OCR Text |
Show H M ) COFFEE WAS IT j , J People Slowly Learn the Facts. Bt' , r "All my life I have been such a nlave ppH (jj I to coffee that the very aroma of It was ppH ; -; i enough to set my nerves quivering. I ppH i ! j kept gradually losing my health, but I ppH 'v used to say 'nonsense,' it don't hurt me. ppB Slowly I was forced to admit the truth" ppH j H I. and the final result was that my whole ppF i ';j I nervous force was shattered. ! i ' "My heart becamo weak and unccr- ppH tain in Its action and that frightened ppH me. Finally my physician told me, JHI .'Jlj I about a year ago, that I must stop PpHI v: A f drinking coffee, or I could never expect PpHI ' n to be -well again. pHI ' ,i "I was In despair, for the very ppH 'i i ' thought of the medicines I had tried ppHI 'j, , so many times nauseated me. Of course ppH I jj I thought of Postum, but could hardly ppH j S bring myself to give up the coffee. I . Finally I concluded that I owed It to ' myBelf to give Postum a trial So I got pHI jj J a package and carefully followed the dl- PPh 'fj rectlons, and what a delicious, nour- uvr Ishing, rich drink it was. Do you know ppPJI jH ' I found it very easy to shift from tho PPH ,fJ coffee to Postum and not mind the PPH ;f change at all. Almost Immediately PPPH t ( after I made the change I found myEelf PPH y ! better and as the days went by I PPH jfl f kept on improving. My nerves gTew PPH i sound and steady, I slept well and felt PPB ij ' strong and well balanced all the time. PPpi 8 j Now I am completely cured, with the PPH ,'J'i old nerousne'ss and sickness all gone' PPH jij In every way I am well once more." PPPJ 1 Rf P Name given by Postum Co., Battle Jaf Creek, Mich. It pays to give up the drink that acts R, ''ft on some like poison, for health is the ; fit greatest fortune one can have. H - 'j "There's a reason." Gft the famous llltlo book, "The Road H J- lo Wcllville' in each pkg. tho leading ecclesiastics who wcro In my party opposed my nomination. I was elected In 1KM, because of tho dlsband-mcnt dlsband-mcnt of tho Liberal party, which wan largelv Bcoubllcun. Tho chief orator and all but one of tho apostlos who were on tho stump wcro against me. In the Senatorial Sen-atorial fight of JJKtf, no one can charge that church lntluunco was used In my ravnr. I was strongly opposed at that time." "Yes, and they will oppose you again, roared a voice from the audience, "WhonI run again for offlco In Utah It will bo when thero Is no ecclesiastical domination In politics. Llko every other man who has entered the American party, I have ceased to bo a candidate, although my withdrawal was several years ago." Question Too Hard for Them. Repeatedly Senator Cannon asked If any one In tho audienco would dare to say that tho pledges made by thrc Mormon church authorities to abstain from political politi-cal activity had not been violated, but thero waB no response. When the question ques-tion was asked whether it la not true that these promises, upon which Statehood was obtained, had not been repeatedly and flagrantly violated, thero wero scores of voices responding, "Yes, yes." Becauso of the Important Interest attaching at-taching to Senator Cannon's great speech and tho splendid results In evidence therefrom there-from at Sandy, it Is reproduced In full In Tho Tribune In order that tho largo number num-ber of readers of that paper today may havo full opportunity to become familiar with ils exposition of tno principles of tho new party. Senator Cannon spoke as follows: fol-lows: Senator Cannon's Speech. In tho absence of Judgo IIIIC3 It may bo deemed Incumbent upon me to make such presentation as 1 can of the strong grounds, as he strongly states them, why thl3 party Is In existence. .If tho other parties which are waging a political battle In Utah wero amply sufficient to express the need of tho people then It wa3 an economic eco-nomic and eoclal crime, however innocently inno-cently committed, for this party to come, into existence. It Is an economic crlmo for the people to havo wasted time and money upon a party that Is useless whose work Is already being done by the old parties; and It Is a social crlmo for people peo-ple to break lifelong friendship and affiliations affi-liations of mnnv years in order to lead off U60leasly and mischievously, factions of the old parties, in order to constitute a new one. Not all tho offices in Utah or the United Slates, nor all the ambitions which men can feel to hold those offices, can alono Justify tho organization of this party, nor can the ambition to hold thoso offices or to secure thorn for friends Justify Jus-tify any man In Utah In withholding his support from this party, If there