Show p JI MR R COf J O HI rho will ot the th suIt city t to enjoin It from Into f with three limo ot of tho canal coin 8 for tor the tho construction nOd of the pumping lUI u n to the elt city te Ic the Whilo It lo Is to 10 I n nov w that thal the parties to t the volt HIlt that t they had no legal for then n ton and ond therefore Ud lIel nt go o to toce toI I ce cOurt to have gauzy ory torn to 0 pieces It would have been IIII tit to Il ft decision ot of tho Iho thoC j C ourton urt n the Involved In I lint question be for good that p f obstructionists inns not flOt Ifo Olen to tO tOI I ot of ii At cr and tako steps to the of tho t ft A All painted out In iii the News i 1 city attorney took on nn lb I 2 1 lion Ion when ho n provision of thin tho CO 0 M On fi I t ct In oC oCt o othe t the vater We out outI I nt tho timo tie tho non of at Ih lt of the Constitution to the tho matter mattern in n dispute Any tyro In 10 the tho law might see itt a by that pro v that It whatever to todo todo do with the at ar the tho elt eit to It 10 own Interests and continue JIll its 09 ii t with for and 1 n common pur purI Joa It Is n matter so plain that oven I the city attorney ought not mno to have err ll U that In the Con flU nit nil th which he for or It t and that the CUl ee which hIen ho cited In of his vIey Io wan to It which by time rby waif wa no not I tine act re 10 reI I that th Con I it not he be retroactive anti 1111 pe t or of the sith lIh the canal for tor the bring bringIng Ing out of vater from Utah Lake auth tIl time for Its liMP Une Pot For many year ears elt City hUll b be n joined with for this common purpose while Its to the use UIO of tho th water In III ItH town own canals WM waa time the city as Joint oWner with tho those e companies In Inthe n the to Conduct the thu water from the tho JakE ako to th the poInt of dl vision IsIon that time tho tl nal provision to those that t joint own Put nil an end to that and aTul titus thus swept awu the tho might of oC time lIle city to time tho Water Vater titus thull Is i no that It II make one dent tient to consider It It If the jho case had gone to trial the nt at ato o noys retained to defend the Richard and Varlan would doubtless hao presented the whole matter Including thu tho history of the Iho conjointly with the tho canal companies durin n it f many yearn nUll and that tong before beCore the state talo Constitution was vas framed It would have been peon een that the tho plain INs had not II a legal legot point to UpOn pan and that they had n II little foun Coun n for their In common ens ense AlI that they have hae In 18 I 1 to Put the tho elt to trouble and expense mill and to Ind r the erection 1 ot of the pumping ia I whIch time and experience haA em em would rendered un the RUtt brought b 11 the tho farm r re the saved II a vast mount In the or of croll that thal have havo prevented the nil nd troubles unit at hD have arisen In consequence of aile We lYe need not lot timId subject fur furmer mer nt at present It Is n a matter of that citizens wore were In by faulty or of law ndoC the tho Constitution to mom oUy In the actIon that has hao ben been dill ds d train from the ho court on an motion of Their torne It Is 15 with how hower er that we note the net that th line that the tho parties partie iye e nod that now oh 01 It Is III too Iota lato to obtain tine the bene te 8 that would have arisen tn this sea lien n from the unobstructed union ut of uto to o ell eity with the tt cure Q a flow of water time I can roo no ahead ohead and enter to necessary ary tar tor the tho pre or of lie its water rights as al to Utah 1 ku Its outlet nail for tor an further n time antI and render essar Let us IS he be that C threatened 1 even cven at timis timise e dote I Is no mow at 31 un an end |