The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1904-11-20

proposition that has the Spring Creek
proposition connected with il. The
other reason is that we have proposed
to sell TO the city, with the lakes and
reservoir sites at the head of Big and
Little Cottonwood canyons, a reservoir
site at the mouth of Little Cottonwood
canyon, where a lake can be made OF
torty-five acres extent, that will be
, ninety feet deep, and we own but thir-
ty-two acres Of the land. so we will
have TO buy thirteen acres more, and
must have the city advance that
amount on the option, or change our
proposition so that we would only agree
TO put in thirty-two acres
Mr.. Fernstrom then said, Very well:
1t VIII have to go as it is
No one but Mr.. Cole and myself is
interested in this lake and reservoir
proposition, so that either Mr. Cole or
myself made the statement, If it was
made as published, and we now ask
Mr.. FernstrOm TO say which one of US
he claims did make il, and when and
where it was made. This the public
may care to know, and we very much
desire TO know"
The statement was signed by j, NJ.
Thomas. Added to ii was this: 81
hereby endorse every word Of the above
H. B. Cole"
Why Davis Is Opposed.
Councilman A. J. Davis announced in
the afternoon that he would make no
minority report against the water pro-
position submitted to the council Thurs
day night by the special water com
mittee. But this does not mean that
there viii be no fight against the adop-
ton of the report Monday night when il
comes up for the final action of the
council. To a representative of The
Herald Mr.. Davis gave his principal
reasons for opposing the proposition.
Ever since ! entered the council.
be said Il have been working for
better water supply for the city. I CO.
operated with the Commercial club in
its scheme two years ago. and l still
think if that had been accepted by the
city it would have been the proper So
luton of the water problem.
las to the lakes in, the Little Cotton
wood canyon I know nothing except
what is set forth in the report OF City
Engineer Frank c. Kelsey wherein he
says there are billions of gallons of
water i'm these lakes in the Cotton
woods.
Liberty Park Pumps.
If pumping plant is necessary why
not use the Liberty PARK property!
bona fide contract was made with the
Commercial club two years ago to fur
nish 100000 gallons of water for $4,000.
Then why pay 1905. 600 for 100000 gal
Ions at Spring Creek SO remote from the
city? The city can secure no title to
Spring Creek. and Chemist Harms says
the water is impure.
In the proposition submitted by City
Engineer Snow and adopted by the city
the only water the city win get viii
be from Big Cottonwood. Here the Sep
TENDER flow is 10,730,0 900 gallons every
twenty-four hours. That is all the
water the city will get for $S50000. The
balance that is promised is a mere as
sumption.
Emigration canyon is conceded by
experts to have plenty of water. An
appropriation of money was made by
the council last spring TO develop this
water supply, but nothing has been
done.
My position is that under this
scheme the city does not acquire by
purchase cne gallon Of water. The
whole question reduced TO its last an
alysis is. Do We wish to pay $S50.000 for
10. 730, 900 gallons of water on a pump
ing basis?"