Is reason for its existence and operation within this State. If this party have no reason for existence exist-ence let It deliberately march off the field and lcavo the political contentions here In Utah, whether they affect national or State questions, to the settlement of tho old parties; and let tho men and women who have Joined the American party gropo their way back to tho national party which past experience ha3 shown to bo best representative of their political convictions. If this party do have reasons rea-sons for existence. It should bo able to make them so pluln that not only Its present pres-ent adherents will remain In strong support sup-port of Its purposes, but thousands and tens of thousands of other citizens of Utah will Join Its ranks at an early time. Some Political History. Without dwelling too much upon ancient an-cient history, but In order that we may get a starting point, let us briefly consider consid-er tho situation, political and social, of Utah antecedent to 1S30. In tho years previous pre-vious to that tlmo a very sharp line divided di-vided Gentiles and Mormons. That line was political, but It also extended Into social affairs and sometimes Into business relations. Thoso were great heroic days. In some respects The Gentiles wcro comparatively com-paratively a handful, and yet behind them stood the power of the United States. The Mormons wero locally In the majority, but they had no external sentiment or sympathy to support them. Lt us call tho light at that tlmo an even one. You could not havo gotten a Gentllo to cross tho dividing lino and Join with tho Mormons Mor-mons politically for any price which might have been named. Thero was not money enough In the country to lnduco a Mormon to ally himself with the Gentiles, for ho believed that they not only prosecuted prose-cuted but persecuted his people. Thero aro In this assemblage scores of people who stood with the Gentiles In that day, and scores of people horo who stood with tho Mormons. Of course, I was with tho Mormon people. So long as tho situation of that time should enduro. I felt that I must (lghf. for them, no matter whether they were right or wrong. Disappointing as was the thought that wo wero In a country and not of It, that as Mormons we wero a proscribed class, every Mormon wanted to take his fate with his people, sharing in the proscriptions which affected affect-ed the lives of the leaders. Every Mormon Mor-mon was ready to protect those who wero living in plural marriage. He was ready to vote the ticket which might bo selected se-lected In the Tabernaclo or other places of assemblage of the People's party. Whatever might havo been his personal relations with Gentiles, ho would not yield any of his loyalty to tho church leaders. Manifesto Freed Mormons. At last, under tho gentle hand of Wll-ford Wll-ford Woodruff, there was mado a manifesto, manifes-to, which was Interpreted to forbid further plural marriages and unlawful cohabitation, co-habitation, and this being closely followed by political declarations which left all tho Mormons free to join national organizations, organiza-tions, every Mormon felt that at last tho gates had been opened and he could bo as other American citizens were, having neither religious nor political tica which bound him in antagonism to tho general sentiments of the country. If there are any hero who did not pass through that experience they will find It almost Impossible Im-possible to realize what a vast glory seemed' to have opened unto us when we could clasp hands fraternally Jew, Gentile, Gen-tile, and Mormon when If we waged political po-litical war It was Just ns other American citizens do. because of political differences, differ-ences, national In character. What a Joy it was to escape tho old divisions, which made of every Gentllo an enemy of the Mormons nnd every Mormon an enemy ot tho Gentiles! Swift Evolution. In tho period from 1800 to the admission to Statehood January -I, 1S90, thero was a swift evolution. Wo passed from enmity to fraternity, from local strife to local peace, from a Territorial condition Into Statehood. That Statehood "Was obtained, briefly speaking, In the following manner Plural marriage, and unlawful cohabitation wore forbidden by tho church; amnesty was asked for and obtained, under a plcdgo of honor that the practice would not bo renewed; re-newed; division on national party lines was effected: speclflo covenant was mado that the authorities of tho churcn would not Intervene In political affairs; a Stato Constitution was adopted forever Inhibiting Inhibit-ing plural marriage and forever Inhibiting tho domination of tho affnlrs of the Stato by tho church. That was