The Evening dispatch. [volume] (Provo, City, Utah) 1891-1895, 1895-10-29
TOO ONE SIDED.
position.

Yesterday in conversation with @
republican who stands we'll up in the
church, we heard an honest confession
in answer to our protest against apOs-
talic stumping. Said our republican
friend If your party had not nomi-
mated Apostle Moses Thatcher, Apostle
John Henry Smith would not have
taken the stump this season for the
republican party. He went on the
stump expressly to Offset that nomIna-
tion. THEREIN lies taclt concession
of that for which we have all along
contended, VIZ that apostles take the
stump because of the weight their in
huenoe carries with them as apostles.
When charged with that, our friend
remarked well. your party has
Apostles Moses Thatcher, Lorenzo
Snow, Franklin D. Richards, Brigham
Young. Heber j. Grant and others.
all democrats, and whose influence on
your side ought to reconcile your party
to the work done by President Joseph
F. Smith and Apostle John Henry
Smith," To which we reply;-Apostle
Thatcher has made but three, not ex-
ceeding four addresses since the divis-
ion on party lines. And all but one,
and that not exceeding ten
minutes in his home CITY, have
been addresses to conventions
in which but a comparatively small
number of people were pre- sent. So
lar as the other democratic apostles
are concerned, they have been OF no
earthly use to the democratic party, as
among all that number, Heber j.
Grant has made only one short speech.
On the contrary, Apostle Smith has
been on the stump, by the consent"
OF his superiors, nearly all the time
during each campaign, while President
Smith has been an ayowed partisan
from almost the first moment of di-
vision, and, as it is presumed, by the
consent" of hls superiors. But the
first apostle that appears even as a ST,
lent candidate for the democrats, must
needs be "disciplined" for not first
obtaining the consent" of his repub-
lican superiors (?).
Now, cannot our apostolic friends
see two distinct propositions in the
First that it was an act of
gross injustice to Messrs. Thatcher
and Roberts to discipline" those gen
tlemen for entering politics and ut the
same time to consent to republican
apostles taking the stump? Was it |
not also gross injustice to the demo-
cratic party to select so lnopportune
4 time and place in which to
perform the "disciplining" (?) and
aking all the circumstances involved
n this entire ecclesiastical influence
n politics, from beginning to end, is
here not just; cause for a mighty kick
rom the democracy for that which to
nbiased minds is apparently unjust?
The other proposition to which we
esire to call the atteDtion of our ap-
stalic brethren is this: Can they not
ee the dangers to the church that have
1me and will continue to come
trough apostles entering politics? Can
ley not see that their presence on the
tump will always be taken advant-
ye of by both sides, and that there !
i II be an everlasting quarrel as to
hich end of the political scales has
le preponderanee of apotolic weight?
Mess the quorum of the apostles t
split exactly in two in the middle q
and each one take the =
ump and make certain number of 0
eeches during each campaign, there Il
III always be jealously on the part of n
e rank and file of both parties? o
The DISPATCH doesn't expect any II
swers to the foregoing, and merely tt
Ks those questions to show how the g
ople feel and to set the apostles to ii
mixing. v
az
UNDER A MISAPPREHENSION, ell