Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1903-03-11
DO NOT BE DECEIVED.

A morning contemporary is sorry thot
the Dessert News Is opposed to the new
water commission bill Very likely.
That paper takes the other side So It
did very strenuously in favor Of the bill
as It was first introduced, but which
had to be dropped for the very reasons
set forth By the Deseret News. Some
Of them apply with the same potency to
the substitute measure now before the
Legislature.
IL Is asserted that the city Council
Is utterly incompetent TO handle the
water question; that hundreds OF thous-
ands OF dollars have been wasted by the
Council In futile measures to deal with
the question; and that It Is hopeless TO
look for relief in that quarter. Is that
so? Let us see.
IN the first place the water affairs
OF the city have been "handlea" by
the city Council from the Beginning OF
the municipality. The present members
are not responsible for anything but
their own acts A new Council can be
elected II the existing body is 'incom-
petont," The power ii IN the people to
choose competent Men for the purpose.
That is the design Of the law and Of
the State Constitution.
In the next place, this cry about
wasting hu1dreds Of thousands Of dol
lars Is deceptive. and is raised TO de-
celye legislators from the county, as
well as ordinary citizens who do not
investigate. II should be observed that
no Specifications as to this waste are
giten. 1t Is not shown by any particu-
lars or figures that water money has
been improperly spent by the City
Council. IL the sum OF {250,O0O raised
by bonds Is referred 10, Il can be shown
that what has been expended OF
that amount has been appropriated ac-
cordlng to TIE terms and for the pur-
poses understood and voted upon by
the ax-payng citizens For every dol
lar that has been spent some improves
ment can be shown In our means Of
water supply and its distribution.
As for supposed futile Efforts do
the promoters of this reyamped scheme |
expect that the City Council could ac-
compllsh with s25O,OOO that which the
accusers propose TO effect with a mill
lion or million and a half dollars, TO
be obtained by bonding the olty2 The |
people have 1t in their power 10 elect |
city Council fully competent to han
die the whole water question, and |
1t win be safer in their hands than In |
a special commission, appointed by the
Governor or any other State function
airy.
Now as to the question Of constitu-
tionality our contemporary sagely re-
marks that this "would be easily dis
posed OF by the courts Just so, But
why pass a measure that is manifesty
in conflict with the Constitution, TO
promote litigation and incur the costs
Of such a contest2 Why not sit down
now on a proposition that is clearly in
violation OF the State Constitution? The |
conflict between them has been pointed
out several times in these columns.
Finally, our opponent takes up the
wealth argument. Let Il be distinctly /
understood that this Is is own plea,
not ours as Il endeavors to insinuate.
II had been urged In, favor Of the bill
that large proportion OF the
wealth OF the city wants the
commission, TO this We replied
without dispuing the statement as we
might that all the water-users were in
terosted In the matter, and the poor |
mans vote counted as much ms the rich
mans ballot II this bin was left 10
be decided by the water-users and tax
payers, It would be swept out Of sight |
by the volume Of the votes against it.
10 read the watery pleas Of the adyo-
Gates OF the newly patched up scheme /
for commission, one who did not take 1
pains 10 examine the rash assertions
made, would think that IL assured a
full supply Of pure water to this city /
for generations to come The whole
claim is speculative and without sub
siantial basis. 1t sweeps away the pow
er Of the body constitutionally desig
mated as the proper custodian and con-
troller Of the municipal water rights,
and vests Il In a commission appointed
by one official. That Is AL There Is
not o guaranty OF any kind that a fun
supply Of water viii be the result
The scheme when tested by the orr
ganio law OF the state will not hold
water. It's Fundamental defect Is the
same as was NANTES, in the first
scheme for which Il Is substitute. II
adds another flaw. In putting Salt Lake
City under direct and special State con-
troll. II the Governor appoints six CONF
lnlssioneIs they become State officers
In eflect. The body would be "a State
board within a municipality for munici-
pal purposes. This city can regulate It's
own municipal affairs. They belong to
the Mayor and the city Council, ana |
the proposition on this point is radi-
caily wrong and out OF harmony With |
our system OF local government We |
are sorry that our contemporaries have
gone so far astray on a matter Of such