The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1898-10-09

| 1sOOS4 tSs
1t was thought that an expression
of opinion of the views of Mr.. Eldredge,
Republican candidate for congress, and
/ those of some of his, chief supporters
and workers III the campaign in regard
to Mr.. Roberts, the fight which is being
made upon him and on some of the is
sues which are being forced into the
campaign by the Tribune and some
people. would be interesting to the pub
lie. With this in view a reporter Of
The Herald sought ont Mr. Eldredge
and propounded to him a few ques-
lions.
The first was: DO you consider your
Democratic opponent, Mr. Roberts, elig-
ible to the position to which you both
aspire?"
TO this Mr.. Eldredge repyed: HE
or his party is to be the Judge OF that.
I refer your question to the Democratic
party"
DO you approve of the fight being
made upon Mr.. Roberts by the Salt
Lake Tribune?"
Mr.. Eldrsdge's reply was: Consult
Mr.. Lanpaa in regard to that"
The reporter than asked: In your
opinion was the manifesto of Oct 8,
1880, issued by the presidency of the
church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints concerning plural marriages in
tended to disturb existing polygamOus
domestic relatiOns2'
Mr.. Eldredge thought intently for a
few moments and then requested the
reporter to write out the questions he
wished answered and leave a copy with
him for short time and he would
write out his answers.
In addition TO the three questions
given above the following two were
written cut and given to Mr. Eldredge;
Did YOU or did you not understand
the anti-pOlygamy section in the state
constitution as referring solely to the
further contracting of plural mar
riages?"
DO you regard the question of Nor
mon beliefs or practices a proper issue
in this campaign
WALTON IS CAUTIOUS.
The document was left with Mr.. Ed
Fedge and the reporter promised 20 re-
turn for the answers in two or three
hours and in the meantime he went
over to Republican headquarters and
there found State Chairman Wesley K.
Walton, whom he attempted to inter-
view, plying him with the same ques-
lions as those pFopOunGed to Mr.. Elld-
Tedse. Mr.. Walton, however. declined
to be interviewed and would state MOTH
ing further than that he never INDUCED
in personalities in a campaign and
never had anything to say against his
opponents personally. Their principles
were all tkat he found fault with and
in regard TO the questions he politely
but firmly declined to answer any Of
them
ELDREDGE CHANGES HIS MIND.
The reporter in due time sought out
Mr.. EldredSe, expecting to receive the
answers to the queries-which the gem
tleman had had ample time to con-
slider Mr.. Eldredge, however, in the
meantime had changed his mind. and
like Mr.. Walton, declined to be fur
Their interviewed, COUGHING his declina-
ton III language very similar to that
used by Mr.. Walton. He would not in
dulge in personalities in the campaign,
and begged TO be excused from answer
ing the questions.
JOHN HENRY TALKS.
John Henry Smith was found on his
way home from the theatre, and in the
light from drug store window the
questions were read by the reporter and
eandidly and freely answered by MIR.
Smith as follows:
Question.-Do you consider Mr.. Rob-
erts eligible to the position of con-
gresham?
Answer know Of no reason Why he
is not.
Questien.-Do you approve of the
fight being made upon Mr.. Roberts by
the Salt Lake Tribune?
Answer.-No, I don't
Question.-In your opinion was the
manifesto of Oct. 6, 1890, issued by the
of the Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter-day Saints concerning
plural marriages Intended to disturb
existing polygamous domestic rela-
tons?
Answer don't remember the word
ing of the manifesto. 1t will answer
for itself. The understanding I had
was that there should be no further
marriages, so President
Woodruff told me with his own lips.
don't, however, think any man in the
state thought it his duty to throw off
his former wives and children, and not
do his duty loyalty by them, but I
cannot say if il was meant or not that
the same relations should be mains
tanned between man and his plural
wives after the proclamation as be-
fore it.
Questionable you or did you not I'M
derstand the anti-pclygamy section of
the state constitution. as referring sole
ly to the further contracting of plural
Answer don't remember what the
spirit of it was. and cannot recollect
the wording Of it. The language is
there and speaks for itself.
Question.-Do you regard the ques-
ton of Mormon beliefs or practices q
proper issue in this campaign?
Answer--In no sense.