The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-03-26

Tie SAINT lOOllIlS DIS SuIIOuIlQluS SCdlCS.
Maloney, of Weber. was against
striking this out. He said the provision
was a good one, being included in
other constitutions. and he thought
Utah should offer as good a field for
investment as any other state.
Thurman objects.
Variant withdraw the motion.
Thurman objecti That is a good
amendment.
Thurman said he admitted there
were many foreign investors in the ter
ritory. There may be one gentleman
of Liverpool who had $350.O00 in Salt
Lake. But under what circumstances
had this been done? Had there been
such a provision? No. The whole
matter should be left to the legisla-
ture. 1t could be fully trusted to make
no distinction except when public nee
essity demanded it. When that occa-
sion should arise then the legislature
should have full power in order to
guard the interests of the state.
Varian's motion was carried by
vote of 40 to AZ and the section went
out. 1t read: mo distinction shall
ever be made by law between resi-
dent aliens and citizens as to the pos
session, taxation. enjoyment or de-
scent of property"
Injuries From Street Grading.
There was still some discussion over
the question of paying damages for
property injured by street grading,
brought up Intentionally by Thurman,
who moved that it be made necessary
for public corporations to pay for
property before it is used for public
property. During the discussion Eich-
nor said to leave the provision provid-
ing judgment for damages would re-
suit in bankrupting this city, on ac-
count Of street grades that have been
made necessary. Varian said in the
matter of damages courts would con-
slider benefits derived by property own
ers as set offs to damages. Pierce
called up the State street grade and
said it was a shame that no one could
get damages for the injury they had
received from the raising of the street
above their property. Richards said
that the public which secures advan-
tages from a street grading should be
willing to pay for all damages sus-
tanned by property owners over and
above the benefits they derived from
the grading.
Pay Up in Advance.
There was a somewhat lengthy dis
cussion over Humans proposition
making payment in advance necessary
when property is taken for public pur-
poses. Thurman made a short speech,
in which he said there was grave in
justice of making men wait for years
before they receive compensation for
property taken by corporations. He
thought that when thing was to be
done an appraiSement could be made
up and the owner given his value be
fore his property was taken from h.in.
Richards made the chief speech
against the amendment He said 1T
would work great injustice to railroad
companies in particular, and all other
companies which are making great
public improvements. because when
right of way was demanded by COM
pany many property owners demand a
compensation which is several times
greater than the value of their prop
erty.
He said railroad companies do not
look two years ahead when they are
making their plans. They want to
build at once when they have the
money. Yet under the present system
two or three years are used up before
the courts fix the true value of the
property taken. Should companies be
compelled to wait until this DE done?
Should the railways be left unbuiltI
He thought the matter should be left
to the legislature, which could be de-
pended upon to secure compensation
to property owners by good laws.
This view was supported by Goodwin,
Van Horne, James, Murdoch, Of Wa
satch, Eichnor and Boyer.
Rights to Homes.
Thurman said every man should be
protected in the use or mis- property.
A man might have a lot. 1t might be
his home. 1t might be his all. A rail-
road company might stake off his lot
and tell him to get off and await the
slow process of law. In the courts he
will have to meet the companies, where
they can have every advantage. They
have attorneys paid by the year and,
if delay is advantageous, they can Sc
cure it. If they are compelled to pay
for property before they can use 1t,
they will see that their cases are set
tied They will perhaps find it to their
antage to pay little higher price
than they think just and give poor
man payment for his property, so that
he can live.
Thurman was ably supported by
Snow, Evans, of Utah, and Cunning
ham, of Utah.
The matter finally narrowed down to
a selection between two substitutes, by
Howard of Emery, and Richards, of
Salt Lake. The former was accepted
by Thurman and reads as follows:
Private property shall not be taken
for public use without just compensa-
ton first made; and no private pro-
perty shall be damaged for public
use without just compensation. to be
determined by competent tribunal
Richards substitute was as follows:
Private property shall not be taken
or damaged for public use without just
compensation first made or paid into
court for the owner
The Howard substitute carried by an
overwhelming majority.
Right of Way.
Varian moved to strike out section
"a, which reads:
Sec. 24-Private property shall not be
taken for private use unless by consent
of the owner, except for private ways
of necessity, and for reservoirs. drains,
fumes, or bitches, on or across the
lands of others, for agricultural, min
ing, milling, domestic or sanitary pur-
poses. and in no case shall such pro-
perty be taken without due compensa-
ton.
He said he did not object to the idea
conveyed by the beginning of the Sec
tion. But he certainly did object to
the exceptions. He said the scope was
too broad altogether. 1t encroached
upon vested rights in property and the
convention could i'll afford ITO sanction
such thing as that. He did not care
so far as mining went. That he was
we'll satisfied about. But there was no
need of a provision. 1t is we'll settled
throughout the mining region that
mining use is a public use. However,
he did not want to extend the right to
private ways. The courts already
recognized that doctrine sufficiently.
To open a mans land for water
bitches for agricultural as we'll as for