Comments on: Dictating Politics: The Election of 1912

By: floridagirl

floridagirl — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 04:41:40 +0000

Wow! Okay, I’ve heard of Church News, of course, and Mormon Times, but didn’t know they came out of the Deseret News. Cool, thanks.

By: Ardis E. Parshall

Ardis E. Parshall — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 03:57:19 +0000

No making fun of you! No reason why you should know this —

The Deseret News is owned by the Church, and has been since it was founded in 1850. Church leaders are still involved in major editorial decisions, but I don’t know to what extent they’re involved in routine work, except for the Church News. That is published as a section of the Deseret News but is edited and run almost like a weekly version of the Ensign.

Mormon Times, another section of the Deseret News, is just another routine section like the sports section that caters to one segment of the News’s audience, and is not controlled by the Church.

By: floridagirl

floridagirl — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 03:39:31 +0000

See, this is what I DO like about the internet. The opportunity to find out all these “small history moments” that I had no idea existed.

Ok, now here’s my embarrassing question for the week…is the Deseret News owned by the church? I have never seen a Deseret News paper in my life and don’t live anywhere near where it would be distributed….so I don’t know. Thanks for not making fun of me! Unless you do.

By: David G.

David G. — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 21:33:56 +0000

Thanks, John, that must be what I’m remembering.

By: John Willis

John Willis — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 15:58:27 +0000

Read Truman Madsen’s biography of B.H. Roberts. The church in 1895 under Wilford Woodruff issued what is known as the political manifesto. General Authorities were required to get permission from the President of the Church to run for political office(This is still in effect Ezra Taft Benson had to get permission from President Mckay to accept the position as secretary of agriculture during the Eisenhower administration. In 1968 Benson wanted to run as the vice presidential candidate of George Wallace, President Mckay said no. Wise decisions in both cases I think.)

Back to B.H.Roberts , he saw the political manifesto as a means by which the Republican Church leadership could keep Democratic Church leaders, like himself from running for public office. He was not completely unjustifed in thinking this. Moses Thatcher of the Quorum of the 12 left the quorum, or was pushed out because of conflict over this issue. Fortunately for the church and Roberts things did not get that far with him. He did run for congress in in 1896 and lost and won in 1898, he was never able to take his seat as he was a practicing polygamist and the house refused to seat him. The church did not spring to his defense as it did in 1904 when Reed Smoot a member of the quorum of the 12 was elected to the Senate. Of course Smoot was a monogamist.

It is true that there was conflict and bad feeling between J.F. Smith and B.H. Roberts over political issues. Unlike Thatcher ,he was able to swallow his pride and stay in the quorum of the 70 and continue to make outstanding contributions to the Church,

By: Ardis E. Parshall

Ardis E. Parshall — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 12:15:23 +0000

I don’t know the occasion you’re talking about, David. I’d guess it was closer to the 1895 election than 1912 (except that JFS wasn’t the prophet then).

By: David G.

David G. — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 04:48:34 +0000

Interesting, Ardis. I recall discussing in Brian Cannon’s Utah history course that there were direct confrontations between JFS and BHR over political matters. The details are fuzzy, but I seem to remember JFS dropping the “I’m the prophet and I receive revelation so you’d better follow” card, which Roberts, the good Democrat, refused to do. Do you know the details better than me?

By: queuno

queuno — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 04:43:22 +0000

The endorsement of a candidate in a newspaper editorial hardly amounts to “counsel”.

Ezra Taft Benson might have something to say about that…

By: Hunter

Hunter — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 03:38:39 +0000

Yes, I agree that’s how JFS saw what he was doing in 1912. His experience of having to testify at the Smoot Senate hearings about how Church members were free to vote their consciences had to have stuck with JFS. Whether he felt it his prerogative to dictate to Church members or not, he had to have known what *that* would have looked like to others/outsiders. In that sense, then, I have to think that this editorial was just that, an editorial.

Thanks for this, Ardis.

By: Ardis E. Parshall

Ardis E. Parshall — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 23:54:52 +0000

Mark, I think that’s how JFS saw what he was doing in 1912. A newspaper’s editorial board can can a stand on a candidate or issue; he was publishing his stand as editor of the monthly magazine. I really think he didn’t see what he was doing as anything more than that.