upr000197 66

with other customers of the Water Company. I f the water producing and d istrib u tin g f a c i l i t i e s be sold by the S a il-road Company to the Water Company care should be taken to reserve to the Sailroad Company such amount o f water from it s own 2.5 cubic fe e t as i t may need, and th is could be follow ed by a contract with the Water Company by which i t would agree to produce and d e liv e r to the Railroad Company such water from the ra ilro a d ’ s own supply at cost to the Water Company fo r such production and d eliv ery . There is a question in th is connection upon which Mr. Bennett’ s le t t e r does not throw any s p e c ific lig h t, and that Is whether i f the Railroad Company reserves from it s own ap­propriation such water as i t may need fo r railroad and dom­e s tic purposes the rest o f the water can be taken over by the Water Company. ¥• should have Mr. Bennett’ s help on the matters discussed in th is paragraph. Passing by questions which have to do with ac­counting, I go along with Mr. Bennett’ s thought expressed at the top o f page 7 o f his le t t e r and the reasons he gives therefor that the most advantageous plan o f making a tran sfer o f the water production and distribu tion f a c i l i ­tie s o f the Railroad Company would be to make such trans­fe r to the Las Vegas Land and Water Company and have that company transfer a ll other assets, except water production and distrib u tion assets, to another corporation. I am not sure that th is need be a new corporation as Mr, Bennett says. We have a Nebraska corporation, The Union Land Com­pany, which has been used not only in Nebraska but in a number o f other states fo r the purpose o f holding t i t l e to , and dealing with, r e a l property where i t seems more ad­vantageous to have th is done by a separate corporation rather than a railroad company or it s railroad or other non-railroad su bsidiaries. The Union Land Company has been domesticated in Wyoming, Missouri, Utah, Idaho, Colorado and Kansas, Whether the Union Land Company could function in Nevada and also in C aliforn ia fo r the purpose of handling re a l estate included in the assets o f the Las Vegas Land and Water Company, other than water producing and distribu ­ting f a c i l i t i e s , is also a question upon which we should have advice from Mr. Bennett. On page 9 o f Mr. Bennett’ s le t t e r he thinks that borrowed capital could be evidenced by an open book account instead o f bonds. His reasons have, ih my opinion, a sound rin g to them but I am not going, as I have indicated, beyond the f ie ld o f the purposes o f th is le t t e r .