. In Superior Court of the County of San Bernardino, State of California. Department One. Cucamonga Vineyard Co. et al., plaintiff vs. San Antonio Water Co., defendant; no. 9187. o whether that formulashouli] be adopted. >^r -VoPinley, .i V/ill you eT.^ thrat matter fuilyiFir^t, -STfiainin^: the thnory of the plaintiffs exports asyou underatf^^d it has been ^rpoented? f?r Britt: That is ontirnly a mista:on urf^umption thatthe itues^ec for the plaintiffs i^rnored or denied the pro-priety of the natural lar; or theory as to this relation be-tlovn hydraulic head ejw? discharge - th
. In Superior Court of the County of San Bernardino, State of California. Department One. Cucamonga Vineyard Co. et al., plaintiff vs. San Antonio Water Co., defendant; no. 9187. o whether that formulashouli] be adopted. >^r -VoPinley, .i V/ill you eT.^ thrat matter fuilyiFir^t, -STfiainin^: the thnory of the plaintiffs exports asyou underatf^^d it has been ^rpoented? f?r Britt: That is ontirnly a mista:on urf^umption thatthe itues^ec for the plaintiffs i^rnored or denied the pro-priety of the natural lar; or theory as to this relation be-tlovn hydraulic head ejw? discharge - that it varies substan-tially in the manner ac sto-tecl by yinkle; 1 cont thinkthat was xi any time denied; they did claim that the hydrau-lic Up ad at the wello ab0 7e would affect the uincliart^e below,but as for denying that the relation betvonn liydraulic headand discharge i;^ vrhat i-jr Finkie riaB statedhere, 1 do not u.„ euch siatttitnt. The Court: Do you then concede U^at ia tae correct formulaused bv ur i-inkle? lir Britt: I do net ooiicecn it ie tiiecorrect forriiula at allbecause what is called tiie ooeff ioijnt as the witneae statec. 12 orr ( \ is purely a matt or of sunaise. haskell: i question tiie correctness of \Jt Finkloethoory, applied to tne oiacharge of rater percolatingthroititi the ^jround. iar >iritt: It is not purposo to concMLt the correctnessof \^ such propoBibion; I say tnoy hxz eimrly fightin^j arnajQ of strav/ in stating tnat iuX koebig or ijr Purcell deniedtiiat theoretically the discharge of water, or & fluiu oithe nature of water, varies as thl^FfJI of the hydraulichead; IxLcOnt think tnere was any such denial, ihe Court: One other proposition: aseumin^ thet the ex-perts all a^^ee, I would liJve to loiow what thoy all a^^eeabout. i-r .;cKinley: i aat^ifiB^^ that Finkle explain the theoryof tne other experts and then his tiieory. ji Ihe in yhich i unuei stood the theory of the otherex
Size: 1298px × 1925px
Photo credit: © The Reading Room / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bo, bookcentury1900, bookdecade1900, bookidinsuperiorcourto07cuca
