OCR Text |
Show This Is For Frank Cannon. ELECTION is over and we are reluctant re-luctant to call attention to any feature of the campaign in Utah which should have been outside the domain of politics. However, an incident inci-dent of Monday night's Democratic rally at the Salt Lake theatre cannot pass unnoticed by Catholics, because j silence would argue acquiescence in the truth of the implied charge made by one of the speakers. He made it in a roundabout way, concealing the poison in honeyed words and winsome speech, all the more dangerous because be-cause of such subtle means to mislead an audience. The speaker was Frank Cannon, ex-United States senator, and chairman of the Democratic state committee. com-mittee. What he said is tantamount to a charge that the Catholic church of Utah was party to a bargain mafle between one of its members and the officials of the Mormon church, whereby where-by the Catholic was elected a United States senator two years ago. In return re-turn for such an unprecedented favor, the Catholic church in Utah was to help this Catholic senator keep his pledge with the dominant church and work for the election of a Mormon to succeed Senator Rawlins. Of course Frank Cannon did not use the above language, ii is too plain for the political po-litical orator. What he did say was this: "It was a splendid day for Utah when the dominant church here said that it would not seek to control the votes of its members; there was no man or woman of intelligence in Utah who did not echo the mighty cry. Every churchman says the state shall never lay its hands Upon the religion of any adherent of any creed, and in j the same breath these state that no cnurcn shall lay its hands upon the civil rights of any man or woman in the United States. "It is not that influence, the influence influ-ence of churches, that I fear; it is the influence of that attempt to put two churches in the pockets of two men, to make of Utah a pocket borough. bor-ough. You have heard the statement of robbing Peter to pay Paul, and Paul to pay Peter. This is the scheme that is being tried in Utah, ' and it dates with the giving of one senator-ship, senator-ship, two years ago, to be followed by the . giving of the senatorship to another from this time on as long as you shall see fit. "This thing was taking from Paul to give to Peter, or from Peter to give to Paul, but the trouble was that it was not robbing Peter to pay Paul, but it was robbing the people, and this is what I call the pocket borough. I have a fond regard for both of the gentlemen under consideration. I do not need to name them. They are both Republicans, but they are neither Devine nor Sutherland, neither Lannan nor Lawrence, nor Goodwin nor Allen, nor any of the men whom the Republicans Re-publicans used to follow, for they have been relegated to the rear. "I have a fond regard for them both and reverence for their views. They have the same right to hold their conscientious con-scientious convictions that you and I have. But thVe are many people who think too much of the splendid creeds of both churches to drag them through the highways and byways, that some man may have a senatorship as a reward re-ward for dohng it." The person who'. puts any. other construction con-struction to such language than the meaning we have given it,' does not read aright. Now, Frank Cannon, if you have any 'proofs that Bishop Scan-Ian Scan-Ian was behind any bargain made by Thomas Kearns with the dominant church, produce those proofs for the enlightenment of Catholics, of Catholic Cath-olic Democrats who embrace 70 per cent of the voting population of that faith. What you know about the Mormon Mor-mon end of this allegeQ deal does not concern us. What you knowr about Thomas Kearns' connection with it does not concern us. It is a matter, after .all, between Kearns and his conscience; and wealth in this western country, struggling for political honor, hon-or, is not much troubled by conscience. But the false, misleading position in which Frank Cannon's speech places Catholics' in the eyes of their fellow citizens does concern us. It is' an insult in-sult to their intelligence, to their faith and to their manhood. . It is not necessary to defend Bishop Scanlan from such a false Imputation, nor answer for any of the, priests in his diocese. Everybody in Utah knows Bishop Scanlan, personally or by reputation. rep-utation. No one ever befo? said that he was a politician. No one ever knew him to take a hand in the political troubles that broke hearts and homes in Utah. No one could ever say that he was other than a Christian. Catholic Cath-olic bishop, denying to no man the freedom free-dom of conscience and worship, and zealous only for the spread of Christian Chris-tian charity and truth. But, assuming that Bishop Scanlan is the politician whom Frank Cannon would have the theatre audience suspect, sus-pect, (mention of the church implying the bishop of that church), what harm could he do the Democratic party in Utah, agreeing that he is friendly to one of the members of his church and rejoices in his political exaltation? No harm whatever, even if he tried, because be-cause Catholics do not take kindly to politicians of the sanctuary; neither is it a bishop's business to canvass for votes. Catholics take their faith but not their politics from Rome. The reasons which may move the Mormon to change his politics do not control the Catholic. Intelligence guides the Utah Catholic in the casting of his vote; wealth, never. It is up to Frank Cannon to put his speech in plainer language, and produce pro-duce proofs. |