The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-04-04
The Proceedings.


The Proceedings.
The convention was called to order at
10 o'clock.
Rev. S. G. Dodd. chaplain at Fort
Douglas. was invited to offer prayer.
Miller. of Sewer, offered a petition
for prohibition from Ellen Atkin and
1875 other women of Salina. Lauritz
Larsen. of Sanpete. presented one from
G. n. Lund and 172 others of that coun-
ty. Both referred.
Personal Privilege.
Driver arose to a question of per-
sonal privilege. He said derogatory re-
marks had been made during the last
few days regarding the courage or
those who were voting for woman sur
frage. He and only one other (Evans)
Of the delegation from Weber county
were standing by the platforms of the
two parties. The other gentleman had
gone UP to a mass meeting in ogden
the night before and had been insult
ed. He wanted to protest against an
attempt on the part of some 400 per-
sons trying to represent the peopIe
Of Weber county, which has 10000 IN
habitants. This was not proper. This
crowd had even gone to such a length
as to attempt to condemn the Whole
convention because of its action on
woman suffrage. He said he is not
fanatic. Those who know him will bear
evidence of this. But if he We're left
alone by the Weber county delegation
he would stand for the rights OF the
women of his county and of the ter
ritory. He said the Weber delegation
had come down unanimously favoring
suffrage and now only two were left.
He wanted to show what mobs were
doing.
Eichnor-Does anybody doubt the
gentleman's sincerity or honesty?
Driver said no. but he wanted to
show how sentiment had been worked
up. He read the resolutions printed
in The Herald and said he would
neither recognize the meeting nor pay
attention to the resolution
Evans said the gentleman need not
feel bad about the meeting. A MAJOR
ity there were woman sufTragists.
These adjourned and only a minority
held the meeting and passed the reso-
lutions.
The convention then took up the re-
nainder of the bill of rights where 1t
had left off when the woman suffrage
question was taken UP. The amend
ment of the judiciary committee on
1uries was presented by Evans ana
adopted.
Eminent
Richards again brought on the fght
over making payment before taking
land under the right of eminent do
main. He proposed an amendment
whereby the compensation should be
secured in advance. He said the pro-
vision was in accordance with the con-
stitution of thirty-siX states. 1t mad
been said that the prior payment pro-
vision was in the interest of the poor
man. but he could imagine cases
where farmers might want to build an
irrigating ditch and be stopped because
of some large corporation, which Wouio
demand an exorbitant prior pdynien'
for lands over which the ditch must go:
Evans said the provision shouIo
simply be that private property should
not be taken for public purposes With
out due compensation. The manner
and time of paying could and should be
left to the legislature. He is not cor
poration lawyer. Most OF MS practlce
has been against corporations; out
thev should have equal rights before
tI1e law He had never heard OF men
being oppressed under our laws. Cor
norations do not court law suits. Ehey
will greatly prefer making just COM
nensation to having litigation on their
hands. Such an unyielding provision
as that which makes prior payment
necessary would seriously retard the
building up of the territory
BENEFITS Not Counted.
Kinbal. of Weber, offered the fol-
lowing substitute:
private property shall not be taken
for public use or damaged Wlthoue
inst compensation as determined Dg q
i1rv which shall be paid as soon DIS -
can be ascertained and before posses
sion is taken. No beneht which nc
occI,,e 70 the owner as result Oh an
;,r,nrovement made by any private cor
nora ion shall be considered IN ilAlhs
~ CONDENSATION for property taheh
or damaged" .~,o,,+
was by far the best mat na9 neGti
offered. It had the true ring. Ihis -
a serious question. Men must haEe
g. 1ioh+ to live. The other amend
rlie were simply threshing over old
e+raw which had been Thoroughly
+braebad in committee of the whole.
he did not care how summary pro-
aaadino might be decided upon in order
tbet enterprises might not be retarded.
R,,t no matter how great may De TIE
mower the law should say Pay IN ao-
vance for the property or hanos Oh.
lanes asked if he knew OF any IN
stance where a railroad had takea
nroperty without paying for 1t.
Righteous Corporation.
Thurman said he knew a case wnere
man had been offered $500 for MS
nronertv. Rather than go to law ne
offered to take $500 though protesting
that the property was worth more. AT
length the iIry compelled the righteous
oor1orations to give 81, 500. To take a
mans property without his consent is
bad enough. To take it without nrst
payment is an outrage. Hard casn is
better than gilt-edged security. One pre-
sents certainty. the other uncertainty
At any time a railroad line is Hke!y
to be run through a mans house. 1t
will be torn down and the ground he
used. Then the bond may prove WORTH
less Then where will the man who is
injured find his compensation?
Maloney said KimbalPs amendment
was copied from South Dakota, where
it was given full trial and had proved
lust both to the railroads and the peo-
ple. He wanted men to be fully COM
pensated before being deprived OF their
lands and houses.
Utah County's Fix.
Greer said in Utah county there was
a neculiar condition. Two railroads
, :. rim diagonally through valuable
nrouerty and a third was being pro-
iected. He believed that Kimbalrs
amendment would be fully protective,
as il would strike out the considera-
ton of accruing benefit from the line.
Cannon favored Evans amendment
He said there was always a class of
mon who would try to defeat "a rail-
road or any other public Improvement
which might go onto their lands. This
would retard improvement. The whole
matter should be left to the legislature.
so that if the provisions on this point
ebo,1Id nrova unjust there would be an