Salt Lake evening Democrat. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1885-1887, 1885-07-13
SATURDAYS MEETING.

.
Vefy1e% people who are not adherents
of the dominant church in this Territory
but will commend the spirit which
wdhpted-tseS calling sef the meeting 'erf
Saturday night to give public expression
to the feelings Of indignation that all felt
concerning Che hoisting Of the Tag at half
mast on tlie<aguFt1s. no naataa6sfow much
they may differ as to the policy of such
meetings. But such meetings are not a
guarantythat all said at them can be
coafQenae6 the same as the spirit that
cslGJ4lsfA- sANd suSl il was on Saturday
night. Patriotic zeal is not always
the same as patriotic wisdom, We have
in mind the remarks of Colonel NJ. M.
Keish9 Et Saturday 's;meeting, and refer.
to that portion of the gentleman's speech
that had to do with the attitude assumed
by the comansndant at Fort Douglas,
General A. Mcdowell McCook. Mr..
kaighnskS- pays - tflaa General the
tributes of honor and respect that
his war record entities him to, but said
he "could not help thinking that if the
old veteran who established Fort Doug
las, General f. p. Connor, had been in
command, there on the last Fourth of
JelS thf. .fagsJn Obs city lyol1ld not have
been long at haltmast," and then he re-
lated an interview that he had had with
General Connor From Mr.. -Kaighn's in
terview it is TO be inferred
that General Connor would have
marched Z his command into the
city and have hoisted the flags at all, risks
and costs. If such would have been
General .Gonnot,s course, we are very
glad he was not in command on that
day Men naturally deprecate and feel |
outraged and indignant at such proceed |
ings as those that were witnessed here on |
the Fourth, but we sincerely believe that |
R-true crtizers wonld deprecatel stfH |
more the unauthorized interference of |
the military on such an occasion. Gen
eral McCook but did his duty on the
Fourth, and had he marched his
troops into this city on that
day { without the Sanction & and
command of his superiors, he would have
committed an outrage greater than the
one that was committed. He would very
properly have laid himself liable to
court martial, disgrace and dismissal
The interference of the military in the
civil affairs Of any government must
eventually mean the subordination of the
civil to the military power, and all the
direl consequences that that means. If
superior officer is at liberty to deem one
occasion justification for an unauthor-
ized interference in affairs, why
may he not so deem anotherP
If the military in this country act upon
their impulses upon one occasion, why
may they not upon all? Although the
affair OF the Fourth was not in any sense
bipartisan affair, still, with the stern dis
cipline and absolute subordination of sol
diers that exists in all armies, if license
were allowed them to act in their discre-
ton, what as to prevent a commander
using his troops TO further the political
lsissnes ief THE. party-with With he SYM
pathizes? However much one NAV
regret the political condition of this
Iesritory, and = however bad it .isf
Tor General McCook to have come into ,
this town and assumed control of
,hipgs on the Fourth would have been a
M gt9ater and more serious ioutraS IL AAk
5he one that was committed, and one :
upon which Americans in all parts of the
.sg74Ts R4haVs l9eEed sath 5ssF,sini !
yrave apprehension. General McCook
jook proper course, and one that should :
&c dommeaAlsi although be but did his .
iuty. --