The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-04-27
CHURCH INFLUENCE IN POLITICS.

from H. j. D1nnlny, a lawyer of thi.
city who was chairman of the cam
paign committee of the Utah Demo
cratic party in 1894. His letter should
be read carefully before the perusa
Of these remarks.
1 The writer endeavors TO mix I'D TIL;
Herald and some Individual or indt
Vlduals connected with The Herald. in
order to become personal and dis
courteous. 1t should be understood thai
The Herald has no church. 1t Stands
up for no church, it attacks nc
church. It defends such general prin.
ciples as appear to it to be right, and
( opposes that which it believes to be
wrong. The writers of The Herald
STAFF have their perfect liberty of faith,
! for which The Herald is in no way
responsible. The personal references
in Mr. Dinniny's letter are merely
Shafts of malice which show the
writer's animus and also his childish
weakness.
The connection of the person to
whom the gentleman evidently alludes.
with the Democratic party dates back
quarter of a century. Mr.. Dinniny
is as ignorant of that matter as of a
great many things which he pretends
10 De acquainted with, but which he
knows nothing about except from
hearsay. He is comparatively a new
conner and, like others of his class. has
evidently been stuffed by older resi-
dents with anti-Mormon romances and
notions.
The Herald is compelled to employ
terms the use of which it has fire.
quently deprecated, because Mr.. Din
niny makes them prominent. Nor
mon and Gentle" would be elimi-
mated from the Utah vocabulary,
were it not for the kind of attacks
which the gentleman seems to think
he is called upon TO make.
As to the attitude of The Herald
in relation Ito the exercise of Church
influence in political affairs, the files
Of this paper are the best reference.
The Herald has not only drawn the
line repeatedly, with sharp distinct
ness, between the proper and i'm
proper exercise of religious authority,
but has thrown open its columns to
authentic statements Of the employ
ment of ecclesiastical power in favor
Of any political party.
The Herald has never claimed that
such influence has not been attempt
ed by some prominent individuals.
We challenge Mr.. Dinniny to pro-
duce any such denial Our position
has been that it has not succeeded in
turning Democrats from their polit-
ical faith. The gentleman tries to
confuse these different propositions,
to place The Herald in false posi-
ton.
Take the case of the afidavits in
reference to the action of Mr.. Gibbs,
which Mr.. Dinniny drags in without
occasion. After all that was alleged,
or proven. if the term suits him bet
ter, what did it accomplish? Has
Cache county turned Republican? Is
it not still a Democratic stronghold?
On the Dinniny theory 1T should be a
big Republican raAying ground, be-
cause Church influence" was SO
strongly exercised to make it so.
Now, to go back to the division ON
party ines-old ground that Mr.. Din
but which he knows little about
except by report The idea that
the members of the Peoples party. /
or as he determines to put It, the
Mormon people were all Democrats,
grew out of the fact that anti-Mormon
10 81 t,o
party, which at it's organization de-
clared against the Mormon Church and
influence in politics, as we'll as its
attitude on the marriage question.
The Peoples party was strong for
local self-government. 1t resented the
of the national with the
local authority. The fight was with
the Republican party. What help the
people obtained at the seat
of government in their struggle for
what they believed to be their rights
and liberties, came chiefly from Demo-
Gratis. Naturally the Peoples party
leaned to the Democratic party on
these issues.
But the distinctive principles Of the
two national parties were not dis
cussed. Only by a comparative few
were they understood. The very po-
5ition taken by the orators on both
sides when the division took place,
showed that they took the ground
that they were addressing people who
had not been at all familiar with ma
tional politics.
The Herald has started with the
of 1892 in quoting figures
the progress of the parties,
because that was the first year when
both parties made a real struggle for
supremacy. Previously little had been
lone in an organized way by the Re
oublicans to make converts. In that
year a vigorous territorial campaign
was fought for the first time after the
division. To say that then or in the
previous year the Mormon people were
Ill Democrats, in party sense, is alb
;olutely untrue.
Thousands of them could not give a
lear definition of the difference be-
ween Republicanism and Democracy.
heir leanings were towards the Demo-
ratio party for the reasons we have
AIMED. But when the Peoples party
lvided, it was bona fidc division, not
mere change of name-a slump into
he bosom of the Democracy. Republi- ,
an orators had field for educational 4,
FORK, and in 1892 they went at it with
I'll, I 7