Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1905-11-18

| 'hN huNNNaNt y ttlSenoou Is 10 fead IN
petition for amnesty, In which tina
pledge" is alleged 10 be given.
The Advocate speaks OF Preslden
Joseph +. smiths declared con
tempt for the law OF the Stat
Of Utah" also states that Brig
ham II. Roberts has entered int,
q polygamous marriage since the Mani
festo.' Both It's assertions are false
| but quite worthy of the columns Of
| that un-Chrlstian magazine. Presiden
| smith declared no contempt" for tn,
law, but expressed his willingness I,
abide the. consequences OF any act n,
had committed; and there is not d
sclntllla of evidence that Elder Roberts
entered into that relation since the
manifesto OF $40.
one more statement Of the Advocate
We viii notice. ana leave that part OF
the subject. II says: THE State OF
Utah and the Mormon Church, which
so far as the election Of officials is con-
cerned Is practically the State OF Utah,
have acted In bad faith" This Is but n
repetition OF the rubbish that has been
gathered up here and sent out TO de-
ceive the people OF the East The state
OF Utah has complied fully with the
requirements Of the Enabling Act, and
gone still further IN carrying into effect
the demands Of the government as eX-
pressed in that act. The Mormon"
Church Is not the State Of Utah, has
nothing TO do with lts control. Is as
separate and distinct from il az any
other Church in any other State and
does not direct or effect the election Of
officials in the State No matter how
many times the Christian Advocate
repeats the libel, the proofs are all TO
the contrary. 1t Is simply a conven-
lent SANDER for anti-"Mormon" papers
and prea 10 circulate.
Now, what have all the pretended ar
gument, incorrect data, and virulent
attacks on the Mormon Church Lead
ers TO do with the legal aspect
of the case against Senator Smoot? The
logic Of II is this: Certain prominent
"Mormons' are charged by public ru-
NOR, not by any legal complaint. with
having broken pledge to the nation
and with practices contrary to law.
But Reed Smoot is not accused OF any
OF these offenses, He Is admitted 10 be
free from them personally. but he Is
associated with those persons. and
therefore it Is to be concluded that he
"connlves' at their wrong-doing. If it
were admitted that the charges pre-
ferred are true. why should Reed Smoot
be punished for their offenses?
Suppose this rule were applied TO
other United States Senators who as
sociate with, and do not attempt to In
form upon or repudate the society Of
many things which ought not TO be
mentioned In polite society. Would the
Christian Advocate" have them con-
demned and expelled for such associa-
ton or condonation2 Would 1t charge
them with "conniving' at the acts Of
others because they do not take action
against them Would It clamOr for
their expulsion ION both moral and
legal grounds Such logic as is found
In the North Western Christian Advo-
cate is on a par with similar stun to
be found in the average religious weak
ly
It Is pretty evident, however. that the
article which the Advocate approves
and has admitted to its pages orIginat-
ed In salt Lake city, and is simply n
rehash of old materials that have be-
come mouldy and almost obsolete, and
that have been shattered TO shreds and
relegated TO the manure heap where
they belong If the readers OF that
un.Christiau paper can find any CONF
fort consolation or religious food IN
such unsavory diet, they are welcome
to il, and the paper which delights in
1t should have full credit for dishlng Il
up in the style in which It is offered TO
the public.