OCR Text |
Show m BEACH LlNBS.li Mr. I. F.UttltOH, C. E.,Has His Inntags Today AT TUE LAND OFflCK BQUI8T. lie FoHotti la the TTake or the Three Preceding Witnesses. The hearing or the land contest case was continued at the United States land ofllce this momlnir. Mr. Charles W. Owen, C. , was under examination when theKEvva went to press yesterday afternoon, and hereto is appended the continuation continu-ation or his evidence, which concluded con-cluded shortly before the adjourn meat for the day. The Witness said that Trhlle he had made no chemical analysU "or the specimens of the substratum, or salt in question, tasting one or the crystals had suggested to him that they conlalned a considerable lier- centage of sulphate, of soda, which was a'so an alkaline deposit or the lake, and of some commercial value. He ha 1 tested the water taken from the ponds overlying the salt deposit with Brume's hydrometer and ako 1 United States thermometer. It tested 7prcent of Mid matter, the specimen of water having been obtained about I50d feet north and a little west of the shanty, in tin, main pond on tbo disputed land. Of the 27 per cent or solid matterln the water, about 9 J would be salt, according to tho Beaume hydrometer. hy-drometer. Ho obtained a bottle ol water from the Great Salt Lake, directly west of the land In question, of which the teat gave 20 rr cent ol solid matter. In August tfells were dug and tested in Wituess' presence, and the percentage of solid matter then taken was, he b-lieved, about H. Water taken yesterday (Bun-day) (Bun-day) from theame well which bad in the meantime received considerable consider-able storm water, and of which a portion or the saline matter was posibIy precipitated upon the bottom, bot-tom, and which ho reared to stir up on account or disturbing mad and f"nd gave a iiercentage by the Beaume test or 9 per cent solid matter. mat-ter. Major Bird Alfred Thompson, the protestant. in a declaration un-i dcr oath, and Isaac J. Starouck aud Morgia I.. Sproat, In affidavits, corroborating Mr. Thompson, and sworn to on July 8th, 1&93, state that the lands now in question, which ho applies to eater under the Desert liand Act, were at that time "unappropriated, unoccupied and unsettled, because It has been impossible im-possible to cultivate It successfully an account of its dry and arid condition." con-dition." Isthattrue7 Mr. Thompson objected to tho question, to which Witness replied, "Certainly not," and said the laud was decidedly sallno in c'laracten The reclamation reclama-tion of this land by irrigation for agricultural purposes was in witness' wit-ness' opinion, quite impossible. The witness was cress-examined at considerab'e length by Mr. Thompson, his lino of questioning being similar to that adopted with the two preceJldg witnesses. In the coJre or his replies, Mr. Owen sttd his statement that ninety per cent of the solid matter was salt was a presumption, naseu upon teveral iiUVrcmt analyses which were ofll-ialand midebyMr.O. O.Allen and Captain J. T.Kingsbury. His own tests were based purely upoa Beaume's hydrometer, which was simply a test of density. Mr. Thompson What would be the effect or draining the water ofl these land? Witness It would slmp'ydry the land, and would not improve it from an agricultural point of view In any way whatever. Ho vas familiar with the Salt aud alkaline waters between the Jordan and Salt Iiakc They contained less salt but more soda than the lands In question: When the court met this morning, ilr. William J?.. Shelton, civil and hydraulic engineer, or this city, was ca'lcd as .a witness, ror the pro'c-t-ants. He bad been acquainted with these particular lauds he said, eince June 7 th of the present year, when he first visited them. He met Prof. J. Fewson Smith and Mr. Ijevi Reed there. On tne-noTtbrrn part of the Jeremy fc Co. salt lands they made n test of soma of the waters in some or the wells which had been dugindiHer-ent dugindiHer-ent places over that portion of the Und; they also ran a 1'ne of levels from the Great cUIt Lako through the northern inlet. Salt aud water weie foJnd deposited upon the land within the salt ponds, as saowu upon Exhibit preferring particularly par-ticularly to the land In dispute. The salt was covered with water from one to three iuehes deep. The levels showed that the mouth of the north inlet at that time was ailttle over a root higher than the surface or the lake. There was a veryre-eent veryre-eent wjter mark, which gave unduubted evidence that within with-in a few days prior to that time the water had flowed oer and into the Inlet. As to how far the water went he could not say, as they did not follow up the mark. He believed It reached tho Jeremy . Co alt lands "" w0 'M not bu positive as to that. Witness visited the lands again on August lltb. Messrs. Almy, Jeremy, iievl Iteed, Prof. Jones Prof, bmitb, and Messrs. B-iitan and Owen were present They drove over nearly every part or this laad, tested wells on different parts, examined the water In the artesian well at the shanty In fact, made a thorough examination of tho land. The land marked "sand bar" was simply