Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1895-10-05


uss the arid region, where so great
uy,a,,ion OF the land Is suscepuole OF
asnl,ure, " the land can be ifrigatev'
49, well be said, in view oil tne gu
u nectiliarities and the topograpnl.
niau .,,;bution Of land and waters, that
ca Jpesislature Is acting for the pupile
ing in making provisions Tor supply
,hc money, forming neighborhoous
he the state with water. Indeed,
s sum, Of the climate and arid soil OF
~ Wy" Iii of the country land Tor ms
ins climate and soil may be properly
oDls.fiss,edl. IL Is safe to say that a supply
eYns s's,er Tor such a use may be that
Or the legislature may decide " 10
Ens onblic use or private. The supply
De, ,"ater 10 a tract Of aid agficultur.
w ,d though OF many thousands OF
,aj IL extent, " occupied by single
aeIss ,is,or. would be ior his private
ppe, and not a public use; yet the
ptne" ,,aet of land might be SO sub
ssnS S.d and held in individual proprie-
oN' ss,n az 10 render the supply oi water
rublic instead Of private use
-, necessary that the entire puDiic
u s,iov the use, as even that II be
ms n. thereof but the use must De
.apssis of enjoyment by oil who may be
.ap.in mat neighborhood, and there
A''' Nv, no within that neighborhood 50
wv, !, runber of the entire public as
FJss,,oy lis character as private use.
me, not close this paper without
..s,,nv TO a class Of cases that are
.sinsans 10 the irrigation district
auas These cases are known as the
lS,'i,,se reclamation cases, and a num-
,hcm have been decided by the
o ", Court OF the United States.
as 10 that court nom different
ss,es OF the union, aud that
eonn has uniformly held in these
49, that where any consider
. NJ tract Of land, owned by different
sssons l. In condition precluding
,,i,iya,ion BY reason Of excessive mois.
~ which drains would relieve, II may
Iii he said that the public have such
an interest IN the improvement aud the
ssnssnuent advancement OF the general
,o,s,est of the locality, as will JUST y the
iayy M assessments upon the owners for
drainage purposes
The ndnciple decided In these cases
..a as | claim. identical with that In the
;,,i,aiion district cases. But II will be
n',,rsJ that In these cases the conditions
"f the land are reversed. In the drain
,gc cases cultivation OF the land Is
p5eyented by the reason OF excessive
mosure. while upon the other hand In
Inc Irrigation cases cultivation is pre-
vented by the reason oil excessive
andity. but in each class Of cases the
cultivation OF the land within district
4 pfeeluded. And II anything this is
more entirely so within the irrigation
districts. For, in the reclamation dis.
tticts grass will grow and thousands oil
ltors can be raised to the acre; while
upon the other hand, In the dry aud arid
lands Of the Irrigation districts, without
Inc artificial application Of water Il
iakes at least ten acres Of land TO sup
port one hundred toads.
Again II is argued that the decisions in
the drainage cases were principally based
upon the consideration tnat the health
OF the public would be benefited and
that no such consideration eau enter
into the irrigation cases. But upon a
close examination OF the drainage cases.
Il will be found that in the great majority
Of them, the property was not taxed Tor
the benefit Of any public use TO keep
any public from getting sick, because
there was no public In the vicinity; but
purely and simply for the benefit OF the
property owners who In many cases
we're not even residents. TINS Is so
from the very nature Of the conditions