com- 

 pany, takes nothing by its action in this 

 matter as to its claims of a right of diver- 

 sion of the water from the San Joaquin 

 river. 



"Second That judgment in favor of 

 the Miller & Lux corporation, and the in- 

 tervenor, Mowry, be entered against the 

 defendants, enjoining each and all of them 

 from diverting any water out of of from 

 the San Joaquin river. 



"Third That judgment be entered in 

 favor of the San Joaquin and Kings river 

 irrigation company, in so far as its right 

 as a riparian owner is concerned, in this 

 action against the defendants enjoining 

 each and all of them from diverting any 

 water out of the San Joaquin river. 



"Fourth That each party pay their 

 own costs herein. 



Miller, of course, is the soul and spirit 

 of the San Joaquin river canal and irriga- 

 tion company and the part of the decision 



