The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1906-01-19
ANSWER IS MAl
TO JUDGE AI
Stoekmen of Wasatch /.
Stand by Statement, +
The Tribune.
FALLAClES in REPLY
ARE POINTER
No Rule Giving Favored \
pany Right of Priori,,1
Exists.

Editor Tribune-Inasmuch
Hatch of Heber has taken ,h.
bility Of replying to the art,o,s ~
pearcd In The Tribune OF la
which he denies that the Hand :,
Is Seen" we. the petItlopsr.
rs dissenters, wish to revlc,, ~,
ments and again ask the o,s
Tribune to give space for SAM
Take Issue With Hatch
With all due respect to I'D
we are compelled to deny son. !
statements, others We wish 10
We quote the following:
AT the meeting called for hi.
there was some dissension o.n
parties claiming to have -
grazed more stock upon tbs -.
dian reservation now includs5 ~: ~
forest reserve than had brtn nlen1
by said parties. The ressas - 1ea
that IT was reported that af,sr ,t tnls
Ing adjacent TO the ressrss ,us ui'se
owners had been provided No ,ha
after those who had here,s,sssi' i'
their stock upon the reservs,,,- 81
be first recognized to the e1tss, !, y. a'
range would be stocked" 'ea'
No Such Statement Nsd.
We deny that any such as,.,.-.
made. Had Judge Hatch beel n-sss,
such meeting he would moi hs,s
the above. The church commI,s.
referred TO In our petition. is,r,-,
chairman, j. X. Murdoch. SrS -
to the president of Wasstcb 49,
ported that they had made ~
investigation, and concluded hy
that certain parties were enrltIsd \
grazing privileges In question
their names with the ansoun, ~
each should Craze, the total OF ~
exceeds the proposed amount ~ m
portment for the grazing seasoa a
Small Owners Left Out Z
There was absolutely no slIrsaL
those living adjacent to the -
small owners should be proyits|
S1ch a generous idea was enlin|
eign To them until the people .
their legitimate rights by has:c
attach their signatures TO peulI
Ing for equality to all. special q,
to none II
As to the statement that the
OF the Hcber Land G. Live Sto1|
pany claims that If the rule Of r.
arises by having heretofore 4
sheep upon the reservation. n
etc, we would ask that the -
be informed as to where he lox,|
rule.
No Such Rule Exists. II
We wish to state that all sh,E
access TO the rules and reguls1|
the United States Forestry bura|
have that privilege and, after 4 u
search, we fail To find such a ras Z
referred to Il
In reviewing the article stating
church party gave the appolslc|
Ranger In charge" TO Mr.. Ma
later appointed him cashier Of ~
OF Heber, thereby showing dlsiuc/
to who should hold the toruE|
ton, we have 10 say that tsfF
so confident of being able 10 s9/
successor that they did not tes
allow him TO resign his former q
Just One Question. 4
Judge Hatch would infer that "A
has been done in the dark. N
Ike to have them answer these g
How many people In WasalA
knew that Mr.. Musser had re1d
above appointment" Again. II 4
cessary that u Wasatch county
appointed, why were the psg
asked to indorse him? Why was
Sary to ask the appointment e
not on the eligible list of the On
commission when Wasatch has
said list who passed creditabs
alton. a man capable both physd
mentally to perform the duha
office.
Unique Public Meeting
In conclusion we wish to a.
Even the meeting,
called for the purpose OF orgah-
stock interests of the company.
lie. every one having an lntereR
vitcd TO attend"
This Is true. as the commlttt
decided as to who had any ihta
then invited them To be pstx
fortunately. a few attended Em
receive that coveted o. inm@