Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1902-02-15
A MATTER OF MOMENT.

The water rights Of the city under
The constitution ard laws Of the state,
extend rot only TO their beneficial use
within the city limits, but TO the CON
troll Of the streams which are the
sources Of supply. before they enter
those limits In commenting upon the
decisions Of the Supreme court In favor
Of the Electric Power company, we re-
ferred TO the question OF that control
and It's apparent invasion by u private
company.
1t has been asserted In reply to what
we mentioned, that the decisions do not
"put the cty'srlghts IN jeopardy at an
And the reason assigned for this as
fertion Is that the company, after taxi
ing out the water which the law places
N control Of the city, Is required to re-
turn the water TO the clty's ditch un-
contaminated, undimlnlshed, and at the
Lowell established by the city"
1t Is true that the courts decision
does make that requirement, which is
all right so far as II goes. But sup
pose the private company. which ia
thus permitted to interfere with the
control vested In public corporation
for the benefit OF the people, falls to re-
turn the water In the condition and
quantity and place so designated,
where Is the peoples remedy? The
company Is viewed as In an iusolvent
condition, because II Is In the hands
OF receiver In what condition does
that leave the people Of this city?
II should be remembered, In viewing
this important question. that II Is not
merely a conflict between two indivld-
uals or private corporations. but be-
tween a public body composed Of many
thousand citizens organized into a mu-
niclpalty, and having special rights
conferred by statute as TO the control
as well as the use Of certain waters for
public purposes and a private cor
poratlon taking the waters supposed
10 be under public control and dlyerting
them for private uses and personal
profits. That to US is very great diff
ference.
However 1t Ia useless perhaps TO
romment further on that phase Of the
situation. We have not presented our
Views of the subject by way OF adverse
criticism, but that the facts may be
understood and the conditions now ex-
listing may be fully met. The decision
OF the courts does not deprive the city Of
The right to go above the present point
of the cltys diversion Of the water in
20 its canal. The city may so on with
the project, which was long ago con-
femplated, for the purpose Of taking
out the Jordan water up the stream
nearer TO the dam, and into the East
Jordan canal, which would give fall
of nearly eighty feet and permit the
water TO be conducted ON a higher lew
Ell than at present which gives but a
nifty feet fall, and be OF vastly greater
benefit to the public, We endorse the
Recommendation that the city proceed
mt once TO secure this right from in
Naslon by proper action,
When the bonds election was under
consideration, the representatives Of the
rity pledged II to the expenditure OF a
pertain amount for the lowering OF the
channel and the prosecution Of this nee
essary work. This was a great induce
ment to voters In supporting the prop
osition for the issuing Of those bonds.
The pledge has not been satisfactorily
FULFILLED. Something ought TO be done
nt once In that direction, and we urge
fhis upon the consideration OF the pres
ent City Council with the Mayor, as OF
much greater moment than prolonged
dispute over the removal or appoint.
ment Of city officer. Gentlemen, pro.
need at once and take the proper steps
IN this important movement