The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1905-01-28
WATER MEASURES
PASS SENATE.
Bills Regarding Eminent Domain
Carry After Debate.
PLANS FOR RECLAMATION
SENATOR M'KAY WOULD DRAIN
ALKALI LANDS.

Senator Lawrence's two eminent do
main bills passed the senate by a vote
OF II to s yesterday after vigorous de-
Date that occupied the better part of
an hour. Barber, CaInster. CIegg.
Gardner, Johnson and Walton voted
against them and Loose was absent.
Inc frst measure. senate bill No. 20.
amends section 1888 of the Revised
Statutes by including the securing of
water rights, water courses. etc. among
uses for which the right of eminent
domain may be exercised.
salt Lake City's water question as
sumed prominence in the debate. Di-
rect references to it were made in Sen
atOr Lawrence's argument in support of
ms measure and il was frequently
touched upon later. The opposition
while manifesting no hostility toward
salt Lake City and admitting the gray
1ty of the water problem here, made
determined fight to exempt water and
water rights from condemnation.
Paragraph of the bill contained the
new matter. Immediately following the
third reading of the bill Senator Wal
ton moved to amend by striking out
this paragraph The motion was sec
onded by Senator Barber.
Walton in Opposition.
Senator Walton said the section ap-
peared to extend the right of eminent
domain into an entirely new field. TAX
ing the position that the new clause
invaded personal rights. Admitting the
necessity for the exercise of the right
of eminent domain, he pronounced the
measure dangerous one. He ques-
toned whether the courts would sus-
tain the measure.
senator Lawrence said there was no
question i'm his mind as to the legality
of the measure, which he said had been
placed on the statute books of almost
every state. Persons Interested he
said. had the right to take the matter
into court Tor hearing and for appra iSe-
ment of damages. The present mad
equate water supply of Salt Lake City
and the recent voting of $500, 900 water
bonds was referred to. Senator Law
renee said he appreciated the value of
water rights to farmers and admitted
that 1t was an invasion OF private
rights, as Senator Walton contended
but argued that this invasion was nee
essary for the good of the many.
1t seems most selfish" he said ''fOr
individuals to oppose a broad measure
like this. And individuals should not
be allowed to hold up municipalities
Tor outrageous prices for property nee
essary to public improvements"
Senator Walton. who owns property
In Cottonwood canyon and is believed
10 voice a sentiment from that locality.
maintained there was no necessity for
salt Lake City to condemn individual
property rights The city, he said.
could go up into the mountains and
build reservoirs, without taking water
rights away from the farmers. In 9th
er states where similar laws existed. he
said, it would be found the water rights
referred TO were not utilized for irri-
cation purposes.
7amberger Argues For the Bill.
Senator Bamberger favored the bill.
n mt OF eminent domain, he said.
CO Low be exercised in a church or in
cemetery. and he did not believe an
1rTlgator was more sacred than those
places. The reservoir idea he believed
had been secured from the few who
opposed the water project lately sub
mitted to a vote in Salt Lake City, and
ne condemned the idea as unsafe. Ar
Guments against the bill. he contend
ed. must have been prompted mainly
by selfshness.
senator Gardner took the old home
stead view of the matter and pictured
familiar firesides that would be no more
If the bill went into operation. He said
he thought the measure would be detri-
mental to the state. and expressed a
belief that Salt Lake City could get
water without taking these homes
and firesides."
senator Lawrence invited him to sub
init a water scheme other than the one
adopted.
worth supported the bill in brief
speeches.
Farmer Mckay Supports Measure.
Senator Mckay spoke at length on
the question. 4 practical farmer him
self. he took the view Of the broad
minded farmer and pictured an i'm
eginary case with IAN old farmer
named Mckay as the central figure
His illustration was "A hOmely one. but
none the less effective. He had old
man Mckay settle on a place with a
creek or spring in pioneer days fight off
the Indians, build up his farm and
raise his children there. Then he had
proposal from a committee of citizens
that he yield his individual interests
for the good of a great community.
Later the "old farmer" saw the town
burn with great loss of property. with
possibly his own children as victims.
All because this selfish old man No
Kay would not make the little sacrifice
requested" Senator Mckay heartily
endorsed the bill.
Senator WaltOn'S proposed amend
ment lost by "A vote Of u to ,, Clegg,
Johnson. Callister. Walton and Barber
voting in the affirmative
The bill was then passed by the vote
above given
Paragraph 10 of the bill. authorizing
the exercise of the right of eminent do
main for obtaining pipe lines for the
purpose Of conducting liquids connect
cd with the manufacture of beet sugar
is another new clause. but was not
mentioned in the debate.
Senate bill No. p, by Lawrence. a
companion bill to No. 20. and enumerdt-
ing the kinds of property subject to
condemnation. was next passed by the
same vote after Senator Walton's pro-
posed amendment, eliminating water
water rights. etc, had been lost.
Reclamation Bill Is Passed.
Senate bill No Is. by Mckay Cby re-
QUest), was passed on third reading.
after considerable debate. The bill
was drafted under the direction of Dr.
J. 4. Widtsoe of the Agricultural col
lege experiment station. and appropri-
atCs $1,000 annually for two years 20 be
joined TO like sum appropriated by
the government to conduct experiments