Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1890-11-11

and, In .itnsns s-f..l-z - =.
much. fresh vs<55' >.5 :19~SxcE
upon tho a1r<sce. 4 <s =. % .
serve e extinct the ~ ~ onIy
meath and deposit Il orfsnch mn p
ms process might 70 on ~. Is
uniess the level OF the iafa $3.50 ssss
have some very remarAatis snouid
t SJLsu cnange, aud even then II would
ssne ages 70 extract the salt from ths
soli 70 such a degree that the iand.
mosiu oe, susceptible OF cuI.ivat;on
anu crop bearing. The water $500
IN Tue wells on this land evijsn.,.
couia not have come FINN, ~,
ponds, for the reason that Az
san SAT- had already been collected In
.ne ponds, and the water, at that
une, sun remained in them. carried
tue lighter salt, and would rsof hsya
gwen the test that the water in
Inese wells did give according 70
rroi. Jones' statement. Therefors
ne oeneved this water was dir,
seepage from the Great Salt I.aIa
Major Bird-Do you know OF anv
ANUS OF like description to those
now Ia dispute that have had the
waters OF the Great Salt Lake cut of
from them and yet are raising sal,
from the fresh waters of Irritation
anu the rains and SHOWS?
Mr.. Ihompson-Obiected In M
leading, immaterial and Irrelevant
Major Bird-We want TO protect
ourselves simply as to its being lend.
Ing, ana We deny that. The hal
ance OF the objection can 90 for
what 1t is worth. We will Allow,
the Registrar and Receiver to draw
their own conclusions as to its com.
potency.
Witness answering the question,
II DO, and the land that l refer 10
Is called, 1 believe, the Frank Dyer
claim, absrt three and n half miles
70 The nearest point Of the lake.
10 other questions, witness said
the land now In dispute was SUBJ
yect to and overfiowed by fresh water
from the Jordan River very IRE.
queatly, in fact. whenever the river
was high and the surplus water let
Town 70 itfor the purpose Of reliev-
ing the same. The effect Of this
water upon the land, asfar as shown,
was TO raise the salt and alkali to the
surface, whefsit could be seen at the
present day. From practical ob.
servation and from his knowledge
of its present elevation he knew
that it could got be flooded by the
Great salt Lake except at extreme
nigh water. He believed there
We're less chances FOR the reclama-
ton OF the lands in dispute than of
the Dyer lands just referred TO.
They carried so much salt that, in
his opinion, not all the waters of
Utah could ever reclaim them
should the lake keep its normal con-
ditiou. On the occasion OF his visits
to these lands witness saw parties
employed making salt. After the
salt was taken from the surface il
was in a wet aud muddy state. He
made his examination for Jeremy
& Co. ny =
Questioned as to the quality OF the
water flowing from the artesian
well, witness said the only examin-
alton he made of Il was by tasting,
but that was sufficient, he consid-
cred, 10 condemn the water forever,
either for drinking purposes or for
irrigation, as it carried some salt.
The quantity, besides, was not sufIi-
cient for any irrigation whatever.
There was no vegetation growing
Around the well.
AS TO these lands being dry and
aril (as had been declared byAlfred
Thompson and others in their affi-
davits) witness said-It strikes me
that there is more water there than
land.
Major Bird-In the same affida-
wits the same parties also swore that
there were no salines upon the land
now in dispute. Is that true?
Witness (emphaticallyEItis not,
and could not have been at that
time.
Inquiry proceeding.l