Show HT 1 NIS the salt lake herald takes the bory partisan gentleman to task THE DISPUTE HIS BIS CLAIMS id no man not aven joseph 1 F smith his has a right eight to misrepresent history to his people in a letter to charles crane chairman of the republican territorial rit orial co committee ammitt ee occupying about two columns in the Silt lit lake tribune lion ilon joseph F smith attempts to tone down the wire i ire edge of his intemperate address in the seventeenth ward which has occasioned casio ned so much surprise and regret among his most intimate friends the 0 gentleman crent leman commences by stating that bitter sarcasm and r ridicule are always the strongest weapons of a weak causell cause and then proceeds to treat those of his friends who have felt pain and humiliation humi lation at his indefensible utterances with a dose of bitter sarcasm and ridicule because of their lamentations over his hia exhibition hibi bibi tion of bigotry and spleen he then takes tile the babyish position that lie he is not any worse thau than his brother who made a speech in which one error of fact aej as J F S views it was mode made and e speech was amended before publication if it be true that his younger brother is as bad as he be how much better does docs that make hiru him but the facts may as well be made clear in opposition to his sms the alleged error jn in his church brothers speech was aspea 1 I 1 na g of the n church property lican congress had bad taken away the words as published fire are congressional grees ional levi legislation 0 they were substituted because the gentleman had been told he be was mistaken in saying that a republican congress had done that but was he mistaken let us see the church property was es C heated cheated under ti the ie provisions 0 of f an act of congress when was it passed in 1882 that act of Con congress contress 0 aress in addition to imposing severe penalties against plural marriage 0 annulled and repealed the utah laws incorporating the church of jesus christ of latter day saints and provided also that it shall not be lawful for any any corporation or association for religious remigious us or charitable purposes to acquire or hold bold real estate in any territorial government of a greater value than fifty thousand dollars andall and all real estate acquired or held by any such corporation or association contrary to the prOTis provisions ions of this net act shall be forfeited and escheat to the united states provided that existing rights in real estate shall not be impaired by the provisions of this section 11 1 what was that but republic r canle can legislation both houses of congress and the administration r were republican reau alican contrary to stories told about its not being sin signed ened by the republican f dent it was so BO signed and that stands of record the act of febuary 19 which was not signed 0 by the democratic president contains a section on oil the sub subject j act but it simply d directs tile the attorney general of the united states to institute proceed r ings to carry carry into effect the law daiv of 1862 which was republican I 1 legis evia lation therefore the gent lemans good brother was right in his first statement and was only wrong in in listening to his older but r rasher as her Ite republican publican brother the so called ed edmunds tucker act is a misnomer it originated in the senate and passed that body senator edmunds was its author As amended in the house by the committee of which randolph tucker was chairman it was greatly changed t and improved from the ori original inal we have at hand the bill as it cattle came from the senate and as amended by the house the bill as it passed was a compromise made ky by tile the corn com i cittee of conference of which eda 1 ii ti ii munds was a member present and tucker was not the feeling 0 of odthe the country at thu the time of its pas passage age was furious against the mormon morino n people wagon loads of petitions from religious bodies all over the united states were dumped upon congress members were besieged by their constituents to pa pass 4 the bill the only men almot alino l without an all exception who date dare to stand up tip for the i rights c of the mormon church were democrats democrat ts in the house tile the doity members member who had bad the hardihood to openly vote tote against the bill were U 3 9 democrats and one negro republican these rheo are facts which which are established by the record and not a conglomeration of opinions and unsupported statements like those which are arc grouped and called facts in in the tribune artiel article e by I 1 I 1 ion hon joseph F smith now as to some come of those alleged 0 facts which he says it is useless for any democrat to deny why useless sines sinca they thas are not true rp ip it because c they are published over his signature it is too late such a plea na is that the pamphlet kis his name contain conti ins so many errors which have been full fully exploded thit that the fact that lie he says thus and so does not make inake them thein correct or