The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1900-12-04
IN A FINE TANGLE
Assortment of Iniunetions ON
Jordan River Dam.
BOOTH ISSUES AN ORDER
DAM CAN NEITHER BE OPENED
NOR CLOSED.

The contest nov going on between
the canal companies Of salt Lake coun-
" and the power company al the dam
in the oJrdan Narrows as to whether
the dam shall be open or closed, in
creases in interest every hour. Added
TO the conflict between the different in
terests there is now an apparent con-
fict between the courts. With an in
junction from one court to prevent the
closing of the dam and an injunction
from another court of equal power to
prevent the opening of the dam, the
pathway of the law-abiding citizen in
that neighborhood is not very straight
or clear.
Judge John f. Booth of the Fourth
judicial district in court at Provo yes
terday issued a temporary restraining
order in favor of Utah county farmers
20 prevent the closing of the Jordan
river dam, on the ground that the lands
of these farmers were in danger of
being flooded from the waters OF Utah
lake The effect of this order from
Judge Booth if enforced viii be TO pre-
vent any stopDage of the water at the
dam in the Jordan river.
on the other hand Judge Ogden Hiles
OF this district granted an injunction
Two weeks ago to prevent the power
company from removing pianks put in
the dam by the canal companies of this
county for the purpose of impounding
the water in the lake This injunction
was not operative until Saturday, when
the canal companies put up the $4,000
bond required by the court.
Here then is presented d direct con
flict of authority. If Judge Booths or
der is enforced the dam cannot be
closed; if Judge Hiles injunction is en-
forced the dam cannot be opened.
Question of Boundary.
No doubt this phase of the matter
Will resolve itself into contest as to
the location of the dam in question and
as to which court has jurisdiction in
the matter. There is some question as
10 the boundary line between the cOun-
ties at that point and it seems TO be
the general Impression that Utah cOun-
" has about quarter OF a mile the
best Of the argument. In other words il
is thought that the county line is about
that far this side of the dam. If this
should prove TO De the case then Judge
Booth would have the jurisdiction, as
Utah and Salt Lake counties are in
different judicial districts
Provo Case.
The suit brought yesterday before
Judge Booth on behalf of the Utah
county farmers. set for hearing on the
that if the dam is IN Utah county the
order OF Judge Booth VIII become eff
fectfVe at once and remain effective I'M
I'll after the case is 'ided- Should
that be the outcome - carry the
matter over to the time ", the Utah
commission takes pOssessi4 -of the
dam and the canal companies of this
county relinquish their authority.
The suit was brought by George T.
Peay ana his wife. Annie NJ. Peay,
and is against Salt Lake City and Ger
tain canal companies of Salt Lake
county, asking that they be restrained
from closing the gates of Jordan river
and thereby stopping the flow of water
from Utah lake. The plaintiffs aIlege
that they are property owners near
the shores of Titan lake and that if the
waters of Utah lake De raised above a
certain point the compromise point,
their lands viii be inundated and much
damaged Plaintiffs further allege that
according to an agreement entered into
10y defendants and certain Utah county
people the waters of Utah lake should
be permitted to freely flow through the
Jordan river between Oct. I and March
4, but that on Dec. 1 the flow of water
was stopped by the defendants
Plaintiffs also allege that the defend
ants have no right to raise the waters
of Utah lake above the compromise
point and that while the waters may
not be above compromise point on
March 1, yet if there be excessive
SHOWS in the mountains during the
winter the waters would rise to such
an extent. by reason Of the head gates
of Jordan river being close during the
winter, that the plaintiffs lands would
be inundated Plaintiffs have furnish
ed bond for $4,000, Provo Commercial
* Savings Bank being the bOndsmen.
Attorneys John 3. Miner and NJ. NJ.
Warner are attorneys for the plaintiff