poses. And where the entryman at the time of the withdrawal had earned title to the land by full compliance with the homestead law, he is entitled to compensation for the land and the improvements thereon as fully as if the legal title had passed to him, but no evidence of title either equitable or legal will be issued. (35 L. D., 459.)

PRESCRIPTIVE TITLE TO CANAL RIGHT OF WAY.

December 22, 1906.-Form of contract for the purchase of lands may be modified in exceptional cases in the purchase of canal right of way to be an agreement to secure a prescriptive title to such right of way. Instances when this may be done are limited to the purchase of canal right of way which has been held in the possession of the grantor for a period of time in excess of the statutory requirements relative to perfecting a prescriptive title.

LANDS IN PRIVATE OWNERSHIP.

SUPPLYING ADDITIONAL WATER TO PARTIALLY IRRIGATED LANDS.

October 11, 1906.-Additional water may be supplied from reservoirs constructed under the reclamation act as may be necessary to fully develop and reclaim partially irrigated lands in private ownership, provided no restriction of the reclamation act is violated and the applicant becomes a member of the local water users' association. (35 L. D., 222.)

WATER RENTALS.

December 6, 1906.-During the construction of a Government project the temporary use of the canals of an irrigation system purchased by the Government for conveying water to lands that would otherwise be allowed to go to waste is not incompatible with the purpose, but is directly in pursuance of the object for which the property was acquired.

WITHDRAWAL OF LANDS.

MINERAL LANDS.

October 6, 1906.-Lands valuable for mineral deposits contained therein, although embraced within the limits of a withdrawal of lands susceptible of irrigation from any contemplated works, are not affected by such withdrawal. Hence the privilege of exploring for minerals in such lands remains in full force notwithstanding the withdrawal. However, lands withdrawn for the construction and operation of irrigation works rest upon a different principle and are not subject to any lien or claim other than a vested right existing prior to the inception of such withdrawal. (35 L. D., 216.)

TEMPORARY WITHDRAWALS DISCONTINUED.

June 29, 1907.-The practice of designating certain withdrawals made under the reclamation act as "temporary" will be discontinued. (35 L. D., 649.)

YAKIMA INDIAN RESERVATION.

August 10, 1906.-Under the provisions of the act of March 6, 1906, authorizing the disposition of such surplus and allotted lands on the Yakima Indian Reservation as may be subject to irrigation by means of projects under the reclamation act, 20 acres is fixed as the unit for Indian ownership to be irrigated by the waters of any subproject, and if an Indian desires to accept the benefits of the act and place his surplus lands under the control of the Government to be sold for his benefit, he can do so only upon the condition that he will retain 20 acres thereof and no more, for which a water right shall be secured to him appurtenant to the land and subject to the same charge for construction and annual charge for maintenance as other lands under the project. (35 L. D., 110.)

WATER USERS' ASSOCIATIONS.

The following water users' associations have been organized for cooperation with the United States under the provisions of the act of Congress approved June 17, 1902. (32 Stat. L., 388.)

Belle Fourche Valley, Belle Fourche, S. Dak.
Buford-Trenton, Buford, N. Dak.
Elephant Butte, Las Cruces, N. Mex.
El Paso Valley, El Paso, Tex.

Finney County, Garden City, Kans.

Klamath, Klamath Falls, Oreg.

Lower Milk River Valley, Malta, Mont.

Lower Yellowstone, Sidney, Mont.

North Platte Valley, Scotts Bluff, Nebr.

Okanogan, Alma, Wash.

Orland Water Users' Association, Orland, Cal.

Payette-Boise, Caldwell, Idaho.

Pecos, Carlsbad, N. Mex.

Rio Hondo, Roswell, N. Mex.

Salt River Valley, Phoenix, Ariz.

Strawberry Valley, Spanish Fork, Utah.

Sun River, Great Falls, Mont.

Sunnyside, North Yakima, Wash.

Tieton, North Yakima, Wash.
Umatilla, Hermiston, Oreg.
Uncompahgre, Montrose, Colo.
Williston, Williston, N. Dak.
Yuma County, Yuma, Ariz.

