Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1892-01-20
HOME RULE OR STATEHOOD.


For the DEsrurt LvENiNa NEws.l
Editor DCssrct AelUG
Not long siuco I received a short
note, Of which the following Is copy:
"Hadley u. johnson:
"Dear Sri notice by the Times
that You ATE opposed to the bin pruvid.
ing home rule for Utah. am at a
loss TO understand the position you
take. IL you have time 90 do ~, 1
should Do pleased to learn from you the
grounds Of your opposition 10 thu pro.
posed MEASURE"
! withhold the name Of the writer
OF the above note, but remark, how.
ever, that lac Is well known, pfumiu.
ent, popular and influential gentleman,
rs well as n thoroughly posted Demo-
crat. and one who Is entitled 10 be re.
spcc,el, aud who ~ highly respected
~ me tor the mauy admirable qualities
with which he Ia endowed.
lnasmuch NJ this gentleman seems
TO desire 10 obtain my Views iu regard
to this important quatiOu, though
for what purpose 10 not know, aud
as the salt lake Times saw proper to
pr int without any reason being as
sigued, tho alleged fact IL my Oppo.
slti0n 10 the Home Rule bill No demon.
mated, respectfully ask the use OF
space In the columns Of your widely
circulated paper 10 explain some Of the
reasons which induce me to occupy the
position ! do on the question.
fhN frat ftIufHu tnf huH Iat.a
viewed me, the reporter Tor that paper
did not know personally what ms
Views are, aud no doubt wrote from
hoarciy; but, In any event, tile word
oppose does not express ny views at
To oppose II 10 resist; 10 combat; 10
Withstand. Now, my position IL not
one Of combat or resistance. merely
entertain aud express my own ideas VI
what would best sub7erve the interest.
Of the people Of Utah. coincide paE.
tally with Pope, who wrote:
Tor forms ct government let tools contest.
Mhato'ct h best administered ls best
will quarrel with no man on this
question, but entertaining pers1nal
views, am not afraid or ashamed to
announce them In my plain simple
way.
To tho point then. remark that |
do not yield my support 30 the bill In
question, because | think there II an.
other plan which would, IL adopted,
prove 81 far gtolter benefit TO Utah,
refer to that Of statehood; aud believe
that II we urge this home rule plan,
whether successful or not, the effort
viii be In tIB way OF, aud hinder aud
% NftH. 0.
| merely have choice In favor OF
statehood In preference to tho plau
proposed 10y the home rule bill. / do
not say that the present system Of gov.
erning Utah ls-bettcr than the prapOs-
eli measure, but | DO say that state
hood would be better than either, aud
believe that should Congress ace
proper TO make any change Il would
be- more likely % admit u5 na State,
than top sss an net such as Is asked tor,
such a change would be, In fact, n
revolution 30 great that my opinion Is
Congress would hesitate 10 effect %.
II must he born in mind that Tor 100
years the United States has been
In the habit OF governing
tho Territories somewhat according
to the provisions Of our organic act.
Can II reasonably bc expected that
af'ur NO long timo, 30 great n change
as thepropDsed one would be abruptly |
brought ahluir think not, and !
hence withhold my support to II.
! have been informed that the pro |
posed measure was adopted by some II !
my co.wotkers In the Democratic !
party, aud | wish 90 say that my !
failure TO SEE the matter rs they nee Il, |
does not arise from a disposition TO |
antagOnl2e auy portion Of my Demo. |
cratic friends. On the contrary what |
I write Is merely TO let them know that |
!, who have been life long advocate |
of home rule, still adhere TO the prin.
oiplc.
ltthls question had been submitted |
TO the Democratic Territorial couven.
ton held Ia thls city last July, and u /
that convention Ind adopted aud made
Its advocacy part OF It's platform,
then In ihs, case | should have been
willing 10 waive my personal OblGc.
tons, butt s such was not the ease, 1
feel that am at perfect liberty To dis.
snnt from the views OF It's iriendf; aud
this dissent, az / have said, IA based
upon the fact that prefer statehood.
| observe that Senator Teller has in
trpduceu NH providing Tor the ad-
mission Of Utah ne a STATE. Should an
act such ~ he cnutgmplates
become "A law, thlnlS It would be
much better FOR Utah, than would be
the bill introduced by Senator Faulk-
ner, aud / repeat the opinion that IL |
Of success In both houses OF |
Congress would be- rs good II not bot |
ter, than the Faulkner bill. As one |
VI the Sovereign States In the Union !
We could say thatwepossessed homeUlo |
similar to that plsgrsscd by other States,
Should such enabling act dc passed,
have mo- doubt that tho people Of Utah
wouli adopt a constitution, hoping 10
he relieved Of ths present system.
Referring again 90 the platform Of the
DrmorFauc Territorial convention
held IN July last, lud the following
"upuu the subject Of statehood Tor
Utah, (Wpl declare that Wears Demo
cmiauud that our rAlly never has anu
never viii favor the admission 0l
vrrrIl0uus anti the necessary con-
dlli1us rt -tntr hood exist I'VE have
mo- hrainuoy u declaring that state
hood Tuul4 bu great boon 10 this