The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1899-04-05

ments at points of division of streams.
Because this had not been done many
rights had been lost toSadverse claim
ants. In the Dudler case, recently de-
cided against the city, the gunnysack
method of dividing water was respon-
sible for the adverse decision. When
ever it was proposed to use modern
and accurate methods Of dividing the
flow of water in streams along which
individuals have rights with the city,
the council placed on it the seal of dis
approval, and for these undesirable
conditions he believed the irrigation
department is to be blamed.
1.-THE engineers communication" in
terpoSed Callister, Ifs too sarcastic and
too personal toward the watermaster."
Patrick wanted to be fair and con-
sistent, and moved, as an amendment.
that the engineers communication be
referred to the committee on irriga ton
for. investigation and report. He re-
GREETED the apparent jealousy between
Engineer Kelsey and Watermaster
Seldom, but he maintained that his
motion was the only fair and prudent
way 10 dispose OF the matter.
Il believe Councilman Patrick does
not understand the situation" sug-
gested Councilman Howe. TT is only
a few weeks ago he added, that the
city engineer presented a communica-
ton here attacking the irrigation COM
mittee and the watermaster."
THAT is absolutely false was Rob-
ertson's warm declaration.
The vote was then taken on Patrick S
amendment to refer, resulting in eight
noes and six ayes. Allen, Buckle.
Diehl, Patrick, Robertson and Wallace
voted in the affirmative.
On the original melton made by
Fernstrom, Allen voted with the ma
joriity, making 3 to 8 for referring the
unwelcorhe communication back to the
city engineer.
ANOTHER BLAST AT ENGINEER.
In receiving the report of the irriga-
ton committee relating to the engi-
neer's protest against renewal of the
contract with the Pleasant View ditch
owners and the wateTTnaster' recon-
mendation favoring the action, Engi-
neer Kelsey was the recipient of an
other blasting.
In a. faceltious vein Buckle moved, as
a test of the good faith of the anti
Kelsey councilmen, that the report be
referred back to tine committee, be-
cause it was couched in too sarcastic
and too personal terms against the en-
gineer.
Instead of Buckles motion prevailing,
consideration of the report went over,
on Callister's request, under the nules,
for one week. However, there will be
no need of taking up the subject then,
inasnuch as the contract referred to in
the report was ratified later in the ses-
sion.
The irrigation committees report was
as follows:
I'VE, your committee on irrigation,
beg leave to report as follows in the
matter of the communication from the
city engineer and superintendent of ir-
rigation regarding the retention by the
city of the Parley'S creek canal: Your
committee has already made several re-
ports on this matter, and the city coun-
Gil has decided to retain the said ca
nal. The report of the committee that
was the direct cause for the submission
of this, to say the least, most remark
able communication of the city engi-
neer, was merely to change a phase of
the contract which had been drawn by
the city attorney and adopted by the
council.
1--WE think that the engineers COM
munication was entirely uncalled for,
and is certainly most discourteous
one to the council as a whole, and to
this committee especially. We would
not desire to prevent any citizen, as
such, from protesting against the action
of the council or of any committee in
any matter. but we do object to any
officer of the city, as such officer, being
allowed to submit such an arrogant
communication to the council as the one
referred to, which not only assume to
protest against the action of the coun-
ell, as a whole. but also accuses mem