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

II aGI1t64A<1< &-<4 = - ASA$&4 -
cratic gain of loss. and Republican gair
of 5s777, and a Liberal loss of 399. 1t Is
safe 10 say, that no more Democrat Is
voted for MIR. Cannon than Republicans
voted for Mr. Rawlins so how can the
Republican gain of SIN, against the
Democratic gain of 1,0S5 be accounted for
in this Democratic territory? Certainly
not from the Liberal loss. for that was
only 500. and we have right to claim
some of them. The only way it
| can be accounted for, is, that they came
| from the Mormon people. There was no
| other place for these votes to come from,
But how was it in this Democratic ter
ritory that the Democrats only gained
Loss votes and the Republicans gained
5,7f7? and this too in a Democratic year,
when that party was making great gains
! over the whole country. and the Republi-
cans were making corresponding losses
| The only possible way to account for it
/ is, that the charges made in 1892 were
true, and the church men did use their
/ influence for the son of the master; and
! the further charge was also true, that
/ the people were advised to divide as
nearly equal in the two parties, as pos
sible. and if they would not do that, not
TO vote at all. You know that officials
of the Mormon church went about the
country, giving this advice and these in
.structions, and that some who did so
claimed to be Democrats, but were obey
ing church counsel. The whole matter Is
easily explained when you know the
facts and knowing them are willing to
tell them.
In 1894 the vote for Delegate to Congress
shows Democrats 1888, Republicans D.,
S4S, a gain to the Democrats of 1922 and
to the Republicans $685. Now the last
Liberal vote 1888 was 1881, and If the
Republicans got all of them (Which of
course they did nou, and that number be
taken from the Republican gain. they
would still have a gain of 1924 votes
more than the Democratic gain. and the
question is where did this great increase
to the Republicans come from, in this
Democratic territory. and how was 1t
brought about? for we have shown that il
did not come from the Liberals. 1t is
safe to say of 1894, what we said of 1892,
that no more Democrats voted for Mr..
Cannon than Republicans voted for Mr..
Rawlins. The only explanation is. that
they came from the Mormon voters, the
same place they did in 1892, and that Mr..
Cannons political son was again in the
field, and church leaders were continuing
the work begun in the years before. An
other remarkable fact in this Demo-
cratic territory IS that the Republicans
have gained since 1890, 1473O votes,
against 5,407 votes gained by the Demo-
Gratis in the same time. And the further
fact that all this gain on the part of the
Republicans was made in the years when
Mr.. Cannons political son was a candi-
date for office, and the greatest gain of
all was IN the year 1894. when Mr..
that defeat showed their appreciation OF
the man who in one session of Congress,
had done more for the people of this ter
ritory. than any predecessor, and what
the Mormon people had not been able to
accomplish by themselves after forty
years trying. 1t was utterly impossible
for Mr.. Rawlins to be defeated, except by
the strongest possible church influence,
and when one reviews his splendid work
in Congress for this people. and then to
know he was betrayed by those who were
under the greatest obligations to him. /
indignation can only find adequate eX-
preston in most emphatic profanity. I
Mr.. Rawlins was not defeated because Of
Mr.. Cannon's good reputation, character. /
attachments or standing in this territory. /
To find the cause of Mr.. Rawlins defeat, (
we must look for some influence power /
full enough to crush the natural instinct /
of gratitude that this people could not
help feeling for him. and that influence /
can only be found in the Mormon church /
and it's leaders. And it is a we'll known /
fact that this Influence was used TO de- I
feat Mr.. Rawlins both in 1892 and 1894 In
1892 it did not begin soon enough. but in
1894 it succeeded. Some Of the circun-
stances attending its use in 1892, was
brought to the attention of the church |
ax-ffc
presented to them showing that various
officials of the church including one
Gibbs, who signs himself secretary to /
the presidency of the church. went among I
the people claiming that in asking them T
to support the Republican ticket they (
were doing the bidding of the leaders OF /
the church None of these afiidavits have /
ever been impeached, nor were the cul- /
prits in any manner disciplined, hence !
we conclude they did speak by authority. /
as they claimed they did. In 1894 the |
same influence was used by other and +
higher church officials, notably Apostle /
John Henry Smith, who went about urg-
ing the people to vote for Cannon, and /
by his talk leading them to believe he |
was speaking the wishes of the presi-
dency of the church, as no doubt he was.
You know that the church through its
officers and agents, obtained the names
of every voter in Sanpete county just be-
fore the@las telection. Sanpete county was
confessedly close, and We lost 1t, did We
not?
If there was no danger of church IN
fiuence" in 1894, and none had been used
In 1892, why did you and other Mormon
speakers for Democracy constantly warn
the voters not to violate their honest
political convictions at the suggestion of
any one. and ask them if they did so,
what they could say to their children
when they asked why they voted con-
trary to what they had taught them?
Was it not for the reason that certain
Mormon Democrats had the years before
1894. been over the territory advising the
people to divide equally, that we could
not last fall get them out on the STUN?
You know to whom 1 refer. If the
church was not, and is not, in politics,
why have a good many young Democrats
If Cache county been notified since cleo
ton. that they were to go off on mis-
;ions? And why have good many
Mormon Democrats been notified to ap-
bear for trial, for having told the truth
about the heads of the church?
In this communication l speak for my
;elf. but at the same time I am sure l
write the convictions of great many
Democrats of this territory. have wait
d a long time for some one to set the
,eople right on these subjects, and as no
me has done so, take it upon myself
O do II. for I feel that every one has
heir suspicious about the matter, and 1t
right they should know, what l con-
- Owe tho facts I would be glad to