Below you will find diary entries on the topic of “Politics – 1961-69.” You can view other subjects here.
Search the diary entries below for specific dates, names, and keywords using the keyboard shortcut Command + F on a Mac or Control + F on Windows.
Friday, January 6, 1961
Telephone conversation between President David O. McKay and Elder Ezra Taft Benson, who called from Washington, D.C., Friday, January 6, 1961.
Brother Benson: President McKay, how are you?
President McKay: I am well. I read your letter last night.
Brother Benson: Bless your heart. I am happy to hear your voice, and I read in the Deseret News last night that you have just celebrated your 60th wedding anniversary.
President McKay: It was one of the most glorious experiences of my life!
Brother Benson: That is wonderful.
President McKay: All our little grandchildren paid tribute to Mama Ray. We were all crying, we were so happy. I have never been so thrilled and proud in my life!
Brother Benson: The Lord bless you. What a rich experience!
President McKay: Yes, it was. Thank you.
Brother Benson: We are all proud of you and grateful for you.
President McKay: Thank you.
Brother Benson: Our hearts go out to you. I wanted to talk to you just a minute about my plans for the future as I see them now, President McKay. These last couple or three weeks are proving to be about as busy as I have ever had. There is a lot of work to complete at the end.
President McKay: I congratulate you on the tribute from President Eisenhower.
Brother Benson: Thank you very much.
President McKay: He has been a wonderful friend to you right from the beginning.
Brother Benson: Yes, he has.
President McKay: And you have to him.
Brother Benson: We have developed a very close friendship, and he has great admiration for you.
President McKay: You know that I reciprocate that.
Brother Benson: I know you do, and I have expressed that to him, as you have.
President McKay: Thank you.
Brother Benson: Now, President Eisenhower is, of course, preparing a State of the Union message, a budget message, and an economic report — all of which have in them something to do with Agriculture, so that has been taking a lot of time; and then we have just had a flood of callers here to the office from all over the nation, just to come in and express appreciation and to say ‘good-by’, which has been very pleasant but very time consuming. I think I did not say to you that I have been trying to prepare a manuscript, which may be published, of the eight years of service here in the Department. I did discuss it with, I think, Brother Lee and Brother Mark Petersen, and I am arranging to send a copy of the draft, when I get it in shape, to Brother Petersen for review. I thought it would be a nice thing to have a member of the Twelve go over it, and he has agreed to do that –because I do not want anything in it which would in any way be inimical to the best interests of the thing we all love the most.
President McKay: Yes.
Brother Benson: Now, there is one other thing that I wanted to mention. I have, I guess, thousands of cards on people that have come here to the office with whom I have had dealings. Most of them are, I would say, pretty good friends. They are all friendly, but most of them are what you would call good friends; and I thought when I got out that probably I would have those cards segregated by missions and have referral cards go to each one of them. I have not felt free to say all I would like to have said to them during the time that I have served as an official of the government, but I believe that after I get out I could do it discreetly and wisely; and I think probably the overwhelming majority of them would appreciate it. You understand what I mean — that would be for missionaries to call on them.
President McKay: I know.
Brother Benson: We do not have to make the decision now.
President McKay: I think that requires careful thought.
Brother Benson: Yes, I think it does.
President McKay: Going out through your office to the Mission Presidents — I think we had better be careful about that.
Brother Benson: I would not do it here. I would do it after I got back to Salt Lake.
President McKay: I see.
Brother Benson: I am entitled to take all the cards with me on each man, which gives his address and his connection — in some cases his telephone number — and how many times he has called at the office. I would bring those with me. Then we could make the decision later.
President McKay: Well, we shall have to keep it for consideration.
Brother Benson: Yes, that is right. I will not make any move until I check further with you.
President McKay: You will take those cards with you at any rate?
Brother Benson: Yes. I want to have them. They are my property, and I want to refer to them occasionally, so I will bring them along with me.
President McKay: Should they be left as reference to the future Secretary of Agricultural?
Brother Benson: No, there will be another set here if he needs them.
President McKay: That is a personal matter?
Brother Benson: It is the usual procedure for me to take them.
President McKay: Well, all right. You have made a good record. Do not do anything that will let any enemy find fault.
Brother Benson: We will try our best not to. I have had a good briefing session with my successor, and while he does not know agriculture, he is an energetic and vigorous leader, and we are trying to be as helpful as we can. We left him two big books of transition papers, which I wish I could have had eight years ago, which he has appreciated very deeply. I have a good letter from him this morning.
President McKay: That is good.
Brother Benson: As to the question of moving back, President McKay — officially we are through here on the 20th. There will be a little cleaning-up work to do, which you can understand. We have not sold our home. It looks like we are going to have to take a loss on it, unfortunately. We took a loss on our home in Salt Lake when we left. The market was soft, and we had to move quickly, and we turned the money on our home here and had to borrow some, too, but the colored element in Washington — and our home is in that district — has had a very bad effect on real estate value.
President McKay: Yes.
