The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1890-10-23
MIR. GooDwIN's REASONING.

Mr.. GOODWIN puts forth final reason
why the Mormons should all be disfran
chised. He says Mr.. CANNON said, seven
years ago, that, sit was not to be VOC dop-
uli cor Del, but it was to be Vor Del uor
popult." Further, that inasmuch as it was
show by testimony before Judge AMBER
son that all Mormons in good standing
were bound to obey in all things their
Chiefs" therefore Mormon would obey
Mr.. CANNON as he would Con himself, and
should consequently be disfranchised, etc.
The proposition to punish the Mormons
for words that Mr.. GOODWIN alleges were
uttered seven years ago by one of their
leaders, might appear sufficiently ridicu-
lous to any sane person without any com
ment OF our part. But the Liberal candi
pate is fanatic of the first order. To him
it is perfectly clear that one person or class
of persons should be punished for the al
legged words of another person; and he can
not understand how those he seeks thus to
punish should complain in such case
The Liberal fanatic makes the mistake
Of supposing that whatever is said by lead
ing Mormons is taken as inspired. He
hunts up something he considers objection
able in the words of some church leader,
and says that inasmuch as the Mormons
believe everything their leaders say is in
spired, therefore they will carry into prac
tice every such suggestion made to them.
The fact is that they do no such thing.
They obey counsel if they believe the coun
sci is right and if in addition to so believing
enough to impel them to do so.
The reasoning of the Liberal fanatic is as
follows: The Mormons believe everything
their chiefs say is inspired, therefore they
are bound to obey their chiefs in all things
One of their leaders once said, Vor Die, uOr
popui. This means that the people must
obey the leaders. II the leaders should di-
rect the people to vote certain way they
would do so. Therefore they should be
DISTINGUISHED.
Founded on false premise and devel-
oped through a series of invalid conclu-
sions, this final conclusion is simply not
deduced at all. The same reasoning will
convict the Liberal candidate. He is be-
lever, so he says, in the divinity of the
Bible. But what man believes is divinely
inspired, he is bound to obey. The Bible
sanctions slavery. Therefore Mr. Coon
WIN is believer in slavery, and from the
very nature of things must be its sup
porter. He will therefore keep slaves if
he has an opportunity to do so. Hence he
should be disfranchised.
| MAcAULAY has demonstrated the insult
ficiency of Mr.. GooDwIN's argument to the
comprehension of every mind capable oil
understanding the subject. We quote q
few CT his words
ITO punish a man because he has COM
mitted crime, or because he is be
lieved, though unjustly, to have com
mitted crime, is not persecution. re
punish man because we infer from
the nature of some doctrine that the
holds, or from the conduct of other persons
who hold the same doctrines with him, is
persecution, and is IN every case foolish
and wicked.
s'But to argue that because a man is 6
Catholic, he must think it right to murder
heretical sovereign, and that because he
thinks it right that he will attempt to do it
and then to found on this conclusion law
for Furnishing him as if he had done it, is
plain persecution.
''Map, in short, is SO inconsistent crea
ture that it is impossible to reason from his
belief to his conduct, or from one part o.
his belief to another"
If Mr.. GOODWIN were capable of under.
standing the argument of MAcAULAY for re
ligious liberation, we would cite him to it
Our present purpose is merely to direct
public attention to the fact that Mr.. COOP
WIN is a Jhorough-going and unreasonins
fanatic. Heis the Liberal candidate.