vouch touch for their accuracy that he be believes believe them himself we do not dispute but that this makes them theli true is a palpable absurd absurdity it y I 1 seeing that lie has made so go many mistakes to liin begin with it is not true that the den democratic socratic party had pledged in 1886 and violated that pledge and gave to us ug tile the ed munds tucker law in 1887 we ve challenge joseph F smith to produce th the e proofs of liis his rash state ment overtures were made by bv leading democrats to the mormon church leaders to agree to the cessation of plural marriages as a preliminary to a movement for statehood and those overtures were peremptorily declined and tho promise refused if half what has been done since under tinder harrisons administration had been conceded under Clev elands nobody familiar with all the facts lias has a well grounded doubt that utah atall would hane hae escaped the troubles trouble which she lias has since passed and would have obtained her political liberties we find no fault with the refusal we only state the facts A number of leading Damoc democrats rats and two or three republicans nere interested in deliverance 6 and promised to aid it under certain conditions there were no party pledges there was no one authorized to pledge the democratic party to way thing of the kind this story of democratic pledges has been used by cans in this campaign but we know that it is absolutely untrue because this writer is acquainted with the inside facts in the case and is prepared to substantiate what hat is here aff affirmed irined further it is not true that tile the democrats in con congress ress had reason to know it was possible ible to admit utah at the time mentioned by lon hon joseph F smith it is ia true that two or three republican lican senators were favorable to admission it is true that this was told to the democrats who were ivere willing to work for statehood but it is not true that they knew it or who those republican senators were for it was not considered prudent t to 0 disclose their names when asked for at the time because of the popular sentiment now as to Con congressman L cressman coxs fly expression which has been so shamefully pe per averted and which lion iron J F smith quotes in a wrong b connection there was no better friend of utah and the mor mons in con congress reas than sumet sunbelt Sun bet cox he was favorable to admission at tile the time he used the expression quoted it was uttered tittered in a democratic caucus allon the question of of f admit admitting tina the two dakotas was discussed cox was vas strongly vly in favor of the bill c ajen i lemen who were then working jeal eal busly asly fort for the be admission of utah ato proposed zed to add utah to the da kian bill it was a against ainest that of presenting the utah que ion that cox exclaimed 44 ut jh 1 the fly in our pot of 0 0 ointment 0 aija i ft anty wily did dia hi hasay say that because h ina yie view of the still an anar ry p public U all c I 1 the itlie bill forthe for I 1 t ie dakotas would be spoiled ad defeated lefea ted if butali ward I 1 tacked on 1 W it aba thatis 8 I 1 the naked truth and danset f I 1 acox ox no pent utah in denoral s bea mauu 1 actu red ia arl utah out espre ahloo i jhc eg relate y san alleged oo 00 sen oUt utah aliDe democrats macrate mo crate part Par tofit of it i P q r rue C ri hav boi doiel cl hs s the report u p W or arpea I 1 I 1 H OP ibi 0 the te best and aaa democrat Z that report shows s that thai it first senator inah was violently opposed to utah but after cooling down ed to read what tho those democrats promised and said if lie could become convinced v of the sincerity of themore the movement I 1 he might be induced to favor favo it the expressions attributed to him hy by mr smith sire are not in the report I 1 and were not bedas the gentle jiin can learn if lie he will ask the two democrats to whom lie be refers senator pugh did not say constitution be damned and the remarks about the popular will being ill the constitution were not made by venator v pugh hut but hy by senator E edmunds on another occasion as mr smith sinith may may learn from his republican 1 fri friends enas senator puh was chairman of the committee to which the bill for tile the restoration of church property was referred lie he worked hard I 1 ni n favor of the bill and thus it appears that the attempted conversion spoken of was I 1 not alto altogether c eaber a failure but granting that this ilary y democrat was bitterly prejudiced against utah and the mormons cormons Mor mons what of it did he represent th the 0 democratic party what about the host of democratic congressmen adored utah and would have helped to admit her if they could believe she had any chance of admission what about the violent hostility of edmunds allison ingalls Ing c nII reed heed i antl and a host of if other republican congressmen who were also interviewed anti and who were bitt bitterly eriv ed to a admission 4 foes does the gentleman call it fair and to single cingle out that one violent senator add to his