Show ff n PROVO ELECTORS 1 t t TO DETERMINE I Supreme Court Says They I Must Vote on Granting the 1 Street to Railroad Uses Pr 1 r city eli council gut u t to tot Me t the Ute question of whether it ft shall g t a street for a depot aIt It and ami thus bua i r J Knight has hall scored a victor r in inI Ms his eitl oa with that body bod bodI I s supreme ireme court in h an opinion writ I f lm toy w D N chief JutI Justice and andI In by the other justices justice yeater yester I i 4 reversed the judgment of Judge T 1 D DI I 1 acting tor for Jud Judge e John K x Booth Boe Ii oth t tF tUM M Fourth F judicial district in which S Lewie sustained a demurrer of o the 1 I city council of Provo Prove to a complaint mAd fUnd mAdi by JU Jes Knight In this complaint Mr fro i r t asked that tt the council be bei re i 1 from granting the exclusive t c I to occupy a treet for depot pot pur purt to the tM Denver a Rio Grand Grande with t submitting the same to 0 the citizens I I f t far r a vote Judge Lewis the ibe r and when Knight declined to tot J 1 7 T the complaint dismissed d ed the case ca t 1 It II 1 to ROW now II remanded d with directions that nib t 1 reinstated opinion nion quotes section m of the I he hew i w 1 a led laws of 1907 providing provi that city J councils CM melis or trustees of Incorporated may any Y railroad COM cant COMi L i s by granting tAI rial property of b such i forth The or Of town for purposes set let t I eni was WU sustained on the aum aumi I 4 t Use that the tile words word real rasi property did i not sia Include streets The le court says a U as v JUx jo jot t 1 t T think that this is ill true so 80 o fab eras t me the pertains to io a mere street He t In j the hi f fIlea Ii Iii i I ej Ilea the feo fe t of th the is teiM Pid h hi hf k it r tM t street or upon hidi a 11 pg hl bIdI rt exists In Is not In the chy eity H HIt It otherwise has haa no right t r int Ut i iIa I or r to the Ia land ft from th the I way upon uD A It Hut But it la ii in effect in th the complaint that the Die eit city is 15 f tie I owner in Tee fee fe of oC tlc the t laud Iw described in Int Int t complaint O and occupied d by bythe y the street i land bind the council will wm unless re e str ln eI d grant nt the railway company t tv fee ty ly and ana occupied by It J JoY argot and other railroad purposes purpose for f fet of et f years veers Pr p r the tM purposes of the demurrer the truth troth of these thee facto fact I Is III admitted Such uch an of nf or Interest In property pr perty as asun undoubtedly un Is real property It la is not averred erred that the council f IP M grant nt Hi the fee fl cc of the land nor will v f city J 7 s interest therein Stilt still the theto theto H to the railway company as a I WI Is WIthe alleged the right ri ht to exclusively hely occupy aM 11 th the tbS land for or the period parted of 1415 years Is the granting of an interest In and a anda nd a the land itself constituting Unit real prop prep i I If i Upon the facts a as IU alleged we think tl k kr r tl t 9 C grant nt cannot lawfully be made With 1 the question q lon of making it itt Iti t UM qualified i I electors elector ae as provided in |