Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1898-02-12
An ASTOUNDING DECISION.
lreparabIe Disaster 10 Many People viii be
the Result.

Salt Lake city, Feb. 70, 1898

Salt Lake City. Feb. u, 1898.
To the Editor:
Government by injunction" has be-
come trite phrase in the American
vernacular. The judicial arm of our
government system has become potent
in manner not contemplated when
the nation was organized. The power
of injunction was vested in courts for
the protection of the citizen, to pre-
vent injustice and arrest the force OF
might when exercised against right.
But of late years that power has been
extended far beyond the sphere which
to the common mind appears to be
legitimate. This has caused the wide
spread feeling which has found ex-
preston in the words which commence
this communication.
Government by injunction is not the
only form in which the rightful au-
thority of courts may be perverted.
1njunctions are issued not infrequently
when the conditions complained of do
not warrant such methods of proceed
ure. and when the judicial mind Is
warped by bias or is but partly in
formed as to the facts. great injustice
is sometimes the consequence. The
utmost care. patience and fairness
ought to be exercised by the judiciary
when invoked to stretch forth its
mighty arm, in order 10 prevent an in
dividual, an association or corpora
ton from exercising those rights and
privileges which are necessary to its
proper liberty. If not to its very exist
ence. Such extreme force should never
be set in motion when milder means
may he employed in the support of JUS
tice and the promotion of equity
decision rendered by
the Supreme court of Utah. a week ago,
which has occasioned SO much amaze
ment and alarm among a host of agri-
cultursts. as to call FOR a protest from
the general public. While 1t is con-
coded that the decisions of courts
should he regarded with respect, and
that, when final, they must be
obeyed, yet 1t must he admitted
that they are open to public criticism,
and that when they effect Il manifest in
justice, they may become objects of
public Indignation. 1t must not be for
gotten that every department of our
government Is for the public service.
The whole system Is n creation of the
people, by the people and for the people.
The judicial. as well as the executive
and the Legislative branches, is amen
able to the power that created it.
THE divinity that doth hedge a king
forms no halo around the judge more
than about the legislator or the execu-
tive officer. v N'n people are hurt, they
may cry on ln matter from whence
comes the injury: and when wrong is
perpetrated ii may be lawfully exposed
and popularity denounced. In referring
to the case in point, then, no law is
thereby violated and no public offense
is committed. Any one has a right to
dissent from n ruling of a court to
show its errors, to deplore its effects
and to voice public opinion as to it's
80 y. -.
circles, as well as among the masses
Of the people who are acquainted with
the facts, is that the decision was an
egregious blunder; the sufferers call II
IA terrible outrage"
The North Point Consolidated Irriga-
ton Co. some time ago sued for an
injunction against the Utah and Salt
Lake company. the South Jordan Canal
company, the North Jordan Irrigation
company, the city of Salt Lake and
the county of Salt Lake, to prevent
the maintenance of drain ditch which
had been constructed to carry off the
natural drainage and seepage from the
higher lands in the southwestern and
western parts of the county, through
Hunter. Silver, burst, Potter, Decker
lakes into the White lake. and also
to prevent the use for similar purposes
of the Surplus canal, running from the
nelghborhood of Twelfth South street.
White Lake. and thence on towards
the Salt Lake. The complaining COM
pany claimed n right to the use of the
water from the surplus canal, by vir-
tue of an alleged grant from the sur
plus canal company to the North Point
Canal company, the predecessor of the
plaintiff. for irrigation purposes. and
also that the lands watered by the sys-
tenn used by plaintiff had been dam
aged and rendered worthless because
of mineral substances carried through
the drainage ditch and the Surplus
canal, which have become a public
nuisance. 1t was contended also by the
plaintiff company that the Surplus
canal was constructed for irrigation
purposes rather than for drainage; also
that the drainage ditch on the west
had been enlarged since the time of the
alleged grant from the Surplus canal
company to the North Point Irrigation
company. The purpose in view in the
planting of this suit was to recover
damages said to have been caused by
the deposits of alkaline matter on the
lands watered by the irrigation system
of the plaintiff company.
The defendant companies denied the
existence of any legal grant to the