Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1902-04-15
THE LAW AND THE VETO.


once more the Mayor OF Salt Lake
City has exercised the power OF veto
under the advice Of the City Attorney
and once more he has put his foot In
IT," 1t was expected that he would dis
approve Of the resolution passed by the
City Council to unite with three Of the
canal companies, so as to secure add
tional water for this municipality This
anticipation was based on his previous
action, when II was proposed that the
city should Join with four canal COM
panies for this purpose. The Mayor Is
pursuing his defined course, and in that
sense is consistent with himself II he
had given as his reason for the veto
something that could stand on its own
feet and have q rational appearance,
the public, or a portion Of II might,
perhaps, coincide with his views. But
when he presents as the foundation OF
his veto the opinion OF the City Attor-
new In full, It becomes simply an object
Of general derlslon.
The attorney makes reference to some
case which he says, has recently been
before the Supreme court OF the State
OF Ohio" and which he claims to be
the precise question" confronting the
Mayor, but as he gives no particulars
concerning the controversy. and
as IL is certain that there Is
great dlsslmilarlty between the
two cases, because the Ohio
contention was as to the construction
Of legislative enactment,and the pres
ent dispute is over a resolution Of the
City Council, and further. that neither
the law nor the Constitution OF the
state Of Ohio Is quoted in the City At
torney's opinion, we are left in very
great doubt as to the bearing OF the
Ohio decision on the Salt Lake City
resolution. But the City Attorney
quotes the Constitution OF Utah as con-
elusive on this subject, which reads as
follows:
The Legislature shall not authorize
me state or any county, city, town. |
lVWhsnlp, district or other political |
subdivision OF the State To lend its |
credit or subscribe to stock or bonds In |
ana OF any railroad telegraph or other |
private, individual or other corporate
enterprise or undertaking."
Now what on earth has that 10 do
with the action Of the City Council, for
the purpose Of securing water from
Utah Lake for municipal purposes? The
Legislature Of this State has not taken
any step thus forbidden in the Consti
tuition. The purpose of the prohibition
Is evident in its language. There is no
proposition before the public to do any
thing In defiance Of that instrument.
The city is not undertaking TO Tend
Its credit or subscribe to stock or
bonds" for any individual or cor.
porate enterprise"
What bearing, then, has this clause
In the State Constitution upon the
resolution adopted by the City Council.
either In relation to the four or to the
three canal companies? The City
Council Is empowered by law:
ITO purchase, receive. hold. sell. lease.
convey and dispose OF property, real
and personal, for the benefit OF the
city both within and without its cor
nnTAfn "a. Frssf 4
tect such property and 10 do an things
III relation thereto as natural persons,
TO construct and maintain water
works or to authorize the
construction and the maintenance OF
the same by others. or to purchase or
lease any or all OF said works from any
person or corporation.
ITO construct or authorize the con-
struction OF waterworks without their
limits; and for the purpose of main
tanning and protecting the same from
Injury and the water from pollution.
their jurisdiction shall extend over the
territory occupied by such works. and
over all reservoirs, streams. canals
bitches pipes ana drains used IN, and
necessary for the construction and
operation OF the same. and over the
stream or source from which thu water
Is taken, for ten miles above the point
from which II Is taken and 70 enact
all ordinances and regulations neces-
sary to carry the power herein conferr-
ed into effect,
ITO construct, purchase. or lease. and
maintain canals. bitches and reservoirs.
and 10 purchase or lease springs.
streams or sources OF water supply for
the purpose OF providing water for r.
rigatlon. domestic or other purposes.
and II necessary TO secure said sources
Of water supply 10 purchase or lease
the land from which said water has
been appropriated or applied Laws
OF Utah. 1901, chap. 1874
VIII the Mayor and city Attorney
contend that this city has no rlrht 10
Join with the canal companies taking
water from the same source Of supply
through the same stream or channel
In maintaining works TO control the
water al the head OF such stream or
channel? Did not the Mayor approve
Df the project recommended by the
city Engineer TO lower the channel
eighteen inches. and to secure the co.
operation, In that work, OF the canal
now seeking union OF effort
'or a similar purpose but In a different
Eay7 Did not the city authorities.
when asking the people 10
sanction the issue Of water-bonds.
pIedts themselves to the appropriation