The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1884-12-02
Another Plain Protest Against
the Proposition
TO GRANT THE RIGHT OF WAY.
Some Points fOr. the City Fathers to
Ponder Over Before Taking
Final Action.

able to the city's granting to the Salt
Lake and Fort Douglas railroad the
right of way for a railroad upon the
canal embankment, provided the rail
road representatives would pay a proper
moneyed consideration therefor, (some
$4,000 or $4OOOO), which seemed to be
just to all parties, but further develop
ments showing the unutterable mean
ness of railroads in general, have con-
WINGED me that the City Fathers ought
not to allow the railroad to run on the
bank for any consideration whatever,
no matter what terms are offered. The
only path of safety for a future undis-
turbed water supply for our gardens is
to keep the railroad entirely OFF, and re-
tain in the hands OF the city, the un-
qualified, absolute control OF the canal
in general, and its banks in particular.
Ii we can't control the embankment
we eannotcOntrolt the canal. One OF these
recent developments is the arbitrary
way in which the ID. & r. G. people
(after getting the right to run on the
embankment of the canal for about
mile near its head) went to work to
make the bends of the canal conform to
the curves of the railroad. In doing
this they left large, vertical, high banks
ON the upper side of the canal, instead
of sloping them to a line of repOse as
they were expected to do, and the banks
being high and vertical, or overhanging,
are constantly falling into the canal.
am credibly informed that to ma ke the
upper bank safe for the flow of the
water will require an expenditure of
something over $1,000, as the presence
of the railroad on the embankment pre-
vents scrapers being used, but that s., 600
would make it good if the rails and ties
we're not in the way That the city has
offered to bear half this loss, but the ID.
& r. G.. road refuse TO pay anything,
and a suit must ensue. So here we are
right into trouble through accepting
S., 600 for the use OF a single mile of the
canal grading. The city has lost money al
ready, besides the great future loss OF
being unable to use scrapers SO as TO
scrape the mud out of the canal on to
the embankment, where it ought to be,
to aid and strengthen it year by year,
because the rails and ties are in the
way.
No, stree! The railroad has no bust
ness on the embankment of the canal.
The City Fathers may feel aghast when
they find that they are obliged to scrape
the cleanings of the canal up steep bluffs
and hillsides, TO where they have no
right OF way. and leave them on the
upper side of the canal TO be washed in
again with the first heavy rain.
So will it likely be if the new road is
allowed on the embankment. II was
not made for a railroad and the bends
of the canal into hollows and around
prominences are not adapted for the
curves of a railroad. Moreover, if the
rails and ties are once laid, the sOver-
eighty and absolute control passes to
the railroad and the canal becomes, at
least in part, outside the city control.
They will do according to their own
sweet will; til unavoidable.
The city had much better make do
nation of $4,000 or $4,000 to the pro-
posed railroad to enable it to pay its own
right of way through the farms. than
accept any sum whatever that they
would pay for the road to be laid on the
but as / heard one of our
most prominent citizens recently say, the
untold benefits to the farmers from
the presence of the railroad will be so
great, so much greater than can be des-
cribed in words, that the farmers will
gladly donate the necessary land to the
road for right of wayl II they
will not do this, then untold bene-
fits, described bylone of your benevo-
lenUly inclined correspondents, are all
and untruei Benevolence is
all wrong when we assume to give away
other peoples property l would will !
Ingly myself give hundred dollars to !
aid the proposed road to golhcnestly to
work and build and make its own grade, |
rather than to have my interest as a |
holder of this city in the canal |
in the least degree.
Neither is there anything "Crdel" as /
described by said individual in the City I
Fathers honestly retaining as in duty /
bound. full and undivided control of the 1
canal, and particularly the embankment 1
which has cost so much toll and money /
If the city TO accomplish. The cruelty /
would lie all the other way. 1t would
De and is cruel to even try and wrench
he same out of its legitimate control.
It is only the same kind OF cruelty /
which every honest household exercises
when he locks his door at night, lest
jOme one who wants his prop erty should
come and take il when he is
.ither asleep or dreaming, and that
hey will prove true to their trust and
leep that trust sacredly and firmly to
he own proper use, benefit and behoof
or ever Of the property holders in our
city. Any other course would
'e a great outrage and great injustice
o US and to our children who have vet
o pay the interest and principal OF the
100000 which it took to build the canal.
There are also many legal objections
which l viii not now allude to, but
7hich the City Council may yet have to
meet before the courts in case they
hould be so unwise as to attempt 10
onate or ALLEVIATE away from the
of the city the use of
property in question but for one don't
hink they viii do it or that they are at
II disposed to do so.
Now, if the city's holding any property
hat does not bring in any income, is a
aid reason for transferring the control
f it to somebody else, and the time has
ONE for the city property of that de-
cription TO be given over to others
ses, why speak for the City Hall and
be beautiful corner laid off by ex-MayOr
Attle. There are two others. friends of
nine, who speak for Liberty Park The
pare coins in the Treasurer's hands ]
night be thrown in the street to be {
crambled for by the small boys. {
Co - . ". D. rr-r,rrIc I