Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1896-01-25
7BLBGRAPHIC.
FHE WATER SUPPLY
.,,,onyn IRRIGATION CASE


-
.,...,,yoroy, JAN. 2i.-EE-Pfesl'
,a,,,l,on, 10 his argument before
'l' =. supreme Court, rs sPeo'al
'l' " IN the California irrigation
''l'' ,n hvor Of sustaining the cons'i-
,',. . - Of the Wright sot, slld he
u'''4 .s, tbs,e were few general prln'
' Nv md a few subordinate causes
~. cut OF decisions OF tins su-
..n, Cout. which were applicable 70
\, present case. These he regarded o.
s,,s. The power exercised In Do'h
-. was the same, 1t was the power
ling a portion Of the property o.
y 49,. 49,. fof The use VI the state IL
A.I n "a clear, made clear ny Toh-
w W. ~ ,sci,lons Of this COURT " was
~, w. ~ iaxing power Of the state was
w. 'Nd 'a IN found its only Limitation
's ~. statement of tue Constitution OF
iss Unllpd 5iaiss. -, ..,
~ IN power Of state 10 levy n gen
,,,It,x and provide fot tho levy Of
,..s'6e lax was full and could not DO
,s,iisnseL Ia the mattOr OF THIS
I'D assessment II had always been
',eognlfed that It, absolute equity had
~ ADMITTED, Hs referred 10 steps
,,tsn 10 see what could DO done with
M srli lands, and said these lands
-. yaluslesn without water. Under
iss ofdlnafy LAND laws OF the United
n ,e,, now, he asked, could we ever
rave brought out tneirferiiiilyE llhefo
mu,t be some combination.
sElthtr the power Of the state or the
,eysfnment must interfere, or the
Halted state. through ils public
alsen niufi consent 10 put vast tracts
al these lands into the hands OF indl-
yliuas. IL IL simply = question Of
Vb,ihsf this IL 10 DO In the hands Of a
pnya.e corporation or OF the public.
rpse l. no other way 10 make the
apioholdef independently
Hsisa tcfi, should the water supply
bs In the hands Of . private corpora.
lion. A certain portion Of the stock
should be made Appurtonant 10 the
land 10 be Irrigated, 20 every land
ownef becomes stakeholder In the
lrflgallon company. TIE people who
own the land choose board OF direct.
on and have the management and
conlfol Of tho whole. They are freed
by this participation from the threat or
apprehension OF the control by those
who have no interest In the case. This
legislation was enacted nearly ten
ytan age, and has been consianlly
exercised ever since and copied by
cher staiss."
He regarded As sufficient notice TO
all PARTIES the presentation Of the potl-
ilon and the fixing OF u day upon
Eheh II would DO heard by the board
oisupetvlsots. That gave them ample
time TO make protests. He referred to
number Of decisions OF courts where
Iach notice had been decided TO be
,dtquAis.
10 concluding his remarks, the ex.
Pittldent said II retted with the leRis-
ll'ure, unless restricted by n oonslitu.
llonN pfovision, 10 determine In what
manner the funds should be raised,
lied,
1 NAhAh hlbhs
Counsel on the other side commended
lbh the Wright act took proporty
sl'hous the process OF law because, a.
llll court had said Ia the case OF the
Missouri Pacific railway VI Hume. A.
vas mol within the legitimate scope Of
ihlAuVe power. II was n settled
lnneiple Of law, they commended, and
sH Tue law Of the United States, that
w Hght TO compensation wheneyer
lH'h'e property was taken for public
We, Nn an Incident TO the exercise Of
slu power and lnseparably connected
hu w. Any attempt OF any legisla-
.uia 70 levy Assessments on propefty
ny compensated by special bsnefits. or
10 excess OF such dement's, or moi nro.
p po,uuna.s 70 them, ior the purpose Of
s,u,uuouon OF n public Improvement
W. l,he general public welfare, was
'u .. excess Of legislative power
.uu violation OF the foufteonth
susnumenl. Ii had been argued AZ a
,ea'oh Why the Wright act which had
- ~ mAue ID The statutes referred 10.
nulen were framed In the light NJ
Pshence with the practical op.ra.
wv, 81 We Wight act, strongly ann.
p l, the Argument that the upcon-
imn"s.,aa1l FEATURES OF the act made n
,egcs.. tT's Ior any such law to operate
49,, s,.y, and showed that these
NJ, 'sa'ulea hsd sought to eliminate
VII uucon.lllutlonAl features of the
49, n. Aoi which had given rlse 10 i,s
Topl6 neyeus expressions and which
y, ~ To.k the practical destruction
lon, "W embodying such proyis.
,nr,. AZ was also asserted that tbe
~, 'ine court OF California mad baIa
,s,s.. sy susceptible" was iplsnasd
M, pNole IN their natural state and
,lo" W. W. me only mode OF oonrtnc.
lSs ,u unuet which they could IusiItv
S my ,ne.H,lon Of cities and towns nd
F'VfeIy Incapable of I,rI,.,t 80 ""u