Brother Benson: Now, we do not know how long it is going to take us to move it. We are pushing it hard. We have several companies working on it. We hope we will have it sold by the 20th. We have set the date for our departure on the 31st of January. The home will sell better if it can be shown while we are in it, so we are hopeful that the way will be opened up so we can sell it between now and then, and then we can go ahead with our plans. If it does not sell, then we will have to make the decision whether we stay on a few days longer until we do sell it, or whether we move out and leave it with the real estate firms to sell.
President McKay: You have perfect liberty to take what time you need. That will be all right.
Brother Benson: I appreciate that very much.
We have, of course, the cost of moving out, and I have been hopeful that we could have a similar arrangement to that which we had when we moved here.
President McKay: It seems to me that the government should help you one way.
Brother Benson: The government will not do it unless you are going to another government assignment, President McKay.
President McKay: Is that so?
Brother Benson: If I were going to a government assignment abroad or some other place, they would; but there is just no chance of it.
President McKay: Why did they not help you when you went back?
Brother Benson: Well, you see, I was just moving into government service. It is only when you transfer from one government post to another that they help you. They do not help you on the first move — they do not help you when you terminate; but if they ship you after you have come into the service, then they will. So there is not anything we could do there. I wish there were, but there is not.
It has been a rather costly operation for us back here. We have kept our social activities to the very minimum, but even then the costs — we have been living with people and associating with people who have been pretty free spenders because they have had the money. We have tried to hold everything down — trying to keep our children in school at the Brigham Young University part of the time — it has been quite a financial load. It is going to cost us money by the time we get back.
I have had to buy a home in Salt Lake. I bought an old home and we are fixing it up a bit. I have had to go to the bank and borrow the money, assume the mortgage on it, and borrow money from the bank to cover the difference. So it is kind of a tight squeeze now until we sell our home. If we sell our home, we will be able to, we hope, lift the mortgage and also pay the bank off. The bank has been very good here. They have loaned me $16,000.00 on an open note. We hope that things are going to work out so that we can dispose of our home and so we can pay for our old home in Salt Lake.
President McKay: I am here alone now. I will take it up with my counselor tomorrow morning when he comes back.
Brother Benson: That is fine. I did mention it to Brother Moyle one time when I was out there and I was unable to contact you because you were so busy. His immediate comment was, ‘I think the Church ought to move you back as they moved you out.’ But, of course, I will abide by your decision. It would be helpful to us, and I appreciate your approval for me to stay here until we sell our home. We do not want to stay here until we sell our home. We do not want to stay any longer than we have to. We have made definite plans to leave on the 31st. I had a meeting in Michigan. They are having a meeting up there in which they have urged the attendance of all the former Secretaries of Agriculture — that means five, including myself — on February 1st. I was going to attend that, and then drive out from there. Sister Benson and one or two of the girls would go ahead so they would be at the home when the furniture arrives in Salt Lake.
President McKay: You take the time that is necessary. That will be all right.
Brother Benson: We will do that, and we appreciate it. In the meantime, the brethren are giving me some assignments and I have been to Atlanta, Georgia. I am going to Texas to the San Antonio Stake this weekend, and to New Jersey next weekend. I am trying to cut the time down as much as I can so as not to be away any more than I actually have to.
President McKay: That will be all right.
Brother Benson: I am enjoying the appointments.
President McKay: All right. We congratulate you on your eight years’ service. They will be memorable to you and to the nation.
Brother Benson: President McKay, I can not express adequately my appreciation for the wonderful support I have had from you personally, and from the Brethren, also. It has been a wonderful source of strength and help.
President McKay: The Lord continue to bless you and guide you.
Brother Benson: Thank you, and the Lord bless you and bless Sister McKay. I hope that all is well with her.
President McKay: She is getting along very well, thank you. Kind regards to Sister Benson.
Brother Benson: Thank you. We look forward to the time when we can be home again.
President McKay: And also kind regards to President Eisenhower.
Brother Benson: Yes. I expect to see him probably before next Friday, but our last Cabinet meeting will probably be next Friday, President McKay — a week from today.
President McKay: You tell him I have him in mind and I love him as ever.
Brother Benson: Fine. I appreciate that. Did you get my last letter about your possible trip to Palmyra?
President McKay: Yes.
Brother Benson: Oh, that is the one you are referring to.
President McKay: Can you come over to it? Are you going to be there?
Brother Benson: Well, I would like to be there, and I had half planned to be there; but then I got an assignment from the Twelve to go to the New Jersey Stake on that same day.
President McKay: I see.
Brother Benson: So I had better take my assignment, I guess.
President McKay: Yes, you will have to take your assignment.
Brother Benson: Yes, that is right.
President McKay: I have a meeting now with the men regarding how best to go there. I do not know just how to go — whether by plane or railroad.
Brother Benson: If there is anything we can do to help out, we will be glad to. We had planned, had we gone up, to drive from here, but it is about a full day’s drive.
President McKay: What kind of flying weather do they have back there?
Brother Benson: It is very good now, President McKay. The snow is nearly all gone, and it has been very mild and nice. Today it is a lovely day.
President McKay: Well, I want to fly if it is all right, but flying in the winter time is rather risky.
Brother Benson: Yes, but I think maybe you could fly into Rochester or Buffalo and then have them pick you up and drive you from there on. Would you like to have us check at all?
