OCR Text |
Show THE EAST JORDAN TANGLE. When tho city bought for $10,000 its present holdings, in the Hast .Ionian canal, we protested against tho purchase. pur-chase. Our objection was on two grounds; first, that tho minority interest in-terest so purchased would be of no benefit but, a constant, troublo lo tho cit3-; and second, that it was a misappropriation misap-propriation of tho bond money that was virtually a breach of "faith with tho taxpayers of thia city, who had been assured in an ofilcial address of the purposes to which this bond money mon-ey would bo applied, arid this was not ono of those purposes. The result was as foreseen. Tho city has never boon in partnership in any water deal with the farthers that it did not got the worse of it. They combine inevitably against the city, and beat it. Tho East Jordan canal election carried on the .distinct issue of hostility to Salt Lake. H is always so. Tho city goes in with a minority ! interest and gels no benefit: if it undertakes un-dertakes to assort- any right, it gets unmercifully sat down upon, and hns to appeal to tho courts for relief. And such is tho courso to which Salt Lake City is now driven in tho East Jordan canal case. It gets nothing on its investment in tho stock of that company,' and when it squirms at. being skinned, n venomous rancor followw that is as painful as it is unjust. The majority interests in llio East Jordan canal simply rule the city out, and the city has to light in the only way left to il, lo protect its investments and ils interests. And in so fighting it bring3 upon, itself an animosity and active ill will out of all proportion to j the merits of the caso. So, it is by far tho best course for tho city to avoid all entanglements with tho farmers farm-ers on water supply and water rights. ( The outcome of the suit brought by the city in this East Jordan canal caso will bo watched with tho deepest in terest; but ovcry day of its pondencv simply emphasizes the unwisdom of the purhase of ils canal slock by tho city in ID05. |