Show THE WATER QUESTION ONCE more the water question is wo worrying tryIng a good many people in this neighborhood the city council has been wrestling with it mightily for some time and the people are very much disturbed over it there are several complications which make it more than ever a knotty problem conflicting interests and alleged rights figure in opposition to powers claimed by the municipal corporation and the cry for more MOM water comes up from different directions what we said paid on this last fall and which was pooh mooed in certain quarters is now BOW forcing itself upon general recognition we have no doubt that the city fathers father s will give this matter their most earnest attention they will we are sure seek to bring about the greatest good to the greatest number but there is one feature of the question that they ought not to undervalue der value it is the prior rights which some of our citizens claim and which they consider are ignored or treated with contempt the city council of course do not own the waters that how flow into this city they have ample powers conferred by charter to regulate control and distribute them for the best good of the inhabitants no one owns anything that pertains to flowing dowing w water ater but the reasonable use thereof and that ownership is under the laws lawe by priority of appropriation pria tion these prior rights it is claimed have in many instances been set at nought in the deals and transfers and changes that have been made and settlers who have no water rights under the law have been supplied to the detriment and loss of the lawful owners of such rights one thing is sure citizens who had prior rights to the use of the waters of city creek do not now receive any water from that stream and their gardens are drying up while the water they originally appropriated is being sprinkled upon lawns and allowed to run upon sidewalks by day and night in comparatively rat ively newly improved localities there is a feeling of great dissatisfaction growing up over this it is complained that the violation of these prior rights has not been condoned by the substitution of service from other sources because the latter are totally inadequate to the demand and out of all proportion to the supply of the prior appropriation this swapping and trading does not seem to answer the end designed it has created complications without increasing the supply at any rate to anything like the proportions required and expected the city council will have to look for some permanent source of water the right to control which cannot be disputed which will not involve the ruin of farmers who have settled upon st streams rems whether their claims are legal or moral nor the deprivation of old settlers of water the right to use which is capable of complete demonstration and to assert which some are talking of an appeal to the courts there is a disposition in certain directions to throw odium upon everything done by the city council this is part of a deep and dirty scheme of a political character it should be discouraged by every good and reasonable 61 citizen and at the same time the city authorities should be careful that they do not play into the hands of the enemy by giving people who have undoubted rights any valid and certain cause of complaint AM AH the water powers conferred upon the city council are qualified by such provisos provisor pro as s these that nothing herein shall be construed to interfere with the water rights accrued by priority of appropriation amendment to charter 1886 that the control shall not be exercised to the injury of any rights already acquired by actual owners amendment of 1888 this is a subject pregnant with importance and unless it is properly treated it will bring forth a whole of troubles |