The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-08-30

papers that Republican catechism''
has been prepared. and that the same
is being distributed from the office Of
the "Woman's Exponent" thus indi-
eating that the document is designed
especially for the use Of women whom
1t is sougth to thus indoctrinate in
the principles and policies of Republic
canism. Numerous Republican jour
mails have endorsed the catechism, and
it has been officially promulgated in
Republican conventions, and is now
circulating throughout Utah. SO that
there need be no question as to its
adoption and authenticity.
As the women of Utah are now to
participate in the work of framing and
administering our civil and political
institutions, and as this document
seems especially designed for the guild
ance of women, it is right and proper
that it should receive some notice from
those women who do not concur in
the doctrines and policies that char
acterize the Republican party as dis
tinguished from the Democratic party.
In attempting to present a criticism of
this catechism l shall endeaVor to do
so in a spirit of fairness and kindli-
ness, in the hope that some useful in
formation may be impaired to those
women who feel disposed to take an
earnest interest in public affairs.
| first call attention to question of
this catechism, which reads as fol-
III
party organized?' Answer: Its foun-
dalton was laid in 1889 by Washington,
Adams and Hamilton. 1t has been
, known by its present name since 1856"
This answer seems misleading. The
plain implication is that the Republic
can party of today, party which had
its definite and historic organization
in 1856, is entitled to reach back I'M
der another name to 1883, a which
time Washington and others laid its
foundation. The error consists in max
ing a continuity Of opinions identical
with the continuity of an organization
wherein the opinions, or some of them,
may be incorporated. Now, Washing
ton may have entertained certain opin-
ions which, with others, have been
embodied in the platform of some po-
litical party now operating. The prin-
ciples accredited to Washington may
be good and true. But they may be
supplemented by bad principles, and
the party may have degenerated into
!. a tyrannical, oppressive and unjust or
ganization, and it's claim of paternity
from Washington may be as untrue as
that good can flow from a fountain of
evil, or that a good tree brings forth
bad fruit.
The truth is, that while principles
concerned, with the meaning and pur-
poses that they have today, it is mis-
leading and vicious to attempt to
christen them III the fountain of pat
riotism that flowed from Washington's
soul, or TO make him the godfather of
any Of the partisan organizations that
are seeking to establish their claims
TO the Suffrages of the people.
The party system OF the United
States has had a distinct development
of its own, and not until after Jack
sons administration did parties as
sumo their present functions and ex-
ercise their far reaching power, con-
trolling, as they do, not only the pat
ronage of the government, but in a
very large degree the legislative and
executive departments. This vast de-
Velopment of parties is the result of
little more than half a century of
American history,
Washington was not party man,
as we now understand the sphere of
party action and party government.
He recognized no parties or party ma
chinery as a preliminary condition
under which legislation should be pre-
determined, or the country governed,
as is the case at present. We do not
speak of parties" in the accepted
ocratic or Republican organizations.
although there are wide differences of
opinion within them. These differences
do not make parties in the modern
sense of the term; and yet these diver
Sif1ed shades Of opinion within a party
are analogous to the condition of So
called party organizations that pre-
vailed throughout Washington's adj
ADMINISTRATION. There were differences
of opinion as to principles and poll
cies in Washington's cabinet, but no
greater perhaps than prevailed in
( Lincoln's cabinet. Washington had
both Hamilton and Jefferson in his
cabinet, and the other members were
equally divided in political sentiment.
Washington did not hold to any party
in our partisan sense. He believed
in and practiced the theory of a non
partisan government, and all differ
ences OF opinion were harmonized I'M
der the same administration.
1t was on this theory of non-parti-
zanship that the electoral system was
framed. The presidential electors
were originally designated to be made
independent and non-partisan, and for
Q time they fulfilled this purpose of the
constitution in the election of a presi-
dent; but after while party spirit
developed 10 such a degree that the
original intent OF the electoral system
was lost sight of, and the electors be-
came mere automatic cogs in the party
wheel 1t is not unlikely that in the
future progress of society, a condi-
ton of affairs may arise wherein the
original intention of the constitution
as to a non-partisan government NAV
again prevail, so that all shades of
opinion may be represented in the
same cabinet and administration.
However, whether such a result is
at all likely to ensue is immaterial in
this connection. The fact of import
ance is that the truth of history re-
flutes the plain purport Of this cate
chiSm in its purpose to make Washing
ton responsible for the paternity of the
Republican party. There is no con-
tinuity of Republican organization
reaching back to 1889; nothing of the
kind IT is a lamentable perversion of
Athe truth. There was 10 political
party" in our partisan sense in Wash
5ngt6n's time. The idea of such q marty
was not originated in American poli-
tics until many years afterwards.
40 continuity