Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1906-10-26

Mormon Church At the same time he
mendation, or recommendation, think
It is called from his bishop In the city
of Ogden, which he exhibited with
Judgment and discretion TO those whom
he thought might be interested In its
contents. Now, might have more con-
fidence In the good faith Of some of the
caustic criticisms this editor has made
OF the chief hierarch Of the Church OF
he could reconcile them to the fulsome
phrase contained In letter which this
came editor wrote about this Same
hlerarch few years ago and published
In the columns of the Mlllennial Star.
/ don't know whether the change In his
attitude has been due to change In
his position or Views, or IL simply an
ordinary, everyday bluff. ! don't know
about that. and ] dou't particularly
care,
SOME PLAIN TALK.
Five years ago the chief editor OF this
paper, the chief director Of its policies,
the chief leader OF your party and the
man who has been chiefly benefited, TO
the Supplying establishment OF nearly
everybody in the state, was elected TO
the senate OF the United states. 1t was
current repute that he owed his cleo
ton. in part at least, to the active IN
reference of the then president Of the
Church. This charge was made In
double-leaded editorial in the Salt Lake
Tribune. then IN honest--and therefore,
dlfferent-hands So far as ! know, that
charge has never been seriously dis
puted; az any rate, Ii has never been
refuted by him.
Now he is your leader. | know that
In private conversation you deny that,
but up 10 this moment not one OF you
has had the moral courage to say IN
public, as you say in private, that you
repudiate his leadership and denounce
his record. Why is he not your leader?
You follow him. you have constituted
and you recognize his newspaper as
your organ; you spend his money to
advance your interests
ALL MANNER OF STORIES.
You have circulated beyond the Dor.
ders Of this state all manner OF stories
concerning the interference Of the
Church In politics, hut you have failed
to mention this. When witnesses went
down to Washington some time ago,
prominent members of your party,
leaders, 80 TO speak, of your party, they
went down there as witnesses for the
proteetnnts I'm the Smoot Investigation.
These men testified with reference TO
many Of the reguted instances OF
Church Interference IN the politics OF
this state They were sworn to speak
the truth, the whole truth and nothing
but the truth and yet With singular
and inexplicabe unanimlty every one Of
them refrained from mentioning this,
the most significant, the most important
case Of the kind that they had ever
heard Of. ] have often wondered why.
Time passed on and new president
was elected IN the Church. The story
is told on most excellent authority that
since the new president came in, this
leader Of yours has again sought the
influence OF the Church IN order that he
might again return TO the senate but
the leader OF the Church told him that
he was not in politics, and that
the Church was not In politics, and that
II would not be dragged into politics
by him. and since he could not obtain
that Influence, y eoause the Church
would not be dragged into politics. he
began this bitter war upon the Nor
mon Church, which he has kept up ever
since you. my American friends, have
been demanding the expulsion OF my
colleague. Senator Smoot, from the scn-
ate.
CONFIDENCE AND RELIANCE.
There is a principle OF law known as
the doctrine of estoppel. which declares
In effect that he who will not speak
when he ought TO speak will not be
permitted to speak when he desires TO
speak. Under this law, as well as all
the laws OF decency, these leaders and
this newspaper are estopped from MAX
ing that demand, because they were not
content with simply being silent. but
they afljrmatively spoke and afiirma-
lively acted, when Senator Smoot was
a candidate, IN direct opposition to the
stand they are now taking
Some Of these men have charged, me
and others with Inconsistency. because
they say We opposed the election OF
Senator Smoot and now decline TO Join
IN the demand for his expulsion. Both
statements are absolutely true. / did
oppose the election of Senator Smoot.
ROT upon any personal ground; he was
NY friend. ] had known him intimately
for nearly quarter or century.
had known him to be- as know him
now, an honest. upright, capable and
law-ablding citizens and o country-lov-
Ing man"
In conclusion Mr.. sutherland said: II