UNLV Special Collections provides copies of materials to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. Material not in the public domain may be used according to fair use of copyrighted materials as defined by copyright law. Please cite us.
Please note that UNLV may not own the copyright to these materials and cannot provide permission to publish or distribute materials when UNLV is not the copyright holder. The user is solely responsible for determining the copyright status of materials and obtaining permission to use material from the copyright holder and for determining whether any permissions relating to any other rights are necessary for the intended use, and for obtaining all required permissions beyond that allowed by fair use.
Read more about our reproduction and use policy.
I agree.Robert Griffith had filed a protest to the water company's drilling of well #11, most likely in response to their protest to his well. Strong recommended contacting Griffith's lawyers and offering to drop their objection in return for him dropping his.
hln000747. Union Pacific Railroad Collection, 1828-1995. MS-00397. Special Collections and Archives, University Libraries, University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Las Vegas, Nevada. http://n2t.net/ark:/62930/d1r20vw49
English
Mr. Leo A. McNamee: Los Angeles - May 29, 1945 1-7334 (CC - Mr. E. E. Bennett Mr. W. R. Bracken) You have copy of Mr. Bracken's letter May 28th, file V 23-1-B, enclosing copy of letter received by him from State Engineer notifying us of formal hearing upon application by Robert B. Griffith to appropriate underground water which was protested by the Las Vegas Land and Water Co., and application filed by the Las Vegas Land and Water Co. to appropriate under-ground water which was protested by Robert B. Griffith. The State Engineer's letter is postmarked Carson City, and states the hearing will be held on June 12th in the court room of the City Hall (not mentioning what city), and I presume we are to understand the hearing will be held in Las Vegas. Mr. Bracken advisee me that at the time protest was entered by LVL&W Co. against the Griffith well it was his understanding that the underground waters were allocated by the State Engineer for "highest beneficial use", and that the requirements of a municipality took preference over all other applications. I now understand that this is not a fact, in that the statutes of Nevada do not so differentiate, in view of which I cannot see that we have any valid grounds for opposing the Griffith application. I do not believe we could demonstrate to the satisfac-tion of the State Engineer that a well which has not been drilled will, if placed on production, have a detrimental effect upon a well or wells operated under prior appropriation, which latter are located a considerable distance from the well of the applicant. It would appear that the protest filed by Robert B. Griffith against the drilling of our Well No. 11 is merely in retaliation for our protest against his application, and it is my suggestion that our position is untenable, and that you contact Mr. Griffith or his legal representative and have an understanding that, conditional upon Griffith withdrawing his protest our Company will simultaneously withdraw its protest. I have discussed the matter with Mr. Bennett, who con-curs in my viewpoint, and it is requested that you proceed accord-ingly. You will, of course, be prepared at the hearing to offer necessary proof to justify our application. Frank Strong