The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1901-05-05
JORDAN WATER CASE
DECIDED BY MORSE
Rights OF All Parties are
Adjudicated.
AGAINST POWER PLANT
ITS PETITION FOR INJUNCTION
rs DENIED.

decision was delivered yesterday
by Judge Morse in the big wafer case
Of Salt Lake city and the several canal
cOmPanies>tal1ing water from Utah lake
through Jordan river against the Jor-
dan Narrows Power company and
other claimants to portions of the
rivers flow. IN the decision the rights
of all the parties to the. case. are deter
mined as to the exact amount OF water
to which each is entitled. Vested rights
and priorities are recognized. the mu-
nfcipality and the principal canal COM
panies being awarded all that they
claimed. AS to the power company, it
is awarded a portion of the flow. Under
certain contingencies, but its rights as
against the city must be more dedniteIy
determined in a case yet to be decided.
Its petition for an Injunction restrain
ing the city from cutting off the flow
is denied.
The judgment is a distinct victory
for Salt Lake City in particular, which
IS awarded everything it cOntenQed for,
according to Attorney f. S. Richards.
VINO, with c. S. Narian, appeared as
counsel for the municipality at the trial
of the issues
This case is probably the most i'm
pQrtant Of any action ever tried in the
Ugah courts affecting water rights.
} Nearly 100 water claimants corpora
( tons and individuals were parties to
the ease, all seeking to have their re-
spectiVe titles quieted as against each
other. the trial commenced on Jan.
IA and lasted smith March Is and dur
nag the torty-one court days l75 wit
neSSeS were examined. The entire sec
| ond week in April was occupied with
the arguments. 1t was certainly the
longest trial in the record of Utah jur-
ISprudence, and probably more costly
than any other water trial the daily
expense being estimated at the rate of
| $1,000, including attorneys fees. Very
! many of the most prominent Lawyers
! Of the state participated in the trial. In
ali prOba blity the supreme court will
be called upon TO pass upon the case
before the judgment OF Judge Morse be
comes effective.
While the interests of all the princi-
| pal canal companies are Identical with
! those of Salt Lake City, only the Utah
q SAT- Lake. Canal company would Join
( the city iIr commencing the suit and
4 hence it became necessary for the Two
plaintiffs to make the South Jordan Ca
nal company, the North Jordan IrTiga-
I ton company and the East Jordan Ir-
I rigatiOn company defendants with the
! Salt Lake City Water & Electrical
I Power company, commonly known as
/ the Jordan Narrows Power company.
| The other defendants and the complain
/ take water from the river below the
( headgateS of the large canals, and
some of the parties TO the case were
/ claimants and appropriations of pOr-
tons OF the river flow as far back as the
/ year 1850.
Finding of the Court.
After reCiting the findings of fact
with elaborate particularly, Judge
/ Aorse'S decision declares that Salt
/ Lake City, the Utah & salt Lake Canal
/ company, the East Jordan Irrigation
/ company, the South Jordan Canal COM
! pany the North Jordan Irrigation COM
] pany are entitled to a decree awarding
] them, subject to the limitations set
/ forth below, the right to the use OF all
/ OF the waters OF the Jordan river for
irrigation, culinary and domestic pur-
! poses 10 the extent Of the capacity of
! their several canals, after fifteen sets
/ OF claimants along the river far below
/ the point of diversion of the canals
1 have been allotted an aggregate of
/ l5S1l5 cubic feet of flowing water per
/ second of time at the maximum.
/ The city and the four canal compa-
! MES, the courts decision declares,
/ shall at al times allow to flow unim-
/ peded through the channel of the. river
J a sufficient quantity Of water, which,
/ when added to the aCCretfOns of the
! river from seepage and other sources
I viii furnish at the various points of df-
( version and measurement the several
West Jordan Milling & Mercantile
/ company, the Utah Mattress & Man
] ufacturing company, the United States
( Mining company, William Cooper; jr
/ and Bennion & Bennion for the opera
! ton of their several mills and factories
1 During the 1rrigating~ season. of each
| year there shall be allowed to flow SuCh
/ additional quantity of water as will,
when added to the accTetions from
! seepage, and other sources, supply at
] fuf nj n
] measurement the quantity of water
I awarded by the decision to the several
I farmers and land owners taking water
( for irrigation purposes through the
Mining company's OLD Galena smelter
/ ditch, the EecksteGd ditch the Mousley
] ditch. the BenniOn &, Benni0H mill race
and the Cooper mill race.
! TIE limitations with reference tor the
rights of the city and the four canal
1 companies to use all the waters from
Utah lake are as stated in the proceed
/ ing paragraph and IS contained in the
! compromise agreement between the
1 river owners and the land owners along
( the shore of the lake, whereby the right
was conferred in 1855 to raise the lake
level 10 compromise point, which is
thirty nine and d half inches above
low water mark.
Rights of Canal Companies.
The decision gives the right to the
city and the four canal companies
namGe TO impound and store all Of the
flood waters of the river in Utah lake
and to have their title thereto quieted,
subject to the limitations stated.
While the flow ia the river is suffi-
cient for al Of the four canal COM
Rapies and the city to the extent Of the
capacities of their respective canals
each shall be entitled to fun quantity
Of water. but when the river flow is
insufficient to iii all the i've canals %
their maximum capacity they shall he
given an equal division of the water.
provided that if by any such div ision
One-dfth of the water should. exceed