OCR Text |
Show RAWLINS ATTACK ON THE CHURCH- Jok Rawlins surprised everybody, probably including himself, by his savage sav-age attaok on the Mormon church and its leaders in the joint debate. We cannot believe that he seriously contemplated contem-plated an attaok of this nature when he entered the theater, because it was manifestly very bad politics. We think it was the offspring of hot impulse. The most that can be said for it is that it showed a superior quality of courage, but it was that kind of courage that stops at no sacrifice of party interests, and it is the duty of a candidate for office to subordinate private impulses to party good. Mr. Rawlins charged that the church is in politics and is trying to compass his defeat because he is an apostate. He clothed this attack in language and figures of speech as offensive of-fensive as any man could think of on the spur of the moment. We do not think the attack was justi-! tied by the facts. We think it was as unjust as it was brutal. We are inclined in-clined to think Rawlins was honest in the belief that illegitimate influence was being nsed to defeat him, but we are very confident that he was wrong.. It cannot be denied that both parties have used all the church influence they could get hold of. So both parties have done in every othor part of the United States. They have used church influence, race influence, bar-room influence and every other kind of influence that could make them a vote. So it has been from the beginning and so it will be to the end. It is puerile nonsense to assert that one party is better than another in this respect. All parties wiil use all the influence they can command when they are in the midst of doubtful campaigns cam-paigns and striving for victories which they believe to be of vital moment to the public welfare. In Utah Democrats, as well as Re- publicans, have drawn' upon, the personal per-sonal influence of leading members of the church and have tried to make it appear that the Mormon people ought to be in sympathy with their party. It may be that the more prominent and powerful Mormons are Republicans, and that for that reason stronger influence influ-ence will be exerted today for Cannon than for Rawlins. But we see no evidence evi-dence of the illegitimate use of church influence for one party or the other. The truth is that the Democratic leaders lead-ers concede that there is now no suoh Democratic majority in Utah as they expected, and that possibly there may be no Democratic majority at all. They are unwilling to admit that the Republican Repub-lican gains are due in any measure to the inherent strength of the cause of protection, or to the splendid presentation presenta-tion of Republicanism by the able and eloquent candidate of the party. They are angry, and it suits them to lay the shrinkage of their vote to church influence in-fluence rather than the true cause. Nobody doubts the ability or sincerity of Joseph L. Rawltns, but many of his friends in both parties would have been glad if ha had exhibited last night a broader and more tolerant spirit. No Democrat can afford to deny the strength and dignity of the Republican party, any more than any Republican can afford to deny the power and majesty of that Democracy that has survived through years of defaat and still commands a splendid following. I There is no reason why both sides! should not be fair, bat Mr. Rawlins was hardly fair to hi3 opponent last night. , v- - i |