an Ideal situation, situa-tion, that was what wo had all prayed for and worked for. Pointed Question. Docs any man hero Imagine that amnesty amnes-ty would havo been granted to tho church leaders and Statehood would have been obtained for Utah If the Gentiles had opposed op-posed a bestowal of thcao great gifts? If any ten. out of hundreds of strong Gon-tlles Gon-tlles In Utah, had raised tho flag of antagonism antag-onism and had fought tho light determinedly determin-edly they would have been backed by so largo a sentiment in this country that President Harrison would have been deterred de-terred from giving tho general amnesty and Congress would havo refused to pass the enabling act. Just so surely ns tho Mormons yielded many things which to thorn had been dear, In accepting the manifesto of President Woodruff and In ratifying the complete and permanent withdrawal of their leaders from politics, so the Gentiles gavo up much of their old feelings when they assented to tho full freedom of a formerly proscribed class, and assented to and urged and helped to secure sovereignty for this Stato. During the earlier tlmo thero had been much unrest. Capital had been kept away from Utah. Immigration here had been flow and development of natural resources re-sources had been retarded. With Statehood It was bolleved that overy special difficulty peculiar to Utah had vanished and that Wt! would have ns wide opportunities as :my American citizens under tho flag. In the old days 1 had attributed much of the strife hero In Utah to tho Gentiles. Tf wo wcro back in thoco old time days I might still bo of that opinion becauso the dearest tics of life had been lacerated. But let that pass. Let us assume that we are standing now at tho date Januin-y A. 1W6, with Utah admitted as a Stato of this Union, with all tho past differences forgiven for-given and for tho time being forgotten. Peaco reigns In Utah. Tho State Is popular popu-lar abroad. The favoring eyes of all the world are turned toward her. Tho situation situa-tion was Ideal. What more could people ask? Was It not a cruel offenst, against tho wholo ieople of Utah then living' and yet to bo, to change tho relation which then existed? Who Disturbed Peace of UtahP Who disturbed tho peaco of Utah? Did tho Gentiles begin tho warfaro upon tho Mormon people, their faith and upon tho dignity of the State? If so, then this American party should light Genlllclsm In Utah Instead of fighting Smootlsm for It was an awful crlmo to destroy the pcoo of this State, to destroy the fraternity which existed among men of all classes, to retard tho development of our natural resources, to prevent Immigration here which should enhance tho power and grandeur of tho State. Let us see whero tho offense lies: Was there a violation of the manifesto? Testimony to that effect was given by the church leaders themselves In Washington. They broke the pledge; they opened the controversy. However, 1 will pass that matter by. I am glad that the American party has left that question for this Mormon Mor-mon people to settle for themselves. They can and they will, as we all believe. lias there been a violation of the covenant cove-nant pertaining to tho excrcUo of political power? If the're has been such a violation who aro tho responsible parties? I-t us see. In ISM. the Democratic party held a reconvened convention In Salt Lako City, In which It declared against Interference by the church with tho affairs of the State. In 1S07. Moses Thatcher, who according to Democratic Idea, had been the victim of church Interference was a candidate for the Senate of the United States, and for many days was perilously near to election by a Democratic Legislature so stronglv Democratic that In the two bodies of tho Assembly there was but one Republican to each twenty Democrats. Mosesrhatch-cr Mosesrhatch-cr was defeated and tho victorious candidate candi-date was ejected, becauso some ecclesiastical ecclesias-tical power reached over Into the thin ranks of the three Republicans in the Joint assembly, plucked ono oX them from his political relations, and set him down in the column of Democrats who wcro voting vot-ing for tho Hon. Joseph I,. Rawlins and that gentleman was elected. In that year then thero was Interference. More Ecclesiastical Interference. In 1SS0 there was another Senatorial election elec-tion and an aposilo of the church, acting with tho knowledge and. as tho mass of tho Mormon people bcllovcd, with the consent con-sent and Instruction of his superior, took the management of the campaign In behalf be-half of ono particular candidate. The contest con-test of that time was a strlfo against tho perfectly palpablo determination