The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1907-05-26
JOINT DEBATE PROPOSED.

Now that Senator Fred 7, Dubois, or
Idaho, has engaged for season OF lee
turing, and Apostle Smoot, is also sald
to he booked for a course OF lectures IN
the East, the natural assumption Is that
these men would speak on different SIDES
NJ the main question at issue here. 1t
is assumed, of course, that Mr. Dubols
would speak upon the menace or the
Mormon hierarchy in politics, IN morals,
and in commerce throughout this noun
tain country. 1t is assumed on the
other hand, that Apostle Smoot, in hls
lecture course, would take the opposite
view. and would hold that there is no
menace at all in this hierarchlc control
of politics, of civil affairs, IN It's I'M
moralities, in It's treason, In Its pledge
breaking, in its lawlessness, and in Its
commercialism and bad faith generally
to this commonwealth and to the people
of the United States.
Inasmuch as these gentlemen, IN their
lectures and (whether they lecture or
not) in their attitude toward this ques-
ton. occupy the opposite poles oil
thought, it might not be amiss for
them to have a Joint debate in this city
preparatory to their formal entry upon
the lecture course We would suggest.
therefore that date be set for the ap-
pearance Of these gentlemen In joint de-
bate in the Salt Lake theater or in the
tabernacle, if the tabernacle could be
procured for that purpose, as 1T is to be
hoped that it might The probability is
that the tabernacle would be none too
large to hold the crowds that would hock
to hear that debate. The question under
discussion, if il included the general
issue, would be one of immense interest
in this region; aud the debaters are
champions, respectively, Of the positive
and negative side of the question. On
! if the general question is too broad fol
anv one session of debate, there might
be a number of days set aside for the
| champions TO discuss the question In al
| it's phases. We are sure that n discus
sion of this kind would not only be o.
immense interest to all the people O.
the mountain region, but it would be al
event that history would perpetuate a
one of the important dates in Utah
history.
Or. if the debate on the general quea
ton, taking sufficient number Of day
or nights in which to thresh it out
is not practicable, there might at leas
be one tilt between the two champion
in which the discussion could run upol
the attitude that Apostle Smoot has oc
cupied from his earliest period of publ
activity in Utah on the question o
polygamy. The apostle might affirm
as his friends who voted TO retain hin
IN the Senate did affirm, that no ha
always been an active, outspoken, III
sparing, energetic opponent Of poly
gamy, and has made himself conspicu
Gus In crusade in the Mormon churc
for the restoration of monogamy as TIL
ideal and divine marital state. This, W
are sure, would be of equal interest t
any public question that could possibl
be considered in Utah. And while th
apostle would have the affirmative sid
of that, we imagine it would not tax
him very long to produce the ovidenc
that would support the contention tha
his friends made for him as a foe c
polygamy, on which to base their vot
/ that he should be retained in the Sci
ate,
II is true that no one who has live
l in Utah during Apostle Smoot's publ
career here has ever heard of his sayin
or doing anything against polygam
/ II is true that large numbers of peopl
!, and the numbers arc larger in ii
4 Mormon church than out OF it, do M
n believe for one moment that Apost
= Smoot has ever opposed polygamy
t any way. They do not believe that