The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1906-08-04
LITTLE HYPooRITEs.

The Logan Journal makes out a
strong case Of inconsistency, which it
calls by harder names, against Hon, Jo'
| seph Howell and Prof. Joshua II. Paul
concerning the Agricultural College.
The Logan paper Is not lacking In
material. AS proof of the double deal
ing of Elder Howell it quotes from the
utterance Of that distinguished gontle-
man in Logan Il few weeks ago, at
which time he said: "I am for the
| Agricultural College OF Utah. l be-
lieve it TO be the school that best
serves the needs of the people Of Utah,
| and therefore desire to see it live and
thrive. II 1 wero omnipoteut in this
matter ] would make the college the
one great educational institution Of
Utah. believe the college is living
entirely within the provisions OF the
law creating il, and ] also believe the
Federal Government will not see the
work Of the college curtailed seri-
ously.'
And the Journal follows this with
quotation from Elder Howell s talk In
Salt Lake City at later time, contain
ing tho following radically diverging
sentences: ~ am for the college and
against the consolidation Of the two
great State institutions, as ] havo al
ways been, j want to see the college
retained Mt hogan, but l want 1t reS
stricted to its natural sphere as an ag-
ricultural college under tho law. 1 be-
lieye the policy of the administration
heretofore has been too ambitious, and
/ am in favor of such modification Of
demand for maintenance and enlarge
ment as will keep the college within its
legitimate claims, and prevent It's con-
tinuous antagonism of the taxpayers OF
the State. [ believe this both can and
ought to- be done, and if so done, that
the people Of Utah will insist on retain
ing the Agricultural college as n sepa-
rate State institution
That is the case presented by the
Logan paper against Elder Howell, and
it seems to be complete.
The showing concerning Prof, Paul
is equally irrefragable. The Journal
states that he wrote TO President Kerr
this summer, when he desired employ
ment In the Agricultural College, as fol-
lows; Gin your position you may
count on my loyal support. You will
be served with the same constancy and
fidelity that have characterized nv en-
ployment here" And the Logan paper
follows this by a demonstration that
Prof. Paul has been assailing the coll
lege and campaigning the State against
it.
Just why the Logan Journal should
pose as q critic Of individual hypocrisy
does not appear, since that paper has
been the defender of the general COM
munity hypocrisy in Utah during the
entire period of the present contro-
versy. At the head of the cult to which
Elder Howell and Elder Paul belong,
stand tlse hierarchy who have said one
thing to the people Of the United
States and have practiced another, who
have covenanted to God and have
broken the pledge, who have taken
laws OF Utah and have deficd the same.
Not ono word has appeared in the Lo-
gan Journal in criticism of the lawgiv-
ers and exemplars whose methods ap-
pear TO have been followed by Elder
Howell and Prof. Paul. 1t Is scarcely
fair for the Logan Journal to commend
and protect the big hypocrites and then
find fault with the little ones.
Elder Howell and Prof. Paul are
merely living up 10 the community |
teaching; they are merely imbued with |
the general Generalization which comes
from honoring in high place in COM
munity life the mon who teach a lie.
More than once during this contro-
versy the warning has been uttered
that the evasions and falsehoods Of the
Mormon hierarchs would be followed
by hypocrisies and untruths in the lives
ct their devotees. And SO they are.