OCR Text |
Show nlENTWINS I IN POWER SITE I LAWSUIT 'flHHI ; A decision tbat la expected to nave far reaching effect In determining , land title eases In which companies j or private parties have made improve ments on federal properly without oh- , ; talning proper authority from the sec retary of the interior, was rendered ! yesterday by the United States elr . ilt court of appeals In St Paul T The decision reversed that of Judge i John A Marshall, of the United States court for this district In tlve case of the United States vs. the Utah Pow I er & Light company I The court decides, according to I pre BR dispatches from St. Paul last night that the Utah Power & Light 4 company has no rights to the land I It occupies In the Bear River natiou- I al foieBt In Cache county. Utah A J flume, reservoir and conduit are lo- I cated on the forest reserve I As the suit wes brought by United States District Mtcrne;, Hiram E Booth to perpetually enjoin the com pany from maintaining an alleged un lawful possession of these public lands the decision would possibly permit the I government lo confiscate the entire I property of the company on the for Jj e6l reserve I It Is believed that the case will be 4 taken to the supreme court of the I United States, although officials of I the Utah Power & Light compauj :.J said last nighl that they could not de- ; cide on their future action until their 1 counsel had time to consider the re- 'A versal thoroughly '& In 1912 Hiram E. Booth, the United Jj States district attorney for Utah filed ?8 suit against the Telluride Power com- , ' j pany, charging that the corporation '4 had a reservoir, flume and conduit A on the Bear river national forest with iji out permission ever having been Id granted or without the power com-B com-B pany ever having asked permission I S Wben the holdings of the Tellurlde I 9 Power company were absorbed by the . '"'Mi Utah Power & Light company the de- jm fense was assumed by the latter cov- w poratlon, Attorne.vs E. M Allison, Jr., I and Stephen H. Bailey of this city M being retained in both cases Attorneys for the Utah Power & M Light company entered on February 3 jfl of this year a motion that certain g parts of th original complaint be dls- I . M missed The motion waB taken un ?--5 der advisement Attorneys for the W defense argued that an act of con V gresB had authorized tue construc- , Iv-tI tion and maintenance of power plants t on foreBt reefrves Attorney Booth took the ptaud that the law only nave I such permission In connection wittl j the operations of mining and irngn tion properties. On June 10 ludgo Marshall ordered order-ed the dismissal, in accordance with the motion of the attorneys for the power companv District Attorney Booth immediately announced that he would appeal The appeal was arer'i ed before the circuit court sitting In Denver on October 1 The court had the matter under advieement Ml- I til the decision was announced yes terday |