of church leaders to namo a Domocratlc Senator. In view of tho warfare, and particularly In view of the exposure made by The Trlb-uno Trlb-uno and at a public, mooting in the Salt Lake Theater, of tho apostolic Intention, they were compelled to drop their favorite favor-ite candldoto but only when It was too lato to effectively select another; and tho Joint assembly adjourned, leaving a vacancy va-cancy from Utah at Washington. In that year then there was Interference and tho pledge was broken. In 1931 there was another an-other Senatorial election. It Is an undisputed undis-puted fact that Reed Smoot. then a candidate candi-date for the Senate, was removed from his candidacy at tho direction of church leaders. lead-ers. Tho men whrt with Senator Smoot. aro today denying that any church Influence Influ-ence has been used or that the pledge has been broken, tell. In privato conversation end almost In public that the same church leaders who removed Reed Smoot from his candidacy at that time wcro largely instrumental in-strumental in tho election of Hon. Thomas Kearns. Whether they misrepresent or rot upon that point, thero certainly was church Interference and a violation of the pledge In consenting to Reed Smoot's candidacy can-didacy and then withdrawing him from that candidacy. Smoot's Candidacy. In 1902, Reed Smoot was a candidate for the Senate of the United States and almost without exception the other candidates fled to their banks and law offices, leaving him In possession of the field, since It was useless to contend against church Influence. Influ-ence. In 1003 ho was elected by a Republican Republi-can Legislature. Some Gentiles voted for him It Is true. They paid the prlco of election elec-tion to the Legislature by giving pledges that they should voto as they wero directed di-rected to vote. I know whereof I speak. In that election there was ecclesiastical Interference In-terference and a violation of the pledge. Since nnd exclusive of that year, every man elected to tho lower branch of Congress has been approved by the church leaders. No man approved by them has been defeated for the office, whether a Mormon or Gentile. And no man disapproved disap-proved by them has been elected. In every Congressional ejection then down to date thero has been Interference by ecclesiastical ecclesias-tical influence and a violation of the pledge. At this point It may be well to consider tho most astounding and un-American state of facts that has appeared In tho period pe-riod slnco our Statehood was granted. In 1KC Moses Thatcher, an apostle, nnd Brig-ham Brig-ham IT. Roberts. a president of tho seventies, wero candidates for tho United States Senate and the House of Representatives, s-ncct-Ivcly. They refused to aek permission of their ecclesiastical superiors. They wcro defeated. Moses Thatcher later on recanted, re-canted, but not until hl3 serious political aspirations had come to an end. Brlgham H. Roberts recanted and asked permission at a later time to run for this same office, the House of Representatives. He secured p'crmlsslon lo be a candidate for the United States Senate He received the permission and was elected. Mark it. An apostle and one of the seven presidents of .tho seventies, running for two offices and refusing to nsk permission, are defeated. Later an apostlo and ono of the. seven presidents of the seventies running for tho self same offices ask permission, receive It, and arc elected. Cannot Be Controverted. What folly for any one to say that there Is no church Interference! What folly to deny that there Is church Interference mow! What mado Edward II. Calllstcr tho favorite candidate of the Republican party par-ty for Governor? Nothing but tho dictation dicta-tion of high ecclesiastical power. Is there a man or woman hero who would have chosen Ed Calllstcr for Governor, In preference pref-erence to all other Republicans In tho State? And yet for a year all Republicans Republi-cans had mado up their minds that they must accept him as their candidate for Governor, and must strive to elect him. Who took Ed Calllsler from the ranks of ambitious politicians, locked him up In a vault, and placed John C. Cutler before tho people as a candidate for tho Republican Repub-lican nomination for Governor? A nigh ecclesiastic. No other power could have done It. All the Calllster shouters of yesterday yes-terday becamo tho Cutler shouters of today. to-day. The vault was opened and even Mr. Calllstcr himself was brought out to proclaim pro-claim the greatness of John C. Cutler. The palpable folly of denying Interference by high ecclesiastics could not bo more clearly clear-ly shown. More Plnin Facta. Ono may say, "But that Is