The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1898-12-14
ENERY'S GRIEVANCE
The Desk Sergeant's Complaint
Against Chief Pratt.
MAKES PLAIN STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL REFERS 1T TO
THE POLICE COMMITTEE.
Ordinance Licensing and Taxing
Stock Brokers Passed-East Bench
Canal Controversy Settled-Big
Judgment Claims Paid and Others
Demanding STANDARDIZATION

Demanding Settlement-Pet itions
Another of Chief of Police Pratt's
actions was made known to the city
council last evening. This time the
grievance is from one OF his own sup
porters, protege. David S. Emery,
who, on account of his recently deyel-
oped physical disability, claims that he
is entitled to kind consideration rather
than cold treatment from his superior,
which he considers he received. He
made known his grievance in the fol-
lowing communication to the council,
and as to the merits of the controversy
the public may judge:
"On the oath day of May last l was
confirmed by the city council as desk
/ sergeant in the police department, and
Immediately entered upon the duties of
said office. On or about Oct. 10 L was
taken sick, and desired to go to Cache
valley to consult a physician who had
| been highly recommended to me. l
asked Chief Pratt for leave of absence
for about two weeks, and proffered to
| furnish a competent and reliable sub
Stitute while l was away, who would
divide the salary with me. The chief
gave me leave of absence, but said he
would put on a man himself who would
divide the salary while 1 was away. 1
received one-half the salary for the
balance Of October, but have not re-
ceived anything for November. My
! physician now recommends that l go
to California for a few months, as the
climate there will be beneficial and
materially aid in my recovery.
i renewed my request to the chief
to allow my brother, S. F. Emery, to
take my place until my return. He is
in every way qualified to perform the
duties of the Office and is willing to do
the work and divide the salary with me,
thus enabling me to make the trip for
my health. The chief refuses to allow
my brother to take my place and asks
me to resign, so that he may appoint
some one else in my place.
''I now ask the council for my salary
for the month of November and for
such further action as may be deemed
just and right in this matter"
The matter was referred to the COM
mittee on police for investigation and
report
The amended draft of the ordinance
imposing license tax of $50 a year ON
!. all persons, firms or corporations en-
gagged in the business or profession OF
buying or selling commercial and min
ing stocks, or other stock certificates
was taken up and prepared for pass
age.
Buckle opposed the proposed ordin-
ance on the ground that he believed its
enforcement would result in a fiasco
and if not dead-letter ordinance
would operate against small mercantile
concerns and claim-owners who have
treasury stock to sell.
: Romney did not understand that the
ordinance would apply to any class but
brokers, especially those doing business
! on the curb. 1t was not intended, he
said, to harass those who sell or buy
only their own shares in the course Of
business.
Robertson did not want the big fish
Disseminated against while the little
oneS-the small brokers-thrived. He
believed the ordinance was fair in it.
provisions.
l 1t was clear to Diehl that the purpose
1 was right in taxing the moneymaker,
l who are not now bearing their share o.
4 municipal expenses.
y Fernstrom declared the new ordin
ance was necessary measure to pro
e tect brokers who operate on their owl
1 capital and already pay licenses.
5 Callister was for the ordinance if i
would catch the brokers who do bust
ness on the floor of the mining stool
exchange.
On the passage of the ordinance
e Buckles was the only negative vote.
. THE PARLEY'S CANAL CONTRACT
n The time-worn agitation of the prop
2 osition to renew the contract with tn
! Pleasant View Irrigation company TO
> right of way for the Parley's cana
across the southeast bench came to al
c end by the adoption of the draft O
contract, but in a form modified from
what was recommended by the ir1i
\ cation committee
g Callister and Robertson led the figh
r against the contract as recommends
for execution. The old contract pro
# vided that the city had the option a
q any time, without notice, to abando
q the ditch and turn the water into tn
g Parley's canyon conduit. To now re
a quire six months notice of intende
r abandonment of the open ditch, Cal
,r lister believed was q. dangerous propo
! sition, and he moved to strike out tina
: clause. The motion prevailed by vot
i Buckle, Callister, Diehl, Fernstron
h Robertson, Wallace and Barnes. Noe
IS Howe, Margetts, Morris, Patricl
-. Romney, Siddoway and Weller.
a For the purpose of obtaining at leas
" one privilege for the city and to leav
n no chance for misunderstanding c
- =. mistake, Robertson moved the additio
of clause reserving to the city tn
= right to turn all the city water i
i, Parley's canyon into the conduit {
10 any time, without notice.
;s Margetts contepded that it was cor
iS ceded the city already had this RICH
n and added that the Pleasant Vie
y farmers would not sign the contra1
A. if such rider were put into the il
e strument, but afterward he explaine
= that he meant the contract would nt
" be acceptable to the southeast benches
y if the six months notice clause WEI
re eliminated.
~ Robertsons amendment carried, onI
iy Howe, Margetts, Weller and Barnt
SIS voting in the negative.
g. Barnes offered an amendment to il
Sc sert a clause requiring thirty days n,
r. tice of intention by the city to revol
~ the contract for the Parley's can
IS right of way and maintenance.
m Buckle predicted another dry seasc
tn next summer and thought the adoptic
he Of the amendment would vitiate Il
nd one successfully offered by Robertso
s. Callister contended that it was his
e time the city commenced to abandC
If its open bitches, by which there is sue
es great loss of water in seepage, the
and evaporation. He believed Il
Parley's canal was useless and e.
pensive, so much so that it amount,
to to folly to not abandon it forever. VIII
It he feared most was that the cour
f. would hold that the city had no rig
he to divert the flow of water by aba.
" 'doning the ditch; that if water w
to once turned in under this contract
lie would have to be kept flowing, to t
" city's great disadvantage.
Robertson failed to see why the Pa
ley'S conduit could not be made To