The Ogden standard. [volume] (Ogden City, Utah) 1902-1910, 1909-10-06

will go to prevent a measure which
might possibly curtail their personal
income. notwithstanding. 1t would
prove blessing to tho community at
large
Il hope that after the people have
come to 4 realizing sense by the fall
ure of this attempt, they only are the
chief losers. there may be an oppor-
tunity later on to put the plan into
effect. Yours very truly,
CSigned) "ChaS C Shepard"
By the officers and directors of the
Davis e Weber Counties Canal COM
pany, the foregoing letter is viewed
as an uncalled for insult, and A. w
Agee. one of the directors, In reply,
saws:
Il have read the published extract
from letter written by Mr. Shep-
ard. ono OF the promoters of the move
ment for the organization of an irri-
CATION district. TO construct what has
been termed the high line canal. and
which letter purports TO have been
written TO some person whose name
Is withheld. but was evidently written
for publication, with the express In
tentlon of reflecting upon the officers
OF the Da'is &c Weber Counties Canal
company by insinuatlng that they have
been actuated by selfish motives, in
undertaking TO enlarge and improve
the canal.
In this letter Mr., Shepard appar-
emily carefully conceals the real facts
of the situation, He insinuates that
the officers OF the Davis 6 Weber
Counties Canal company have antag-
Onized the new project. which he
claims would be a blessing 10 the
community. for the reason that It
might curtail their personal income
Nothing Is further from the truth.
So far as | am concerned, and / am
sure the same is true of every other
member of the board of directors of
the Davis C Weber Counties Canal
company, there was no thought OF an
tasonizing this new project The i'm
provements now begun have been In
contemplation for years and are but
carrying out the designs of the com
Dany when the reservoir was con
structed
I'VE have in no way sought to pre-
Won't others from supplying water to
lands below our canal. So far as we
can learn the opposition to the project
of Mr. Shepard and his associates.
comes from persons whose lands it is
proposed to bring within the proposed
irrigation district So far as the Da.
Wis e Weber Counties Canal company
is concerned. the facts are that as
soon as it became known that We had
decided TO concrete the main canal and
contemplated increasing the reservoir
and the construction of a power plant,
Mr., Shepard and his associates sought
20 have us abandon the work, claim.
Ing that II would defeat their project
because persons owning lands below
our canal would not enter into their
scheme as we could furnish water for
irrigation much more chcaply than
they could
1T is true that to each share of
stock in the Davis & Weber Counties
Canal company. the market value OF
which is now about $3.50. the company
has been supplying from to s acre.
feet OF water each season. while Mr..
Shepard and his associate promoters
propose TO furnish 2-acre feet at a cost
of sl25.
When our canal and reservoir i'm.
provements are completed We expect
to supply a stlll greater quantity OF
water to each share of stock From
this 1t win be seen that the promoters
of this proposed high line project
ask us to abandon our improvements,
In order that they may supply water,
not only TO lands above our canal.
but also TO lands below our canal, at
cost of three or four times what
water from the Davis G Weber Coun.
ties canal costs. In fact, thev had
the tcmerity TO ask us to say that we
would not supply water to any lands
IN addition to those now being SUD.
piled from our canal
I'VE fail to sec how this would be
a blessing to the community at large
To my mind. such a proposition is not
only absurd, but impertinent. II looks
TO me as though we. as directors of the
Davis & Weber Counties Canal COM