Senator Smoot, and he Is acting as an Individual, and all tho circumstances which you recite re-cite relate but to the acts of a man as an Individual and not as a church leader. It is not fair to proscribe him Or the others In the excrclfe of their privilege a3 American Amer-ican citizens." Let us sec. By n plain political manifesto tho leaders of tho church, the first presidency, the twelve npoatlcs, tho seven presidents or tho seventies, sev-enties, tho presiding patriarch, and tho presiding bishopric, all subscribed to a document that no ono of their number or other prominent official of the church should be a candidate for any political offlco without the consent of the leaders. By this document It Is made undeniably plain that a man belonging to thl Inhibited Inhibit-ed class, can not ontcr politics without bringing with hlrn tho consent or the opposition op-position of church authority. If he shouM come into politics, without church consent, con-sent, as did Sfosea Thatcher and Brig-ham Brig-ham Roberts, ho drags church Influence in against him, and he is defeated, as thoy were defeated. Did not church Influence In-fluence thus appear? If ha should get permission, as did Brlgham "H. Roberta and Reed Smoot, ho drags in church Influence In-fluence in his favor, and he Is elected, as they wero elected. Did not church Influence Influ-ence appear? How can the apostle appear In politics, without having church Influence Influ-ence for him or against him? If he havo consent, ho mav not uno the name of tho presidency dlrectlv. His superiors may even deny lo him tho uso of his ecclesiastical ecclesias-tical rcsltlnn and mov require him to appear ap-pear as a mere Individual citizen. But the momor.r the proposition gets out of tho preslJcnfs office, the whispers begin and winks and ncds begin. By the tlmo tho propos'tlnn reaches the voter, It Is stated as a dcsJro of tho presidency that he bo Slcctuu fin the other hand. If ho have no such permission. It becomes thoroughly understood, by tho tlmo the proposition reacn-s the oter. that it is tho desire of the church that apostle so and eo or president pres-ident so and so shall bo defeated, as he Is out cf harmony with his quorum. It Is True. Iu It not true? Did not overy man in Utah urdeistand In 1S95 that Brlgham II. Roberts was out of harmony with his leaders? And was there not a feeling that It would grntifv th church leaders to havf him defeated 7 Wa3 It not known to every voter In Utah In 1W2. that Reed Smoot had permission from tho leaders to run for th Senate? And did not every voter know thnt It would gratify the church leaders If Reed Smoot should be elected? Are tin re any Mormons in ths audlen ?? In 1002 did you not hear this proposition: "Tho very fact that the authorities au-thorities 'njiv given permission to Brother Smoot to run for tho Senate Is a proof that they want him elected to the Senate. If thov did not want him elected to tho Senate they would rofus permission." Is that not true? At this point It Is pertl-net pertl-net to quoto the only answer which has ever been made lo this proposition. It Is as follows: The frlendrf of Apostle Smoot and the wlelders of church Influence in politics, say It would have bn tho uo of church Influence In politico. to deny permission to him, and th church leaders would have committed tho very offense that Is now charged against Hum If they did not grant permission to him. According to that peculiar doctrine It l.s a use of church Influence to say that an apostle shall not run nnd It Is not n uv of church Influence to say that he shall run. In other words, in Issuing their political po-litical manifesto the church loaders claimed tho right to give permission, b-it did not claim the right to refuse permission. permis-sion. Th very document explodes that nonsensical Idea, for It maintains the ab solute right of thf church loaders In order or-der to maintain church discipline to refuse re-fuse or to grant permission, according to their own desire. Let me repeat this Idea, so that you will get It dearly. It is cinlmed by some ol these Jesuitical controversialists that 11 would be a use of church Influence to refuse re-fuse permission to Rccd Smoot to run for the Scnnte, but It was no use of church Influence In-fluence to consent to his running. Viewed In Its effects, then. It Is not a uso of church Influence to elect an apostle to tho Senate, but it would havo been a use of church Influence to say that he could not be a candidate for tho Senate Just Absoluto Fact Not a bill has passed through the State Legislature that Is opposed by the church leaders. Not a bill falls of passago that they want passed. Not an act has been signed by the