The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1896-04-24

Ny Dear Sir:-As there has been time
for the sober second thought of the
people to come TO them L trust it will
not be out of place for me to present
my views on the new manifesto and
some other matters growing out of
the controversy occasioned by its pub
LEGATION.
SO far as 1 am advised, am not the
only member of the Mormon church
that has spoken right out in meetin' .
refusing to support the manifesto.
While there are many who have talked
under their breath, doubling its util-
ity or its wisdom, when it came to the
point where a man should assert him
self, they lacked the courage of their
convictions
AT the reconvened convention of the
Democratic party of our territory in
October last l cheerfully endorsed the
eight declarations of truth which were
presented and adopted by that con-
vention. (You, Mr.. Editor, were con-
spicuous figure on that historic occa-
sion.) l believed them right then, and
believe them correct now
To me there appears to be on your
part an inconsistency. You claim in
your editorial of April that our con-
tention in those eight declarations and
the manifesto, are in accord. l quote
from the manifesto:
I'VE unanimously agree to and pro-
mitigate as rule that should always
be observed in the church and by every
leading official thereof THAT
BEFORE ACCEPTING ANY POSI-
T1O -
which would interfere with his eccle-
siastical duties, and BEFORE AC-
CEPTING A NOMINATION AND EN-
TERING INTO ENGAGEMENTS TO
PERFORM NEW DUTIES, SAID OF
FICIAL SHOULD APPLY TO THE
PROPER AUTHORITIES AND
LEARN FROM THEM WHETHER
HE CAM etc, etc.
The sixth declaration referred to be-
fore reads, THAT a trust is imposed
upon each citizen in a free country to
MENT, AND ABSOLUTELY FREE
FROM CONTROL OR DICTATION
ENTHUSIASTICALLY OR OTHER
WISE"
I frankly confess, Mr.. Editor, that to
me there is a wide difference between
the ideas conveyed by the words in
capitals in the quotation, from the
manifesto, and those in capitals in
rule six, above quoted.
One says he must LEARN FROM
THEM, etc, and the other says he is
FREE TO ACT. etc. You claim
the church, as such, has
1 maintain the church as such
has not the right to establish any
such rule. 1t has been asserted that
one citizen in the United States is the
equal of any other citizen. If he is,
he does not have to ask any other citi-
zen what business he may engage in,
and when he may seek an office in the
gift of his fellow citizens.
The argument used that a man in the
employ of another cannot expect to
continue to draw his salary and divide
his time and take pay from another
is not applicable lin the case at bar"
for there he sells his time and ability
to his employer and thus secures the
maintenance of his family, and the en-
ployer may properly claim his undivid-
ed labor and ability.
While in the Mormon church there
are at present few if any salaried Off
GERS, and every man is expected to
care for those dependent on him in
connection with his ecclesiastical du-
ties-how does it impress the average
mind that after refusing an allow
ance to a church official, to claim the
right to shut the door in his face that
opens to him the opportunities to earn
in an honorable way tie needed sup
port for his family? If it is deemed
incompatible with the duties of certain
ecclesiastical officers to take an active
partisan part in politics, or accept
and there let it end. But do not let
the church establish a system of indul-
gences that IF we please to permit,
you may indulge If we do not please,
you are not at liberty to act"
'Defying our right to thus control,
and acting on your own judgment, the
price you pay is your standing as an
officer in the church, and the knowledge
that your file leaders and fellow church
members do not have full fellowship
for you"
In short, such man would virtually
be an outcaSt among his brethren.
The contest for civil liberty took de-
finite shape at Bunker Hill and through
tears and blood became established.
when CORVALLIS gave UP his sword at
yorktown. Looking backward we can
now see that every attempt that has
since been made to abridge that right
by ecclesiastical authority or otherwise
has gone down in inglorious defeat.
The handwriting is on the wall and
all church organizations may as well
take cognizance of it. But, MIR Editor
is anything gained by publishing such
manifesto? Has there ever been a time
when the church officials were denied
the right by it's members to remove
any officer who failed TO properly dis
charge the duties imposed upon him
by his office? Does this new declara-
ton do any more?
1t has been done time and time again.
and no one has objected. History in
structs us that the granting of indul-
gences by a certain church degenerat
ed its high officials, who in time came
to sell them for money considerations:
a more demoralizing agency could
hardly be suggested. AS all men are
more or less alike, and subject to temp
tations, it is not necessary that we
lay anew the foundation for such
abuses.
l ask, is not the purpose Of said man
ifesto rather to make all members of
the Mormon church who took part in
the reconvened Democratic convention
last October, and those who approved
of the address then prepared in their
precinct meetings, now declare by their
approval of said manifesto that all
they then claimed was untrue, and
that the eight rules of truth then pro-
mulgated and approved by them are
now to be cast aside?
Can a man support in toto this man
ifesto, and not stultify his act of last
October?
Mr.. Editor, these questions confront
us today. and will have to be answer
ed. Much depends upon how they are
answered by the people who took part
in that convention.
If we are true and loyal to the dec
laratiens then made, peace is assured.
If on the other hand we stultify that
at and der1nnn Stra te we are not to