The Distribution of Water. 
15 
needed. Everybody knows that the imposing of a penalty to 
follow a successful prosecution for neglect of duty, is not of 
itself very effective in many matters, because of the reluctance 
of citizens to institute such prosecutions, and of the difficulty of 
obtaining convictions. But the passage of such a statute should 
have great influence on faithful officials in calling their attention 
to what is expected of them under their oaths of office. It is 
sometimes unfortunately true that persons in public service are 
less disposed to make active and constant exertion than are those 
in the employ of private persons or companies. It is respectfully 
urged that the water commissioners of this state should each 
and all resolve not to fall into such careless habits, but to re¬ 
member what is expected and demanded of them by the plain 
language of the law and by their official oaths. 
Another duty specially imposed by statute in 1895, which is 
really only ancillary to the duty of apportioning the waters of the 
stream according to the prior rights of all, is that defined in 
Sec. 2384a, Mills' Supplement. The water commissioner is re¬ 
quired, on application of the owners of any one or more ditches 
in his district, at once, thoroughly to examine the ditches under 
his supervision to ascertain what use of water is being made by 
consumers. Then if he ascertains the water under any ditch is 
being wasted, or is wastefully, or extravagantly or wrongfully 
used to the injury of other appropriators, he must shut off the 
water supply of such ditch to such extent as in his judgment 
the water was so wasted or otherwise wastefully or wrongfully 
used. As the greater includes the less, it is believed that if a 
ditch owner asks a water commissioner to make an investigation 
of some particular ditch and not of all of the ditches in his dis¬ 
trict, he should do so either in person or by a deputy. It will be 
noted that the third section of the same act of 1895 (Sec. 2384b, 
Mills' Supp.) makes it a misdemeanor for any water commis¬ 
sioner to fail to perform this duty. It may be further observed 
that it is certainly not improper, and in many instances it may 
be the duty of a conscientious official if his attention is in any 
way called, without formal complaint of a ditch owner, to the 
fact that water is being wrongfully and wastefully used under 
some particular ditch in his district, to make the investigation 
on his own initiative and prevent the abuse if he find it is taking 
place. It is further suggested that in any event when a water 
commissioner has reason to believe that any ditch with an early 
priority is demanding more water at a particular time than it 
really needs, or for the purpose of using some water for an im¬ 
proper purpose to the injury of some junior appropriator, he can 
keep fully within the law by advising the superintendent of irri¬ 
gation of his belief that investigation of such ditch is necessary, 