Governor that was strongly opposed by the chief men In tho church. Not an act has been vetoed that the leaders lead-ers did not want vetoed. Has thero been a breaking of the pledge? Does the church dominate the affairs of the State, and do prominent ecclesiastics dictate In political affairs' I pause for a reply. Have I proved the ease? If not. go bark nnd vote tho Republican or Democratic ticket, or part of each, as you may histoid his-toid by the ecclesiastical authority of your ward, your stako nnd the church. If I have proved the caro, come over and Join tho American party. Malntnln the Constitutional Con-stitutional provision that the church shall not domlnalo the affairs of the State lleln the church leaders to keep the pledge which was given and the pledge which every citizen of Utah ratified when the State Constitution was adopted. Where Line Should Bo Drawn. Have I anywhere Intimated that It was tho desire of the American partv that anv man should be deprived of his political rights? it has not so been Intendf-d- nor do I blame Mormons alone for the violation viola-tion of the political manifesto. Sycophantic Sycophan-tic Gentiles have been quite as much responsible re-sponsible as have the loadora of the church, and much more responsible than any of tho church followers. Ono of thf able men of the Mormon church and of this State asked me today whero I would draw the lino between those who have a right to enter the Held of political activity and those who have not. Tno answer then nnd now is: Just where tho church leaders lead-ers drew tho line In the political manifesto manifes-to That document stated that certain officials could not enter politics without consent. Tho highest present authority of the church Interpreted thnt manlfrsto not to mean any ono who stood In authority author-ity below the lino which the manifesto drew. Must Have Consent. According, then, to tho manifesto Itself Its official Interpretation and experience tho first presidency, tho apostles, the presiding pre-siding patriarch, the seven presidents of the seventies and the presiding bishopric, are Inhibited from aspiring to public office. of-fice. If there are others proscribed by that manifesto, it Is by tho Interpretation of the leaders themselves and no' bv the do sire of the American party to excludo am ono who stands below that line from exorcising exor-cising his full freedom In political life Do not misunderstand me. The manifesto does not say that these men shall not en. ter into political activities, but that they shall not enter without consent Experience Experi-ence proves that If any man of this class docs not get tho consent, ho drags In church influence against him; and If he does get consent he drags in church influence in-fluence for him. And as church Influence Is denied and Inhibited in politics tho only logical construction Is to say that the church Itself has excluded from political polit-ical activity all those who are dosignited by that manifesto as being required to ask permission. Utah must work out her own destiny In the tlrst days of Statehood it was the prayer and hope of every .citizen that Utah would take her placo among the proudest of the commonwealths; that never would oppression stain the pages of her history; that forever and forever her men and women breathing this wondrous won-drous air would work for tho highest dignity dig-nity of the State and the Nation for peaco with her sister States, and for Individual In-dividual liberty at home. Wo learned to love freedom In tho long dark night which i preceded the glorious dawn of our Statehood State-hood rights. How proud we wero In that hour! How glad we wero to pledge ourselves our-selves to support the State to Its highest destiny! Aro wo achieving that destiny? Tn the name of tho generations gone which worked and fought, suffered and died that wo might have the rights of citizenship citizen-ship and enjoy here In tho valleys of this Stato the comforts of this life: In the name of the generations coming after us which will enjoy or suffer tho conditions wcT leave for them, I beseech you to settle set-tle this question In tho present decade If tho church Is right In its attempted domination dom-ination of political affairs, then lot every man ask the church for a manifesto on every election morning nnd let him voto Its will. If the American party Is right let overy man. Jtepubllcnn nnd Democrat. Demo-crat. Jew, Gentllo and Mormon, who loves liberty, Join Its ranks and swell th mighty volume of power growing now and soon to be Irresistible by which I'tnh shall bo restored to tho proud position which she enjoyed on the day of her admission ad-mission to the Union. |