The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1898-06-07
Writ of Mandate Issued Directed to
Judge NOrrell
TO SIGN THE FINDINGS
SUBSTANTIALLY AS SUBMITTED
BY PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL.
Jury Returns a Sealed Verdict In
Powers VS.. Clas-The County War
rant Case Still Goes On-Wasatka
Receivers Observation-Disclosures
Court Cuttings.

The supreme court yesterday handed
down an opinion in the matter of the
petition of the North Point Console
dated Irrigation company against the
Utah & Salt Lake Canal company ct
al, for an order directing Judge Nor
rell to sign the findings of fact and
conclusion of law prepared by the
plaintiffs counsel The case was tried
before Judge Norrell, who found the
issues for the defendants. The SUI
preme court, on appeal, reversed the
trial court. The plaintiff and defend
ants then presented certain findings
to Judge Norrell, who, holding that
those presented by the defendants
were in accordance with the ruling of
the supreme court, signed them. This
did not satisfy counsel for the plain
tiff, who claimed that their findings
conformed to the supreme courts de-
ciSion, and that the others did not,
and they filed the application for a
peremptory writ of mandamuS to COM
pei the trial judge to sign their find
ings.
The opinion, which was written by
Chief Justice Zane and concurred in
by Justice Miner and District Judge
Johnson, orders the writ to issue and
directs the trial judge to sign the
findings of fact and conclusions of law
practically as submitted by the plain
tiffS.
The supreme court found in sub
stance that the surplus canal was con-
structed by the Utah & Salt Lake Ca
nal company to take surplus water to
the River Jordan in time of high wa
ter; that the Utah & Salt Lake Canal
company made an agreement on Feb.
q, 1856, with the plaintiffs predecessor
in interest, by which the plaintiff was
permitted to take water from the ca
nal for irrigation purposes, and the
North Point Canal company and its
successors in interest continued to use
the same until 1892, when it became
so befouled by alkaline drainage wa
ter as to be unfit for use, and abso-
lutely destructive to crops, and so
deadly in nature that it killed horses
and cattle which drank of it; that the
discharge Of drainage water into plain
tiff'S system conveyed 300 tons Chem
ically dry weight) of deliterious matter
every "a hours into the plaintiffs sys-
tenn. The court also found that the
defendant canal companies, by a Sc
ries of irrigation bitches and canals,
conveyed large quantities of water
from the Jordan river to the south
west portion of the county upon min
eraliZed lands, and that the water was
allowed to spread over said lands and
by the defendants was conveyed
through an artificial system of drains
into chain of lakes, known as Decker
lake, White lake, Hunter lake and
others, and after collecting the water
in the lakes, the defendants conveyed
the same into the surplus canal of
plaintiffs system. The system of
drainage was first constructed by, the
defendants in 1856, after the plaintiff
had secured its rights under a written
agreement. The drainage system was
enlarged in 1892, and since then, the
supreme court found the water was
entirely unfit for irrigation purposes
and was public and private nuisance.
The court further found that the city
and county of Salt Lake owned the
surplus canal, subject to the rights Of
the plaintiff.
The decision enjoins the Utah & Salt
Lake Canal company, the South Jor-
dan Canal company and the county
and city of Salt Lake from draining or
conducting any drainage, seepage or
surplus water from lands irrigated by
any or either of the defendants, into
the surplus canal or White lake, and
that the defendants, the Utah & Salt
Lake Canal company and the North
Jordan Irrigation company, shall i'm
mediately fill up the drain ditch from
Decker'S lake to White lake and the
surplus canal, and that a peremptory
writ issue against all defendants.
An action for damages will now. in
all probability be instituted by the
plaintiff.