The daily sentinel., 1905-10-24
QUESTION OF SELECTION.

Some few days since we made the
statement that. the government had
been influenced to undertake
scheme in its reclamation service
the building of the great Gunnison
tunnel project, which 1t ordinarily
would not have done, had not such
influence been brought TO bear upon
it, by those who had elected the
scheme for purely personal motives,
that other and better schemes, more
beneficial were sidetracked. Now
there comes the news from Montrose
Itself that the engineers of the gov
ernment are creating useless expense
to the subscribers of the project aud
that 1t will take many years to pay
out upon same to the government and
VIII be burden upon the farmers
and those who propose to use the
waters for years to come. The ans
wer of the Montrose Press to our criti-
cism was that the Gunnison tunnel
project was selected over the Grand
river project. because no such great
body of land could be reclaimed under
the Grand river project. as upon the
Gunntson project. While not abso-
1utely certain of the difference in the
acreage under the two schemes, we
believe that 1t could be proven that
vastly greater acreage would be re-
claimed under our proposed High line
canal, than will ever be reclaimed
through the Gunnison tunnel project.
and at vastly less expense. In select
ing work to be done by the govern
met under the reclamation act II is
anticipated that such work shall be
undertaken where IL would do the
greatest good to the greatest num-
Der. But II does not seem that such
sense of right actuates the govern
ment officials in selecting work to
be performed on the Gunnison tun-
mel project or 1t would never have
been selected over the Grand river
project.
A great many people have the idea
that. IL devolves upon the city TO keep
their sidewalk in repair Loose
boards that threaten life and limb are
let remain. the property owner ex-
pecting that the city authorities Will
nail them down or make repairs
which the individual himself should
make. For the benefit of these IT
should be made most plain that the
city is obligated to a certain extent,
but not any more than the individ-
ual. A property-owner is just as
liable for n suit for damage when his
sidewalk is not properly maintain
ed as the city itself Many side
walks throughout the city are in bad
repair and it is physically impos-
sible for the city to see that every
board is properly in place and nail
ed down tightly. With the miles of
sidewalks in the residence districts
it can readily be seen that. the city
would take care or in fact find out
where repairs are needed. The indi-
vidual property owner is aware gen
orally of the condition of his side
walk and II devolves upon him to
maintain 10 in condition for the use
of the public.
1t is a wonder to us that the good
people of Denver have tolerated the
Very Reverend II. Martyr Hart. of the
Episcopal diocese OF Denver, so long
as they have without protest When
ever the dean gets chance to dis
credit the government under which
he lives he takes especial delight in
slurring it. The other day at ban
quet given at the Hotel Savoy he
said that he liked President Roose-
welt much but that he couldn't vote
for him, because he believed in
mouarchial form of government.
Now II the very reverend gentleman
has such n strong distaste for re-
publican form of government ii is
wonder that. after so many years
of martyrdom in this country that he
does not pack up his toys and 20 back
to England. We recognize the right
Of anyone to adhere to any govern
ment for which they have liking.
hut we do most earnestly protest
against an individual holding the
very respectable and responsible po-
sition held by Dean Hart, everlasting
ly dlnning IL into the ears Of his
parishioners that, he simply tolerates
existence in this country. He has
been doing this same thing for years
and It is about time he is made
TO understand that not only is it .ex7
tremcly bad taste, but shows des-
perately ill-bred manners.