OCR Text |
Show irrigation here were an experiment and that when it proved a success the plans were changed? - It is not a matter of serious consequence, but when motives are ascribed to others just on a pre-' pre-' sumption, it is not ungenerous if a return in kind is laade. ' But the Advocate says: . "Yes, it was habitable, for such as had the sand to face the desert, etc., but does 'that include you and I? I claim no credit for such sand and hardi Lood-Klo you?" We claim no credit, but we have been through all that; have cleared the sagebrush when we had no year's supply of food on hand; have built the cabin we lived in, and with a half dozen other poor men have spent more labor in turning water and conducting it to the land than was ever done by any men or set of men in Utah up to 1880. We were in the desert twenty years before coming com-ing to the present Utah; as to making two blades of grass grow where only one had grown before, we made oats and wheat and timothy grow where nothing noth-ing but sagebrush had ever grown before. And it was for the sole purpose of making a home. If there is any presentation of the desert that we have not faced, wc do not know it. Not in a company with a year's provisions on hand, but singly and, alone. Again the Advocate asks: "Were you actuated by a desire to build for yourself a home in these Western wilds where you could exercise religious liberty," etc. The question is pointless because there has been no spot under the flag since the foundation of this Government where any man who was willing will-ing to obey the laws of his country and of civilization, civiliza-tion, had not only perfect religious liberty, but had the full protection of the Government in exercising that liberty. When men go beyond that, then they are but claiming a license to do what they please fo that they do it in the name of some creed, it is incipient treason. I do not claim that, do you, Mr. Advocate? Again, Mr. Advocate, when you speak of "accepting "accept-ing blood money" you are simply adopting the methods meth-ods of a blackguard. That is if that is not your normal nor-mal state. And when you charge "that we have either "persecuted or misrepresented this people,' you are simply adopting the methods of a scurvy lar, if you are not a natural one. Neither have we sought to detract in the least from the honor or distinction dis-tinction due the pioneers of Utah. They met a hard fortune bravely and uncomplainingly, but there were others, as for instance the pioneers that before the pioneers of Utah came here; not only came, but went a thousand miles further on to Oregon.. You say: "So far as your reference to public wrongs, covenants broken, laws outraged, a Government insulted, in-sulted, etc., these are largely the production of your own biased vision." Are they? How about Abraham Abra-ham Cannon's, Apostles Taylor's and Cowley's plural plu-ral marriages? How about apostles going through the State ordering former polygamists to live 'their religion? How about an apostle coming here and dictating dic-tating the nominations of a full State ticket, by virtue vir-tue of his ecclesiastical office? Where those the things' that were promised when Statehood was given Utah? You say: "We stand for the best good of Utah regardless of what creed or political party is benefited." You think you do because in your thought the best, good of Utah is for the people to obey the instructions of Joseph F. Smith. In point of fact you are a public enemy of your own people, an enemy to the young men of your creed, for you pre teaching them to violate the Constitution of the United States in obeying thir ecclesiastical chiefs in the matter of voting and encouraging them to pursue a course which will bring suffering, loss, continued con-tinued apprehension and fear; an enemy to the young women Of Utah by indorsing apostles who have taken new wives since the manifesto and thus encouraging them to enter a state which will brand with dishonor their children, and leave them in their old age as neither maids, wives nor widows. Is it so wrong for an editor to plead with a people to obey the laws of God and of this free country? If it is not, then it is not we that cause "a perpetual state of si rife and turmoil here." We have never asked anything any-thing of any man in Utah except to do the square thing under the laws. Finally, we commend the Advocate, not to worry itself about who our supposed employer is, until it sees something in The Telegrani to indicate that some one has a string on us to compel us to do what we do not privately believe to be right. WELL, LET'S SEE. The personal affairs of editors are not as a rule any special concernment to the public; but there are times when editors, like men in other stations, are .obliged to rise to a question of personal privilege. The editorial "we" is supposed to apply to the newsf paper only, but in this article, it can be given a little latitude. We have a contemporary, the Advocate, published at St. George in this State, which more than once has been personal in reference to the editor edi-tor of this journal. In the last copy that has reached this office, it is kind enough to devote a good deal of space to the same subject. To a statement made ; by The Telegram it says: True, the great Gxl made the country. He made the rocks, the. sands, the sagebrush prairie; the wide stretches of desert and the lofty mountains. But was the country habitable? To be technical and precise. It was. It furnished habitation In its wild state for the llsird. the snake, the Jackrabblt and coyote: coy-ote: It yielded sustenance for the bison and other wild animals ani-mals upon which the few aborigines subsisted; but was it hab-, hab-, ,. '. itabte for you and I ? Jf Col. Bridger's verdict was a Just one. it certainly offered small inducements to the home-seeker when Brigham Young , and his little band of pioneers arrived here. Yes, it was habitable "for such as had the sand to face the desert and the Industry to carve out a living on Its repellant breast." But does that include such as you and I. Judge Good- win? I claim no credit for such sand or hardihood do you? No, the country may have been habitable, and was habita-. habita-. ble, as is proven by the sequence, for such men as Brigham Young led into the country, but It was time enough for Judge ' Goodwin to come when the much despised Mormons had "killed - the snakes and built the bridges;" reared homes In the desert that were comfortable. If not palatial; established stores and . , other conveniences, and become connected with the outside world by a girth of steel. True, you came to the country while It was yet new, and there remained some privations and Inconveniences to endure, . but what were your motives for coming? Were you actuated by a desire to build for yourself a home In these Western wilds where you could exercise religious liberty, or was it with the hope that In a few short months or possibly years you could amass a fortune from the mines of this country and re-l re-l turn to your Eastern home to enjoy it? And failing In this purpose, were you' not content to accept ' of "blood moner" for the exercise of your God-given talents in 1 persecuting and misrepresenting the people .you had by force of . circumstances made your neighbors? Who Is the real home- - builder the man who camps temporarily in ' a certain place while he Is engaged lnxtractlng the treasures of nature from ' the hills, or the one who files on a piece of land. Irrigates and reclaims it and "causes two blades of grass to grow where there was but one before;" who settles down, with but one object In view, and that the creating of a permanent abode for himself and his posterltyT Undoubtedly, Judge Goodwin, you experienced hardships and t disappointments In the Western country, but they were such privations and risks as were endured a few years ago by the participants In the Klondike . gold craze. They were actuated ' by a greed for gold and not the holler love of religious liberty: the privilege of worshiping a Creator according to the dictates of one's conscience. To try to detract from the honor and dls- . tlnctlon of the early pioneers, now that the most of them have moved on to another stage of action, would seem cowardly, and : beneath the dignity of a great editor. The writer of the above mixes acts and motives . in a way which it is hard, to separate. Now, is the writer absolutely certain that the first thought of Brigham Young and his followers was to settle ' here? After the trouble in Nauvoo the Saints di- vided, one band going by sea around the Horn to I California, where they settled. The Mormon battalion battal-ion went through to California and settled; is it not ; true that the first immigrants that .came here started for the, same destination? That when they reached 1 here" this valley seemed most inviting; that they had a year's provisions and seed to plant; that their stock was so poor and worn out jthat they did not ? dare take the chance of crossing a thousand miles of desert; that they knew the stock would be fully t recuperated by spring by the luxuriant bunch grass ' ' that grew on all the hillsj that theflrst planting and ' '" . J , |