Show THE HYDRAULIC CANAL BUSINESS THE spectacle presented in the third district court december 21 was as a a peculiar one A large number of citizens whose characters are above reproach and whose rep reputations uta tor for honesty are second to those of no class of men in existence were present to answer to indictments found against them by bi the late de junca ai net political cal grand jury ju ay iy we do not believe for one moment that anybody in the court idom including cl h hs honor on the bena bench who 1 is naturally a keen sighted nn min had any idea that real criminality attached to the gentlest n who were forced before him by what we we believe to be one odthe of the most u un n 11 and spiteful juries that ever had an existence with regard to the bunching bu i aching of a large nammer of r reputable renu table citizens on an indictment fr r conspiracy in connection with the transaction in which the hydraulic canal company was a party the public should pythis by this time be well informed one of the phases ofalla of the subject is now naw inythe in he hands of the city council As a good many people may not howe read a statement made 4 to alite ct and which yas was N embodied in the published ml minutes ants of tuesday december Dec emler loth embraces a presentation of aarts farts absolutely sol correct hi every detail we introduce it here to the honorable mayor cad city coundit of salt lake city gentlemen Gent lewen having been informed that some members of conr hanor able body have bave expressed dissatisfaction with the transaction connected with obtaining by the city from salt lake county of a one sixth interest in the jordan dam and its ita storage capacity we herewith make a statement and proposition the undersigned undersigner under signed are members of the hydraulic Hydra tille canal company which organization was a party to the said transaction on or about the year 1879 Salt alt lake chanty built Adum dam for the purpose of ve reserving serving the waters of the jordan river t that at had haa previously run to waste the interest in the dam and its storage capacity was waa divided into six pans one of these parts was granted to each of the following canal companies companie Sf to wit draper north jordan south jordan utah and salt lake I 1 and the jordan and salt lake city cit y the remaining one sixth was still in reserve ceseri e A number of citizens the under signed among them learning that this interest A v as still wad and being aware that there were lar large tracts of lands which could be brought brought under cultivation if the water right auld 0 uld be obtained 4 steps were taken to secure it A petition to the county court for the said one sixth interest in the da dam in and its storage capacity was favorably acted upon the prayer being granted on the basis of this grant of the county court to the hydraulic canal company a canal was located and surveyed and some excavations were made on its line landa were entered centered under inder 1 the homestead and timber laws and the usual amounts paid to the government estimates were made for a hydraulic plant including machinery to pump the water from the river ito to an elevation of over one hundred feet an expert was brought from cal who made plans and specifications all of which involved a large outlay while this enter enterprise rise was in pi in ogress the dry season of 1883 arrived and salt lake city was distressed for water your honorable body became a hayft abaro of the existence of too the before mentioned one sixth interest it teres and the matt matter e r of securing it was discussed this discussion re resulted stilted in the appointment of the following special committee who were directed to investigate vesti veti gate and report alderman james sharp and councilors councillors Counci lors bolivar roberts aud and john dark clark after investigation which we presume was thorough the committee finding that the hydraulic canal company had a claim upon the one sixth interest in question made an unsolicited proposition dependent upon the consent of the council to the said company it was in substance sab as follows that if the hydraulic canal company would address the c e bunty court surrender ing all claim to the one sixth interest in the dam and its storage capacity in favor of the city the corporation would reimburse the said company for all expenditures made in pursuit of their enterprise provided that the aggregate did not exceed this proposition was accepted and the committee reported to the council as follows satt SALT CITY U T october ath 1889 to the honorable nayor mayor and av d city of salt lake ladt gentlemen your special committee ap for the purpose of negotiating for the tb of the jordan rive in addi baw t one sixth to which the city is entitled through the jordan and aad salt lake canal respectfully report that we have performed the labors jabors assigned to usand us and herewith submit the cost of purchase u roll base of said one sixth interest in the nordan jordan dam a and n d the water of said river and ask speedy a action thereon very respectfully SHARP JOHN CLARK cl AKK BOLIVAR ItO BURTS special committee Commit teo this report was adopted by the said council as will appear on the record of their proceedings october 9 1888 the result was that the transaction was colsum consummated mated and a deed was mader by the county court for tat tto one sixth interest to salt lake city its it is stated as in introductory to d tor to the foregoing statement that we had bad been informed that dissatisfaction on this subject had been expressed by some members of your tour honorable body in consequence we make the following proposition to wit if the council of salt lake city will authorize the mayor to deed the one sixth interest in the jordan dam and its storage capacity to the hydraulic canal company on the execution of said deed we will cheerfully refund the money received by us as members of said company pan ris this proposition will be held open until and including january 1 1890 JESSE W fox W 8 BURTON N V JONES S R MARKS ROMNEY H S WELI S W N WILLIAMS JOSHUA MIDGLEY JNO R WINDER geo M CANNON i louis HOOK jessic W fox jit JB JOHN NICHOLSON 0 F B Y HAMPTON A H CANNON W J LEWIS and others this document was referred by the council Cou ucil to the same committee by whom the original proposition was made to the company alderman ma a sharp and councilors councillors Counci lors roberts and dark clark that committee made a report to a regular the council held on dec in which they said we are convinced that the transaction was made in good faith by all concerned j in it the discussion that ensued alderman sharp said there was no member on the floor of the council who would pretend to claim that the transaction was not made in good faith by both sides at the time and for one he thought at the time the city was making a good purchase 0 19 councilor dark clark odthe original committee on the same occasion said we bought the grant that the county court made to the hydraulic canal company for one sixth of the capacity of the jordan dam on the records of the county court today it is recorded that when the company should incorporate they would receive a deed to te the water right when the position of the city to procure it A wa discussed the question was waa con as to whether it would be the better belter plan for the company to incorporate and the deed to be made to it or who her it would be more advisable for the court to deed directly to the city the latter plan being the more expeditious it was a agreed reed upon As a result of this understanding the hydraulic canal company petitioned the county court to make the deed accordingly and on that petition it was done during the debate councilor remarked that he thought the city got all the title that anybody could get it was identically the same as the other canal companies got and the city received in the first instance he had never heard a legal opinion in regard to the matter I 1 voted for the proposition because it appeared to me it was a good buy I 1 am not convinced yet it was not other statements in A a similar line were made but the foregoing are sufficient to show the grounds upon which the indictments have been found some of the parties under prosecution have been asked why the city council was not indicted collectively and individually the reply was that such a proceeding would have been an outrage there being no foundation for it the retort to this was atiat 1 bat in that regard the aspect in relation to those who have been indicted does not differ |