LITIGATION.

ARIZONA.

Salt River project.-No further action has been taken in the suits against Charles W. Williams and C. C. Gish, since the publication of the fifth annual report.

At the instigation of the Salt River Valley Water Users' Association proceedings were commenced early in 1907 in the district court of the third judicial district of Arizona under the title of Hurley v. Abbott et al., for the purpose of determining individual water rights of landowners in the Salt River Valley, who claimed, by virtue of appropriation, the right to use for irrigation the natural flow of Salt River.

The suit was heard May 23, and on June 10, 1907, the United States attorney in behalf of the Federal Government appeared in

court and requested permission to intervene on behalf of the Indians; thereupon the trial of the cause was continued until September 23, 1907, the Government being given until September 1 to file and serve papers.

Yuma project.-After rejection by the Irrigation Land and Improvement Company of repeated propositions by the Reclamation Service for purchase of right of way for construction of the Yuma dike, the company was notified on November 9, 1905, that the Government proposed to construct a canal over its land and claim right of way under the act of August 30, 1890 (26 Stat. L., 391). The contractors, Miller & Peasley, accordingly began the construction of the dike and canal, whereupon the Irrigation Land and Improvement Company applied for a temporary injunction restraining the contractors from further work. This was granted on November 11, 1905, by the commissioner of the Territorial district court at Yuma, Ariz. On November 16 Judge Campbell, holding court at Tucson in the first judicial district of Arizona, dissolved the injunction. and later denied another injunction suit by the plaintiffs. On November 8, 1905, the company instituted suit in the supreme_court of the District of Columbia, seeking to enjoin the Government from constructing any works across their lands. The United States filed a demurrer in January, 1906, and on June 14, 1906, the bill was dismissed for want of jurisdiction. On December 13, 1906, the case was submitted to the court of appeals of the District of Columbia and on January 9, 1907, the court held that, as the title to lands in Arizona was the principal question involved, the suit could not be maintained in this jurisdiction, following the doctrine laid down in the cases of the Northern Indiana Railroad Company v. the Michigan Central Railroad Company (15 How., 232) and the Columbia National Sand Dredging Company v. Morton (28 D. C. App., 288), and affirmed the decree of the supreme court of the District of Columbia sustaining a demurrer to and dismissing a bill for injunction.

The case has been taken to the Supreme Court of the United States and is on the docket of that court for the present term.

COLORADO.

Uncompahgre Valley project.-On September 29, 1905, suit was brought by the receiver of the Denver Savings Bank to secure possession of property mortgaged to the bank by the Taylor-Moore Construction Company, defaulting contractor for construction of the Gunnison tunnel. A writ of replevin was issued October 5, 1905, but on October 10, 1905, an order was issued restraining the plaintiff from interfering with the property. On October 10, 1906, an application was filed to appeal the case to the United States circuit court. On October 16, 1906, a transcript of the record from the district court was filed and the case set for hearing September 3, 1907.

NEBRASKA-WYOMING.

North Platte project. The suit of H. G. Leavitt against the United States is pending in the district court of the United States, no further action having been taken since the filing of papers in that court.

Condemnation proceedings for approximately 240 acres of land located in the diversion dam site at Whalen, Wyo., have been begun in the United States district court of Wyoming. Order of condemnation was secured and appraisement had, from which the United States appealed for a jury trial. The proceedings will be heard at the November term of that court.

NEVADA.

Truckee-Carson project. The cases of Vandall v. Malley and Tevis v. Malley, noted in the fifth annual report, have been dismissed. Suits of ejectment were brought in 1905 against 7 persons who were engaged in the liquor business upon public land at Hazen, Nev. Verdict in each case was given for the Government and the public land vacated.

The Rickey Land and Cattle Company, a Nevada corporation, filed an application in the General Land Office for a reservoir right of way over the Alkali reservoir site, which application was rejected by that Office February 20, 1904.