language and present that as an all exponent of his party sentiments shame and to what purpose does lie he inject a paragraph about secession 9 what ahat has bas that to do with admission into the union the bloody shirt argument 0 is is now nol V despised even by the party that raised it to use uge bis own expression it is a piece of paltry alap trap the gentleman repeats the sentiment that an overruling providence had much to do with the admission of utah this a sort of mild modification of his contradictory statements in his maiden speech but he seems utterly dis inclined to give any credit to delegate rawlins for the work lie he accomplished in in that direction at the risk of the cry of sacrilege we will repeat the logical lo i conclusion that if worked to accomplish this end the instruments used were the democratic delegate the Demo democratic bratic congress and the democratic president quod erat crat de bonstra tum but the gentleman insists that the passage passa e of the statehood bill bil I 1 was forced to support that statement tat ement lie he tells a tribune tale of senator platt compelling senator faulkner to drag the bill out of tile the pigeon ft hole and put it on its passage and that im probable and fanciful fairy tale is told for a fact by ilon hon joseph F smith let us lexi next have an all ender lenient jack the giant killer as veritable bistor hi history stor platt the most invincible and immovable opponent t ci of f utah platt who as chairman of the com committee mee on territories was up to the last moment implacable foe platt who hai had to be placated by gentlemen who worked with him assiduously to keep him from fighting the bill with his ever bitterness bit ternes forced senator faulkner staunch friend and the democratic senate to do as he be now emasculated of power should bid them oh biow low partisan vehemence does seem beem to blind some sonie goed good ineal men the gentleman 7 modifies the remarks made in his speech down to tile the assertion that he does not know of a democrat who after the republican publican i te victory of last year year was not afraid that utah would become a republican state or who was really happy in the thought that is a very different thing to what lie said and which bouti wounded ded so many of his good friends we nnie might 11 i allt take this modification without much dispute but for his fallai statement while to hurt burt any mans feelings is contrary to my iny wish whenever whery cr and upon whatever subject I 1 speak or write J utter the honest sentiments of my heart well here is what lie he said aud and to which it appears lie he now adheres 11 1 I believe that we don t owe our prospect for statehood to the democratic part parly I 1 am ain convinced in my mind that if it were in their power jorj or it had been in their power ill iii the present attitude of events to the passage of the ceab inba ct akay would have done it our laia 1 a 6 gi slature was largely re public aV and if there were i butak ar n mith a 9 I 1 states jigs that had 5 fotr l i it al 11 hlll lL Ll n ho fact 1 art raid to ad n rit U ta it if i no theu hv all 1 lie become come a republican state the then it I 1 liate have never heard of that democrat bow that is contradicted not only by the facts facer in ill the case but uy by tile the gentleman c s own poor attempt te in t at apology As to what lie he baij ai and the force of which lie he vainly to turn away by roundabout sentences herbit here it is if I 1 were ivere the iha baity if I 1 had been aud and you 1 know now that is 3 you you 1 ou who are acquainted with me ine that I 1 ani am not disposed to le be illiberal in my feeling but if I 1 had bal been for the last 0 30 years the republican party and utah had knocked at my door for admission into the anion believing as I 1 did or as ag the 11 publican Republica ii party parly did that utah tte to 0 a man was democratic I 1 should I 1 have iaac my dor door against you if there is any iricanin mca at all to this akil 11 10 is ir it not net thul that he ap 01 that republican couro mid and would have done what the republican puli lican party did if lie iio had been ia if lie he did not mean that lie he should say so and not try to round it the as assertion hat lie has lean been subjected to vindictive personal nt atta task is also untrue it 13 ii what hat lie lias has said blat lias has been it ir is open to criticism it is is a sen ac ciment that amazes even his Ae republican publicAn fiands all they can say fly is is he mean that ile he now says lie did mean it and that democrats find fault with it because became it waa wa sail said against democrats even that is n not true we and a n d all fair minded democrats would denounce the sentiment as atrocious if made by a democrat as against republicans the b gentleman calls his maiden e effort fro rt a 1 poor little political eteh speech that is correct and his apology is i ata aller and poorer than tm his speech it forms ferins another illustration of the fact that a man may ir in some things be a wise counselor roun but in cp a blind guide |