The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1898-09-22
"JosHING AMERIcANIsM."

What a monstrous hypocrite the
Tribune isl On Monday it said: I'VE
opposed Mr.. Roberts then QS95) be-
cause he was a Democrat" In the same
editorial it said: But we did it fairly
and honorably, and all the time felt
thrill of pride that he, high church
/ man that he is, was still a true Ameri-
can, and was q superb example to
young Utah of one who could be a de-
vout believer in the dominant creed of
/ this state, and could still hold aloft the
| banner OF AmericanisIn, even as his
church superiOrs had, the previous
year. declared that ali Mormons might. 5"
What was the evidence of that Amer
| icanism which thrilled the Tribune?
The fact that he was running for office
without having obtained permission
from his ecclesiastical superiors to Go
so.
Although that thrilled the Tribune,
it told him he was doing wrong; it
"ioshed'' him when he lat first re-
belled and declared his Americanism;"
it advised him to surrender that
"Americanism: it says that he did;
and it now declares that he forfeited
all claim on public recognition by sc
doing.
Language fails in describing duplicity
as shameless and as silly as that of the
Republican organ. Yesterday it said:
We said at the time that any church
had a right to interpoSe when such an
officer, without notice, went away 20
run for a political office. That would
-, OH DIT Tr
Roberts at first rebelled and declared
his Americanism, and his party made
a spectacle of itself in assuming Vir-
tues which it never had, and we
''joshed" the whole crowd as they de-
served.
With brazen effrontery our morning
contemporary owns UP that it took
both sides of the question, as usual.
It was thrilled with admiration at
Roberts independence; but it claimed
that the church authorities did right
in trying to curb that independence.
1t says that when Mr.. Roberts ere
belled' he showed his Americanism;
yet it says that a different course
would be required in any church"
1t says that when Mr.. Roberts ac-
knowledged the right of amy church,
to make such a requirement, that he
surrendered his political principles, his
American manhood; his right as a citi-
zen of this republic to advocate any
cause that he pleased"
1t ''joshed" him because he "rebelled" |
and abused him for ending the rebel |
lion.
Talk about hypocrisy! Prate about
opposing Mr.. Roberts in 1895 fairly /
and honorably." and with "a thrill of |
pride.'
Let the Republican organ explain |
what it meant in this editorial refer |
ence to the declarations of the recon-
vened convention:
"Now, If there has been anything
tried in the last two weeks, it has
been to enable the Democratic party
to dominate the Mormon church. In
a public address. it is declared that
the church has no right to make a
rule through which any man shall
accept an Office in the church that
will in the least conflict with his
performing any political part which
he may be called upon to perform.
This is a direct infringement, first,
on all churches, and then it is a
dead straight infringement on the
liberty which the Democrat
ic party processes to be so much in
love with"
What did the Tribune mean by max
ing an appeal to this people" to resent
the sort of intimations it is making
now? 1t was a hypocrite then; it is
hvpocrite now