The Lewiston teller. (Lewiston, Idaho) 1900-1905, 1903-08-14
BOARD WILL INVESTIGATE
Mr.. jenkins ct al. Headed off by the oppOsi.
tioh--Board will Send Engineer to Inspect
the Streams

tion--B Board will Send Engineer to Inspect
! the Streams
Wednesday August Ia was the date set
for the hearing before the state land
board on the application OF Francis Jen-
kins and others for a franchi to i'm
prove the North fork ami Little North
fork of Clearwater river. Me ssrs. Jen.
kius. O'Neill, Pickett and Flint were
before the board with their side of the
case while the opposition was represented
by Attorneys Richards and Haga OF
Boise.
Mr.. jenkins referred to the opposition
said it had arisen because the intentions
OF the company were misunderstood. He
intimated that Lewistons attitude was
prompted by selfish motives as Lewistor
people themselves wanted the franchise.
He cited the fact that the carrying capa-
city of the Clearwater was not equal to
demands of the 1900, 900 feet now being
cut for transportation and was wholly in
adequate to be used to log the millions
OF feet that would be cut when the large
syndicates began to move their holdings
to market He thought it would be OF
great interest to the state to have the
river improved because it would add
value to the immense holdings the state
had in the timber of the Clearwater
basin.
Attorney Pickett presented government
maps TO prove that the upper Clearwater
was not navigable stream and that it
needed improvement; but he as we'll as
Mr.. Jenkins evaded the direct point at
issue, the specific improvements com
templated by his company and tangible
evidence of the value of such improve.
ments to the holders of timber in the
Clearwater region.
Attorney HaPa opened for the opposi- |
tion by citing and reading extracts from
the protests, which, he said, were signed,
practically, by every professional and
business man in the Clearwater country. |
try. He referred to the report Of
Engineer Faris who had examined |
the streams in question and
had found them entirely navigable for
logging purposes. He asked to know
the exact character Of the improvements |
to be made, that competent engineers
might pass upon them 10 see il they
were designed to help IN logging the
river streams in question. He insisted
that the board be provided with fuller
plans that it might be assured that the
Bs5, 600 10 be expended in the initial
work went for improvements or for salar-
es. Judge Richards followed with care
Tul presentation of the case. His side he
said was not against river improvements
out good results. He wanted TO assist
he board in getting at the exact facts.
He CITED the TACT that the Cameron ap /
piication turned down by prior adj
covered practically the
same ground and that it had been care.
ully investigated and reported adversely
BY Engineer Faiis. He counseiIed that
he board should be fully advised and
placed in possession Of all the facts before
/ took action.
And after deliberation The board de-
:ided to send the state engineers into
he field to make an exam nation. fend-
ng his report no further action will be
made. The opposition confidently rely
IN the results of such an investigation
that the facts will support the
contention that The proposed improve
nents are not of practical value.