On October 11, 1904, the Secretary of the Interior dismissed an application of the company for a writ of certiorari upon the denial. of appeal from the finding of the General Land Office. The lands comprising this reservoir site were withdrawn under the second form of withdrawal September 30, 1902, and under the first form of withdrawal August 20, 1904. In April, 1906, it having been brought to the attention of the Government representatives that the company had begun the construction of three canals and a tunnel in the reservoir site, thus threatening to prevent its utilization by the Government, a complaint against the offending company was filed and an application made on September 4 for an injunction pendente lite. The court denied the application and directed that notice be given and a hearing had before the grant of a temporary injunction. A decision in this matter is being awaited.

NEW MEXICO.

Hondo project.-Two complaints were filed in the district court of Chaves County, N. Mex., on February 4, 1907, by Rufus J. Donnahoo and T. M. Daniel, separately, against W. M. Reed et al. The facts in both cases were practically the same, both the plaintiffs' claiming from Hondo River water rights whose application was to be made below the diversion dam of the Hondo reservoir. On Febuary 22, 1907, the court issued an order dismissing both cases for lack of jurisdiction, it having been shown that the defendants were only nominal ones while the real party in interest was the United States.

On February 14, 1907, suit was brought in the United States court at Alamogordo, N. Mex., against Lillie C. Klasner, claiming that the defendant was attempting to divert water on the north side of Hondo River above the Government dam in opposition to the latter's filings for water rights under the Hondo project. A temporary injunction restraining the defendant from diverting any water was issued March 11, 1907, also an order to show cause why the injunction should not be made permanent. The case was heard on this issue May 29, 1907, at which time a postponement was granted the defendant and the case

continued until the November term. In July the defendant filed a motion to dissolve the temporary injunction and the case came up for hearing July 25, at Alamogordo, N. Mex. Evidence was introduced by both litigants and on July 27 the court issued an order modifying the injunction to allow two irrigations of some land on the south side of the river owned by the defendant, the injunction as modified to remain in force until final hearing at the November term.

SOUTH DAKOTA.

Belle Fourche project.-The United States on July 13, 1906, filed a proceeding in condemnation in the United States district court to secure approximately 92 acres of land belonging to the Belle Fourche Land and Cattle Company and located in the diversion dam site at Belle Fourche, S. Dak. On September 10, 1906, the matter was settled by agreement out of court.

WASHINGTON.

Yakima project.-December 12, 1906, a settlement of the Cascade Canal Company action was effected by an agreement between the company and the Government, through which the former is entitled between March 15 and July 20 of each year to 150 second-feet of water from the flood waters of the Yakima River. From July 20 to October 15 of each year the company shall receive from storage a total of 16,800 acre-feet of water, and from the latter date until March 15 of the succeeding year 30 second-feet of water for stock and domestic purposes. By the terms of the agreement the Government acquires the dam constructed by the company at the outlet of Lake Kachess and a further consideration of $10,000, payable in five equal annual installments, beginning January 1, 1909.

In the United States district court for the eastern district of Washington the United States filed a complaint December 31, 1906, against Christian Hansen for the restoration of certain lands whose possession the defendant was unlawfully withholding from the Government. The defendant filed his answer April 3, 1907, claiming equitable title to the lands by virtue of fifteen years'- residence and upon this assertion demanding a decree to that effect. April 8, 1907, the United States filed a demurrer to this answer. The case was heard upon oral argument before the court June 14, 1907, when written briefs were requested. The case is now pending.

June 14, 1907, a hearing was had upon a proceeding commenced April 9, 1907, in the United States district court for the eastern district of Washington by the United States against Thomas Ambler et al. for the condemnation of 241.56 acres of land bordering on Lake Clealum, and needed for construction purposes. At this hearing counsel for the defendants entered objection to the power of the United States to condemn these lands for the described purposes, also to matter of procedure, and the case was taken under advisement by the court. The suit was reopened October 21, and on October 25, 1907, a decree was rendered awarding $3,682, as against $17,607.50 first asked by the defendants, for the 241.56 acres involved. This corresponds closely with the price heretofore paid for unimproved land in that vicinity, and is satisfactory to the Government.