a sandy rllgo thrown up by the action of the waves. Tho lanJ between tho "sand bars" and the like was a low, flat, sandy beach, with considerable mud mixed In, similar to the shores of the lake a long distance either way. In no stue was It agricultural or arable land. .... . Mr. Thompson moved to strike out this last answer, as incompetent. Major Bird asked tho witness If he liad any knowledge of arable and agricultural lands, or lands desert in character aud susceptible or reclamation. re-clamation. .... , Mr. Sbelton arswered In the Affirmative Af-firmative Forseven years or iiis life, he said, he traveled all through this western country. Iu Colorado, Wyo ming aud Idaho he had run ieveral irrigating dltcbei for the reclamation reclama-tion of desert lands. All these lands showed from tho vegetation upon them at that time, and from the character of the soil, that they were susccj-UWe of reclamation and of producing an agricultural crop. The only desert lands he had seen that would practically come under the head of "desert" were in Idaho and Wyoming. Thesa produced no vegetation at all, even where fresh water had been introdue-ed. The lands In that country had the common name ol "bad lands" and, in his. opinion, the land now In dispute at Garfield could very properly bear the same title so fir as agricultural products were concerned. This land was In fact, the beach ofthelakeforseveral miles each way, and was therefore, sullect to overflow by aDy rise of the lake. Theland in the southeast corner of the portion In dispute, and east and south of the lino bordering tho salt pond od south inlet, was a sandy clay.tlioroughly Impregnated with salt, carrying no vegetation except, so far as he could Eeo, a crass commonly called squirrel tail, and that only In small quantities. The salt ponds upon the .disputed lauds extended beyond tho latter, to tho north and cast. Tho lands In question showed decided water marks and left nodoubUnhls mind that they were nearly, ir not totally, submerged by the waters or the Great rUit lake during Its high water p-rlod. They were not at all capable or supporting vegetation, and, In -1 1 n- jlLl L much flesh jjjESWBif SsaaKSsKSs have some very remvlf.6 ehi)uld cMedlimiLiLJl .?Wo ans Her and crop bearimr Th.. Uoa. wit hal already been counted in the ponds, and the water. atthl? UnM.MUIreiskmlsied In them." rrirf the lighter salt, and would not have given the test tbt the water In E ione? rtakment. Therefore he beHoved this water was direct seepage from the Great Bait Lake Major Bird-Do you knowTfanv lands or like des"criPaon to those now iu dispute that have had the .lKCman.dyet nre Ifg salt from the rresh waters or Irrigation and the rains and snows? Mr. Thompson Objected to as XT ,s' 'material and Irrelevant, Major Bird We want to protect ourselves simply as to IU being lead Ing, and we deny that. Thebal- anco or the objection can gonr tTkJL'i la WOrt.h Wo will allow JheReclstrarand Receiver to draw their own conclusions as to its com. petency. Witness (answering tho question) -I do, and the land that 1 refer to Is called, I believe, the Trant Dyer claim, Btxmtlhreoand a hair miles to the nearest point or the lake. Toother questions witness said theland now In dispute was subject sub-ject toand overflowed by ft-eah water from the Jordan Blver very fre quentjy.Iu fact, whenever the river was high and the surplus w-ater let uown to ittbr the purpose or rellsv-Ing rellsv-Ing the .same. The effect of this w ater upon the land, as far as shown, was to raise the snlt and alkali to tho surrace-, wbrruit could be seenat the present day. From practical ob-serration ob-serration and from his knowledge or its present elevation he knew that It could not be flooded by the Great bait Jakc except at extreme high wat-r. He believed th'-tf were less chances Tar the reclamation reclama-tion orthe lands in dispute than of the Dyer lauds Just referred to. They carried so much salt that, in his opinion, not all the waters of Utah could ever reclaim them should the lake keep its normal condition. con-dition. On the occasion of bis visits to these lands witness saw parties employed making salt. After the salt was taken from the surface it was fn a wet and muddy state. He made bis examination for Jeremy i Co. Questioned as to the quality of tho water flowing from the artesian well, witness said the only examination, examin-ation, he made of it was by tasting, but that was sufficient, he considered, consid-ered, to condemn the water forever, either for drinking purposes or for Irrigation, as it carried come salt. The quantity, beside, was not sufficient suffi-cient for any irrigation whatever. There was no vegetation growing around the well. As to these lands being dry and arid (as had been declared by Alfred Thompson and others in their affidavits) affi-davits) witness said It strikes me that there is more water there than land. Major Bird In the same affidavits affida-vits the same parties also swore that there were no salines upon tbu laud now In dispute. Is that true? Witness (emphatically) It is not, and could not havo been at that time. Inquiry proceeding. |