Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.. 00'1164 <br />. <br /> <br />.' <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />," <br /> <br />76 <br /> <br />the United States is expecting to commence to introduce <br />its case, The situation is somewhat complicnted by the <br />attitude which the United States attorneys took at the <br />Torrington hearing last ~~y as to a 1904 priority for the <br />Casper-Alcova. <br /> <br />Ever since this was asserted, I have felt that <br />it has created a possible divergence of interests be- <br />tween the Government attorneys on the one hand and the <br />Pathfinder Irrigation District, GerinG Ft. Laramie and <br />NJrthport districts on the other. Mr. Noi,.~lbors has <br />forwarded me a copy of the letter which you furnished <br />him from Messrs; Iverson, Stoddard and Burke to yourself <br />on this ~ubje~. <br /> <br />I lwvo ::'.:ne over it carefully, and it seems to me <br />that the situation still may present difficulties for <br />your district and the other two mentioned. Apparently <br />the WY::ll:dn~ state irrigation authorities have not been <br />brought into the picture as between the Un1T...~ St,',tes and <br />the Cnsper-Alcova Irrieation District, and there is a <br />possible question that some irrigator under the C~,sper- <br />Alcova District night invoke the powers of the .'..yoning <br />Department to compel delivery of water'to him on a parity <br />with you notwithstanding this contract, if an equal ' <br />priority date should be granted to the C"s."er-Alcova. <br />Moreover, so far as I can determine from the latter which <br />the attorneys sent you, the contract between the Unit~J <br />St".tes and the C'-"l'sr-Alcova Irric;nl.ion District might <br />be ahrogated by the Governr.tcnt ~nd the Ct..u:""r-Alcova <br />Dititrict without reference to your interests and without <br />consultation with you, since you are not parties to it. <br /> <br />A chc,n;c uf policy on the part of the Bureau vi <br />Rec!~:~tionmight easily create such a condition. In <br />other words, it seems to me that the rights of the <br />Pllti'lfl<luor and the other two districts should rest upon <br />absolute legal rights and a legal record thereof instead <br />of on a contract which the Nc!)r::5ka districts could not <br />enforce in the courts. <br /> <br />Of COUI'SO, you understand that we expect to fight the <br />claim of a 1904 priority for Crrs"er-,\lcolfU in "ny event~ <br />This is not only in your interests but also in interests of <br />any other N()bro~:;a a'opropriator whose priority date is junio.r <br />to 1904. You ,rill recall that the 1904 priority date for <br />Casper-Alcova was Qne of the prime moving factors which <br />induced us to CQnunence this suit. ,vc JQ :Jot c:;cpect to rest <br />until the' s')it j,s ende<:!.iJJ, ""'-Q" eff'orts to pre;ve.nt t,ms <br />injllSt.ioe. <br /> <br />5 <br />