OCR Text |
Show BISHOP CONNELLY'S EXPLANATION. Wc print this morning, sldo by side with our report on Tuesday last of remarks re-marks made by Bishop ConneUy at Eureka on the Sunday previous, tho alleged "correction" which appeared In Friday evening's News. How much of a correction It Is, any one can see. Tho gist of the whole matter was that ho was reported as comparing those who had been shot by order of the Government, Gov-ernment, for treason in tlmo of war or danger, to tho witnesses who had been testifying before the Senate Committee on Privileges and Elections, as to tho endowment oaths of the Mormon Mor-mon church. This Is fully preserved In Bishop Connelly's alleged correction, with tho Inevitable Inference, as any one can sco by reading both versions. It Is fair to say, then, that thero was no misrepresentation of Bishop Connelly. Connel-ly. Tne reporter who sent In the matter mat-ter was careful to iret Bishop Connelly's Connel-ly's own story before sending anything. The matter was sent accordingly, and used, with his talk with the reporter given precisely a3 had. This showed both fairness and diligence, and effectually effect-ually disposes of any suggestion of misrepresentation, mis-representation, or Intent to misrepresent. misrepre-sent. As a matter of fact, as wo aro Informed from entirely trustworthy-sources, trustworthy-sources, Bishop Connelly said much moro than he quotes himself as say-inrr; say-inrr; what he said before the words he admits, and what he said after them, gave them point and meaning stronger even than the words convey as they stand alone. He distinctly claimed that the crime of treason to the Government nnd oath-breaking toward it, was a minor offense compared with tho llko betrayal of oaths taken to tho church. We havo the words of residents of Eureka who know what the bishop said, that our report was very close to exactness. Bishop Connelly's "correction," it will be noted, preserves precisely tho connection con-nection between the breaking of oaths of fealty to the Government and the appropriate ap-propriate punishment therefor In tlmo of danger, and the oaths of fealty to the church, with tho penalty Invoked for faithlessness to them. What other Idea could have been in his mind than that the two cases were parallel, and that the penalty was due In the caso of those who had testified to those oaths? Why speak of oaths at all, if this, was not meant? Why speak of men being shot for breaking their oath3 to the Government, In the same connection connec-tion with his angry comment upon those whom he rails at as oath-breakers In the church case, unless he meant that they were on the same footing, and merited the same punishment? The excuse is too thin; it won't "wash." Bishop Connelly stands convicted con-victed by his own "correction." |