The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1906-11-30
sMELTER SMOKE ELSEWHERE.
Several States Are Struggling With
Question Same as Utah.

OF late the judiciary in Montana, Idaho,
Utah and California has had strenuous
time trying TO make an amicable settlement
between the belli igcrcnt agriculturistS and the
owners Of mines and smcltcrs. Tho farmers
md cat,icmen plead that their interests have
been severely damaged by the noSious fumes
Of sulphur and arsenic from the smcltcrs.
and by tho pollution OF streams and the de
vestnrion Of grazing land by mill to'ings
Without exception the plaintiffs hnvc asked
high pOcuniary damages, some perhaps un-
justly. says the Mining World.
For instance, in Montana. where the sub
sidinry companies Of the Amagamatcd cop
ers have proved especially aggressive lti-
giants by reason Of pooling their claims for
S2.30o,0o0 Nnter reduced TO Sl.254,7loO
They are determined 10 he handsomely REIN
bursed for the real and imaginary damage
to their crops and 1.-Two stock. and will not
he content without perpetual injunction
against the Deer Lodge valley ore treatment
works
The Utah farmers and ranchers in the Salt
Lake valley who recently secured n decision
in the Federal court compelling tho smelters
the lessen the smoke nuisance by treating ores
that carry less than 10 per cent sulphur.
again forced into court by the smelters
that will appeal the case by reason OF the
fact that they cannot continue work as
large proportion of the ores mined contain
much 30 and IS per cen, sulphur. II
onch of the defendant corporations files
bond for 100000, the injunction obtained
by the complainanis will not be enforced
by the Federal court, pending the determine
ton OF the case in the higher court. in
other words, the smclters may continue op.
erations for another six months. ms the Cir.
cult Court Of Appeals will not meet al 81.
Paul until carly in Mny next
The Superior court of Solano county, Cali.
fornin. has granted an injunction against
the Sclby Smelling and Lead company tho
plea that the health OF the residents he
ing injured by tho suphurous fumes. But,
ventures au entcrprising journalist. 'smcltcr
smoke mikes farmers fnt, II they did hut
know it, 4 famous tailnEs has been
just decided in the United States District
court Rt Wallace. 1d0. TINT of Charles NJ.
Brown ct al. against tho Federal Mining md
Smelling company. This case is not the
only one that has been tried in tho Coeur
the ight oil a mining corporation TO discharge
debris into streams or upon agricultural land.
The defendants won the case. because il
had been proved that they had long sinre
damned tho stream TO stop tho spread OF the
debris.
Too often, regret 10 learn, counsel for
comp1ainants argue so zoalously against the
financially potent corporations that diSintcr-
eSted outsiders lean 10 the opinion that
blacbmail is being pcrpetratcd, Occasionally,
10 be sure. the complainants aro justified in
bringing suit for the recovery OF damages
from minc or treatment works. and in
such cases defendants invariably make q rca-
sonnble settlement. either Voluntarily when
il has been proved at court that they are
responsible for the alleged grievances. Both
sides in a legal battle should and we believe
usually do, employ the best counsel and
technical experts to Rrgu9 before Judge
and jury that cannot bic br1bod.