Show I LOSES FOUNDRY IN HIGH 1 COURT Supreme Judges Hold City Has Right llight to Create Restricted Restricted Re Re- Areas reas Right flight of or the city commission to detine tie tie- fine tine the residential districts of Salt Silt Lake and to enact ordinances that will prevent the tho erection of buildings for forthe tho the Installation of ot industries that property prop ert erty owners maintain aro are a nuisance was upheld b by the tho supreme court yesterday yes jes- es In an opinion written by Chief Justice 13 E. E Corfman The Western Foundry Stove Repair works for some years ears cars prior to 1917 operated op- op crated a foundry at the tho rear o or of S. S State Slate street a short distance south of or orthe the City and County building The city commission pa passed ed an ordinance July 23 3 1317 1917 7 amending an ordinance enacted enact ed June 12 1917 and making It to erect or maintain a foundry within tho the residential district created t n 1 rI n In hi I I lIau Li uc Ul IU operation Under the amendment all specified In Industrial plants wh whether ther or 01 not in operation included but Lut the boundaries of the tho district were so o changed as to shut out a certain brass foundry included under tho provisions ons of tho the original Inal ordinance In April 1917 secured d a building permit the tho Western Stove Repair works orles began c erecting a building at Eighth West Vest and Ninth South streets within the boundaries of oC tho the residential district and at the tho same time asked d permission to construct and maintain a spur r railroad track trick to its plant Protests made b by residents culminated cd etl in the city offering to purchase tho the site of the plant This offer subsequently subsequently was withdrawn The Thc stove ic- ic pair completed its plant and urd proceeded to operate It It- Complaint was made pr f jl- jl lowed and tho the stove sto repair company comp was found guilty glint of oC having violated toe the ordinance Appeal was tak n to the tho Third district court on the ground that t the ordinance was ona unreasonable lo and discriminatory discriminator The Tho district court sustained the elt city co court rt and antl this juel judg judgment judgment ment Is affirmed b by the tho uno court |