The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1909-07-26
TWO LETTERS ABOUT THE
PROVO DEPOT CONTROVERSY

to divert the town COW herd from TINS
street it was done So. L take H. Wneh
the time comes that 1t is undesirable 70
have the freight traffic move through
the street it viii be diverted to some other
street.
move its tracks south instead of north;
when the land south is unoccupied and
much cheaper2' You answer: Because
the railroads expect to get land for moth
ing. on the theory that they can't move
south"
The facts are. doctor, no tracks are be
ing moved north, or at least the plans DO
not provide for anything of the kind
The reasons given by the railway officials
should answer this question The fact
that this land. as well as other induce
ments, was offered and not accepted,
would indicate that your theory was alto
gether wrong. This point is fully COW
cred in my communication in tOdays
paper.
C6) You ask again: why did the first
petition presented to the people provide
that the railroads should locate the pas
Senger depOt?' Your answer is: Because
the trainers of the petition evidently
knew where the railroads would locate
it, and evidently knew, too, il would not
be where the people wanted it, nor where
they expected it would be put"
So far as the petition in question is con-
cerned, I assume full responsibility for it.
Drew it up myself and had it circulated.
What called out the petition was to get
an expression from the people as to
whether they wanted a union station or
not. At that time there was movement
started to have separate depOts. Knowing
that union depot was more convenient
and that in order to get any depot of any
kind the location would have TO be left
to the railroads, as it was apparent that
the efforts Of few gentlemen who were
interested on one side or the other of the
question would result in defeating the
whole proposition.
Before drawing up the petition I con
-rr1f cd no in
man, woman or child in the town knew
anything about the petition until it was
ready to be circulated for signatures. At
the time knew no more where the depot
would be located than yourself. I think
we all knew two locations had been pro
posed but which of the two, or whether
either one would be selected, I had no
advance information. At the time there
had been no meeting between the man
ayers of the two roads to consider the
matter Of location or other details of the
question, and il was a month after the
petition was filed before any meeting was
held. I did not even know the time or
place of the meeting. Now, the petition
was circulated open and above board. No
one was deceived. Tt is hardly fair to
say, as has been said, that the people
did not know what they were signing
The same might be said of the petitions
signed opposing the change of location
I think the petition represented the senti-
ment of the people at that time and rem
resents their sentiments now if so many
questions had not been raised to create
, a prejudice against the location.
GD You ask why have the railroads
let the disgraCeful conditions at our pas
senger station exist as they have for
years and years?'
It matters little as to what has been
/ done in the past. What we want is to
deal with the present. The past, good or
bad, viii not build d depot If. after all
these years, the railroads are now ready
10 give US a fine station and make it one
of the beauty spots of our town, why not
let them do it?
All the other questions raised bv YOU
nave been explained in d former commu-
nication. Yours truly.
GEORGE w. CRAIG.