Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1900-04-28

that paragraph as am excuse Tor In
dulglng IN It's accustomed sneers at
the religion Of the Latter-day Saints,
and FOR personal abuse OF the editor OF
the News" The statement OF facts
that We made was followed by q num-
Der OF testimonies 70 its truth from re-
liable witnesses. whose letters were
published over the signatures Of the
writer's. Il was further explained that
the Elders thus administering laid no
claim TO the power 70 cure diseases, but
simply carried out the custom OF the
Church as commanded By revelation.
and In accord with the same instruc-
ton to the early Christian Church IN
these words.
rs any sick among you? Let him
call Tor the Elders OF the Church, and
let them pray over him, amounting him
with oil in Che name of the Lord and
the prayer of faith shall save the sick
and the Lord shall raise him up; and
" he have committed sins they shall
be forgiven him. James ~ 10, 10.
The paper that then ridIcuIed and dis
torted the remarks Of the News now
returns 10 the attack, and quoting the
above paragraph from our columns,
asks:
III that isn't O claim 10 cure the
smallpox by the laying ON OF hands,
what rs Il? The tank about faith In
this connection won't do. nor does faith
ever require prepOsterous lies 70 back
90 up
The answer DE-. &c Is not a claim Of
man 70 cure anything by the laying on
of hands. IFS a claim that God can
heal the sick through the prayer OF
FAITH and the laying on Of hands. II
Is a repetition OF Christs declaration:
IAN things are possible to them that
believe" lie dlj not go about laying
claim TO healing powers, but told
those who We're restored. Go thy way,
thy FAITH hath made the whole"
'The talk about faith IN this connec-
ton" WILL "do." II Is the essential
factor in the sum Of the matter.
And there are no "preposterous lies"
either required or presented. The
facts related In scripture are corrobor-
ated by similar facts today as attested
by living witnesses whose evidence
stands unimpeached proving that the
same cause produces the same effect
In an ages. and that God Is the same
yesterday, today and forever" II also
proclalms that while lies are not
necessary 10 establish that great truth.
neither viii lies" or jeers or per.
versions OF what its advocates affirm,
have the effect to subyert or destroy it,
or gain respect or credence for those
who resort to such weapons
As 10 the decision Of the majority Of
the court The Tribune stated, edl-
toriaIly. that It was not final; tina; the
ruling was simply on a demurrer"
that this Is an there IS TO It at pres
emit" and spoke OF when the final
hearing comes on" and OF ultimate
At the same time It's own
report Of the proceedings showed the
hnality Of the ruling" and the "judg-
ment' which ordered the dismissal Of
the case" It's talk about an 'imbecile
editorial which took the ground that
the decision ended the trial was there
fore evidence Of its own condition In |
that particular
The question naturally arose, IN view |
OF the dissenting opinion Of one Of the !
justices Of the court. what remedy Is
now open to the thousands upon thous-
lnds Of people in this state interested in |
this important question? People who |
object TO being forced 10 have their
children subjected 20 a surgical opera
ton as a condition precedent to enter
ing school? The answer Of the News
was this:
zone Is q change I'm the composition OF |
the Supreme court which Is quite likely |
20 occur; the other Is action by the next |
Legislature"
Is not this correct? Is there any |
other method by which a different rul-
ing can be obtained? Is It likely that |
the court as at present composed viii |
reverse itself? Courts have done such |
things, it Is true Even the Supreme |
court Of the United states has reversed |
It's own decisions But Il has done so
on a change In its personality. But |
this Is construed by the Tribune as "a
threat Of a change In the
composition Of the Supreme court,
and II accuses the News" Of presum- |
Ing 90 threaten the deposition Of the |
Judges This Is characterized as !
bullying runanism." the dogma OF a
bigot' etc, etc, in that papers usual |
refined and logical(? style.
Now who has provided for a change |
In the composition Of the Supreme |
court? Who but the legislators chosen |
by the people2 The deposition" Of one
Of the judges, If such a term is admis-
sible will take place by due course Of |
law at the end Of the present year. A
change IS "likely to occur" is II not? II |
another justice is chosen az the No
yember election, that will change the
composition Of the court, viii It not?
All the Trbune's lnvectives, OF which
we have given but samples, are wasted
on us and fan upon the Legislature Of
the State which has provided for the
change that Is likely to occur Where
IS the rooted partisanship' in Il? The
News" made no reference 20 the po-
lucal party TO which either Of the
Justices belong. nor did that enter into
the question OF the law or justice Of the
decision, or OF the means by which a
different result may be obtained
The whole gist Of the ruling, apart
from an these extraneous and lrrele-
want attacks and bar-room. expletives.
Is that the Board OF Health under the