| Show WATER FOR FOB DOMESTIC uch WE WB are in receipt of the follo following wing communication LAKE thoele tooele co dec 8 IM editor deseret news nawai I 1 have been located by a certain creek of water in this county dura period ol of twenty five years andorn and own about one fifth of 0 the water this summer the water has been less than in years past and the parties martlea owning four foar fitilis of the stream havo have turned the water in another direction not lelL leaving ving any water in the old ditch tor for culinary purposes inconsequence in consequence 11 I 1 have had to carry the water for home use a long dist distance hoce or do without subjecting me to much labor and inconvenience to get my water supply tor for home c the stream of water waier comes to the dighe re bolders every ten days two days to each share during the time when I 1 have the water I 1 always turn iu 0 the creek and give the four shareholders a sufficient quantity to supply their necessities for domestic demesne use out but when the other shareholders have the water they allow no water vater to run ran in I 1 the old ditch which ho has run for ty five years now it appears ta me that the water for domestic use cannot lawfully be betoken betaken taken from the old ditch it it can how bow far shall ibe j justified us in turning the whole dom do mystle estle supply from the other shareholders who hold equal shares with me the next question is how does common law view this quest question iori are ra there any precedents in such cases ant the he subject may be coni aldero of public interest as there are othora la in JL a similar condition to that in which I 1 am placed INQUIRER the rule of law in rela relation to the ownership and right to te use water flowing in natural channels Is ie the water belongs to the first appropriator to the extent of his appropriation this rule has been to be superior to legislative enactments and is virtually a constitutional provision in the states and territories in which irrigation pre prevails vels if our correspondent was as he be intimates one of five alve settlers who appropriated in an anti entire r e stream agreeing that each shoals have uie the whole stream two day in every ten during the irrigate ing season and if no part of tay stream was in the tae beginning or b subsequent agreement or custom ale owed to remain la in the channel for tho domestic use of the four settlers who wan were not at the time using the main body of it for irrigating purposes then our correspondent bas no relief but it if the original practice among the live five settlers was to leave a small portion ot of tile the water in the cha channel anel for the t be dona domestic estic use of four of them while the bad the bulk of odthe the stream turned upon bis big land then tte the extent of tha iha appropriation of each settler would be the bulk of the two days la in ten and a small portion of it all the time tor for domestic use such would be the extent of the water right of each settler and suca would be the relief which a court would grant in cabe of a legal contest content toe rights of toe the five settlers referred to respectively depend upon the original arrangement ran gement and custom anich were established among them la in case of such a in tb the stream as to render it insufficient to serve both for domestic and irrigating purposes and the rights of each party in interest to use it forbath purposes were equal a court of equity would oa a showing ot of the facts order the capr water to be devoted to the most urgent and necessary use the law upon this sub et ct Is id t ie tame ame as toe the of a wise humane and impartial mau man would be and whatever the latter cigut feel ought to he done doise a court of f equity would be very likely to order |
