The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1901-11-10

A WATER suit that, for the mag
a nitude OF the interests and for
the number Of people involved
VII take rank as one of the greatest
IN the history of this country, was
practically decided upon in this city
yesterday, when the presidents of the
Tour great Salt Lake valley canal COM
panies and officers of Salt Lake CITY
informally agreed TO bring suit against
al the people and corporations that
have appropriated water from the
streams flowing into Utah lake since
the waters of that lake were apDr0-
priated by the canal companies men
uoned twenty to thirty years ago.
Some idea Of the magnitude of this
Impending suit may be obtained from
lie statement that it viii involve as
ueIerdants all the canal companies, all
the individuals and all the cities and
towns that have in thirty years ap-
prOpriated water from the Provo river.
the Spanish Fork. Big Spring creek,
Little Spring creek and ali the other
streams that naturally would flow into
Utah lake
At the meeting yesterday, held in
the Office of President Angus NJ. Can
non. there were present Mr.. Cannon as
the president OF the South Jordan Ca
nal company and chairman Of the
BOARD Of canal presidents; William Nc
Lachlan, president of the Utah & Salt
Lake Canal company; James Jensen,
president of the East Jordan Irriga-
ton company; William H. Haigh.
president Of the North Jordan Canal
company; City Engineer L. c. Kelsey,
and Attorneys Franklin S. Richards,
Frank b. Stephens. John N. Cannon
and E A. WedgewOOd The North JOr-
u a II Al
that was not represented by an at
torney.
Subject Thoroughly Discussed.
This matter OF bringing suit has been
under discussion by representatives, of
the different companies and their at
torneys for some time past. The dis
cuSsiOn yesterday was informal and
the whole ground was gone over with
unusual care. The unanimous opinion
was that the canal companies had
certain rights which should be pro-
tectel," and the decision of the canal
companies was 10 bring suit to recover
and protect these rights. No plan of
campaign was decided upon at the
meeting, and another meeting viii be
held at the same place at O'Clock
Tuesday afternoon mex TO take formal
action in the matter and agree upon a
course Of procedure. The action of the
canal presidents viii be ratified by the
salt Lake City council on Tuesday
evening and a resolution viii be
.sdcpted in harmony with the action
aiken. All four canal companies and
the corporation of Salt Lake City win
be made plaintiffs to the suit
Question at Issue.
The chief poiht that viii be at issue
IN this great lawsuit is as to whether
or not Utah lake is a reservoir within
the meaning of the law, and upon this
point TIE whole case win hinge. If it
can be established by the canal COM
panies of this valley that the lake is a
reservoir. the case viii be won and
the people in Utah county viii be
deprived Of the use of much % the
water Of all the streams flowing into
the lake. If this point is lost, it is
feared there are serious times ahead
for the people who depend upon Jor-
dan river and Utah lake for their irri-
cation water.
The history leading up TO the pres
ent situation is briefly this, Thrift
years ago or more the canal cOmpan es
of this valley and Salt Lake City APP
propriated all the water of the Jordan
river. A few years later the farmers
realized that in 2 time of drouth the
river would not supply enough water
for their use unless il were held back
in the spring. To accomplish this pur-
pose the companies built a dam across
the Jordan river near its outlet from
the lake fo~ the purpose of holding the
water back in the lake. In this way,
they hold. the lake was concerted into
q reservoir
Next came the farmers living around
the shores of Utah lake who held that
they were heavily damaged by the