| Show THE TRE CITY COUNCIL AND TIIE tile CANAL RAILROAD tue THE city council has declined to grant the petition of the S L and IT D railway company for the rig right h t of way along the canal bank about which there has been so much recent controversy the vote it appears was unanimous in committee and council we believe the decision will he endorsed by the business men of this city and bf by zany many many of the more thoughtful minds of 0 the he county outside of the municipality at the same time there will be quite a number who will feel disappointed at the result and may blame the city fathers for foi their action it we ive under understand sta nd that the refu refusal sa I 1 of the grant was based on two general grounds one the interests of the city the others the interests of the people southeast of the city the necessity of guarding the thu canal from any any control ur or interference from another power ur or company other olber than the city corporation ils as comprehended in the first the importance of keeping free any entanglements entangle ments which might be injurious to the people holding property along the line of the canal Is included in the second that the right of way along the canal bank would give any company pa ny owning it powers that might seriously e rio ugly affect the full free vree and perfect control of that important waterway water way wax cannot be fairly disputed it is conceded that the present railroad company seeking it would endeavor to use its powers in conformity with the public a ic we welfare fare and the needful authority ty of the city council but no guaranty canin the nature of things thin abe be given that the present resent management or ownership ot t the e railroad will continue no one ean eau say infallibly into whose hands or control it may again the difficulties that might arise between the railroad comp iny and the people along tile the line of the canal are are acknowledged on both sides side particularly in view of the possible transfer of ownership or management mana cement to strangers one of the he objections offered at first by parties who are now favorable to the railroad was ivas that in disputes between citizens and corporations the latter had great advantages in litigation the power of mon eythe strength of combination regularly engaged attorneys who would plead without extra expense etc are pitted against individuals comparatively helpless experience and indisputable facts have demonstrated the odds in favor of such corporations but against this it burbe argued an ample guaranty was promised and aud given to tile the settlers hy the projectors of the railway that all disputes should be settled by arbitration the aggrieved citizen or citi citizens zeng to appoint one arbitrator the company another and they two a third this is fair elou enough h in principle the intention of the company in making the arrangement was no doubt sound and sincere but how is it possible to make it permanent letus lotus let us suppose that the ownership or matla maila management gement of the railroad changes and that a dispute arising as to damages in any given case the new management refuses not nod only to pay the demand but also to appoint an arbitrator what then who is to compel the appointment why it will be answered there is a guaranty cua gua rinty binding the company to make it just so fut but is that guaranty any more binding than the law requires damages to ne be paid and do railroad corporations always honor what the law or a guaranty without we have not so learned by experience or observation such a guaranty would probably hold rood good enough under the present management but oil on the accession of another it might not be wortha worth a puff of mountain wind now if tile the interests of the citizens along the line of the canal should become jeopardized by tile railroad on its bankard bank ban kana kand and troubles should arise that could only be settled by expensive law powerful corporation to oppose would not some of the very persons dersons who now blame the city for not grant granting ilig the right of way cry out against the city fathers who helped to put thern them into the dilemma by giving the company privileges thus misused we believe they would some one will ask is the nias opposed to the enterprise we au answer siver no we have already exhibited our interest in it and said all we could I 1 in a justice in its favor we would like to see sec railroads in various directions i 8 such u c h a road as projected would be of gr gread great c at benefit to the tile deseret news company in carrying tarrying materials to and paper from its mill near cottonwood canon it would be of utility in many ways but it does not follow that the city must give a canal bank away in order to assist a private project however valuable abe it may be or however worthy in lit its object tiie tile right of way could doubtless b be obtained on another route by purchase as in other cases and the road be hullt hulit without in fring inc ing upon epou public property which has bas passed into the control of the ahe in municipal uni ual 1 I p at authorities who are arc bound t to 0 cu guard rd t the h interests of the city to tiie tile bt best L of their judgment and ability we offer thebe reflections for the benefit of our county cousins who have become converted to the project and who may f eel feel disappointed at the action of the council we i believe belleve that upon consideration full they will coincide with the leading business men of this city in the conclusion that the city council while unopposed to the railroad or its enterprising projector has been guided in its decision ty by sound discretion and regard for the general welfare |
