Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1904-04-19
SOUTH JORDAN BUBBLES.

We give place today to long state
ment purporting TO explain the post
ton OF the South Jordan Canal COM
pany as seen by the stockholders" We
do so In order that II may not be said
that the Deseret News declines TO pre-
sent that side Of disputed question
But II really contains nothing that has
not been published in this paper and
replied to directly. We do not believe
that the crude statements made therein
are the views Of the foremost stock.
holders OF the South Jordan company
or that vote based on the stock held
therein would support the claims set
forth. There are afew agltators who have
their heads set In a certain direction,
and the term "obstructionists' that has
been used concerning them Is strictly
applicable in their individual cases
There are few indIsputable and
simple facts opposed to the theory that
the South Jordan company owns so
second feet Of the flow from Utah Lake
That company has the right to one-iifth
OF the flow as determined by the actual
beneficial use thereof. The court COM
missioner has reported that In series
OF seven years that has not exceeded an
average OF 81 second feet The corre-
spondent says that the Ave canal COM
panies have never since the establish
ment Of these canals made beneficial
use Of all the water Utah lake would
discharge between given points, Very
well, the right to water is limited TO
the extent of ia actual beneficial use,
and the South Jordan company can
claim no more than one-hfth OF that
amount
The notion that the committee have
done this, that and the other, and that
the government wants to take some adj
vantage Of the farmers, Is so foolish rs
to demand silence instead Of reply, But
we will repeat that the government
does not ask or want anything. II Ia
government aid that IL needed which
cannot be had until the benenciarles
come TO an agreement as to what they
want. and on basis that can be recog-
nlzcd. Development for greater sup
ply--whlch is a real uecessty-can be
done much better and cheaper by the
government than by the companies;
hence the movement now objected to by
few people In South Jordan, IT is not
THE committee but the people, the
stockholders Of four out Of the five ca.
nal companies who have decided on the
basis alluded TO- At FIRST they agreed
that 40 second feet was an equitable de-
mand for their primary rights but sub
seQuenuy decided that 90 second feet
was fair and justnable, They have
raised to go. to meet the directors, Are
the four-dfths OF the users wrong and
fraction Of the one.dtth only right?
Is the TAN to wag the mmal}
Tho correspondent Is not only dense
M to these points but is not fair in
putting his case. lie speaks OF an
average Of 1894 Tor % period between
March 4 aud October No. That was the
time when the pumping plant was IN
operation aud when North Jordan lid
not use the water and the city permitted
an extra flow for the farmers, nut It
does not allow for the fun division u
the water nor for the occasional failure
OF one Of the pumps and the figures do
not show what the continuous flow Is
under all the circumstances, Of which
South Jordan can rlghttully claim but
one.nfih,
The argument that the water is not
needed so much In the latter part OF the
season win not be endorsed hy the ma
iority OF the farmers IN this county
And the statement that only In ono or
two years has the South Jordan COM
pany received less than sixty second
feet lin the early part Of the season"
shows that when compared with the
latter part Of the season the average
has been much less than the sixty feet
which the other four companies agree
Is a fair basis
The demand Tor so second feet Is not
supported by any facts, figures or fair
argument that has yet been adduced
And we can only conclude that the
South Jordan opponents OF the best
measure ever presented for the increase
Of tho water supply In these parts, Il
founded In obstinacy and n lack of
clear understanding, and the structures