President McKay: No, we shall do it from here, just as well.
Brother Benson: I did mention in the letter the hope that you might stop in Washington one way or the other. I know it will be a tiring trip.
President McKay: Well, I shall have to do it in a hurry, becasue I am here alone with Ray and I do not like to leave her at nights.
Brother Benson: Yes, of course.
President McKay: She worries about my being in the air at winter time; she does not like that.
Brother Benson: I hope you will have someone come with you.
President McKay: Oh, yes. I will not travel alone.
Brother Benson: That is good. If there is anything we can do on this end, let us know.
President McKay: Thank you very much.
Brother Benson: Thank you, and the Lord bless you.
President McKay: Good-by.
Brother Benson: Good-by.”
Fri., 10 Feb. 1961:
“Friday, February 10, 1961
Telephone conversation between Senator Frank Browning of the Senate Chambers and President David O. McKay who called him Friday morning, February 10, 1961.
President McKay: Brother Browning, it is good to hear your voice.
Senator Browning: It is good to hear you, President.
President McKay: I am calling in regard to a matter which is dear to my heart, that is before the Legislature.
Senator Browning: Fine.
President McKay: It is an old building down here, the old City Hall, in which the State Legislature met years ago, and which we would like to preserve. The best place to preserve it is up near the Capitol.
The Church is willing to go to quite an expense in removing it, but it needs a foundation. Somebody, during the investigation, has proposed that there be a basement and a foundation put in on which the old building will be placed, and the State Capitol can use the basement for the purpose of storage and other uses. It will require a few thousand dollars to accomplish this, and the Church and other private individuals will pay the full expense of moving and restoring the building. I wonder if we could get you to help us with it.
Senator Browning: Well, I am up here bleeding with everybody landing on me that they can not afford this for education, they can not afford that for school buildings — what would be the State’s contribution under this plan, President?
President McKay: Well, I shall send a man up and give you the full facts. May I do that?
Senator Browning: Yes. Well, I am going down into a committee meeting in a minute, over at the University. Monday would be all right. But have you an idea what it would be — what would the State’s contribution be?
President McKay: It would not be very much. I suppose $60,000.00 or $70,000.00.
Senator Browning: Yes. Of course, Governor Clyde has given us a budget that is unrealistic, and now everybody comes in on top and we can find now over two or three million dollars that are not in the budget.
President McKay: The private persons who move it will have to pay over $150,000.00 or $200,000.00. The foundation, you can judge, will not cost very much, and the State will have the use of it.
Senator Browning: The thing that worries some members of the Senate is that the State would then have to assume responsibility for keeping it. Would they not?
President McKay: They would take care of it. Yes.
Senator Browning: They figured around $40,000.00 or $50,000.00 a year.
President McKay: Oh, no. No, it would not be that much.
Senator Browning: Well, when your representative comes up Monday, have him call in, and I will be just as kind as can be.
President McKay: Well, Monday is a holiday, is it not?
Senator Browning: Yes, but we are in session Monday. Tuesday would be better anyway.
President McKay: Well, then, I shall ask Mr. Nicholas G. Morgan to see you next Tuesday morning.
Senator Browning: That is right. I will see him anytime he comes up.
President McKay: That will be fine.
Senator Browning: Bless your heart. You tell them to get outside agency — that is what the Senators all suggested to raise it all, and then the State could look at it. In other words, the Church is most generous, but tell them to raise the $90,000.00, and then we would take it over. Offer them that thought. We are worried about our money up here. We get hell if we raise taxes (laughingly), so we are in a bad spot. You suggest for them to go to the Chamber of Commerce and all and get the $90,000.00, but in any event I will be happy to talk with him.
President McKay: You say you are getting…’hell’….
Senator Browning: They say if we raise taxes, we are going to be in trouble.
President McKay: Yes, and I am in trouble in paying so much out for the Church! (Senator Browning and President McKay both laugh heartily.)
Senator Browning: I will come down, and we will weep on each other’s shoulders!
President McKay: All right. (laughingly)
Senator Browning: I am coming to see you before I get through.
President McKay: Good. You do that. I will have Brother Morgan call on you next Tuesday morning.
Senator Browning: That is right, and tell him to find the $90,000.00. Just kid him along — and then the State would take care of it may be.
President McKay: All right.
Senator Browning: Thanks, President.
President McKay: Thank you.”
Thurs., 16 Mar. 1961:
“Ricks College
Today at Council meeting I mentioned that the suggestion has already been approved that the Ricks College remain at Rexburg for the present; that President Ernest L. Wilkinson was of the opinion that it would be well to call the presidents of stakes in that area together, or that I should go up and meet them again. I have received letters from the presidents of stakes in Idaho Falls and have visited by appointment with four of the leading men in Idaho Falls. They manifested a good spirit, but of course they expressed the hope that the school would be gained by calling these stake presidents together again, or by my going up and meeting with them; the matter has been fully studied and considered, and I therefore recommend that the Church make the appropriation that was authorized several years ago for the improvement of the school at Rexburg, and go right ahead and take care of the matter.
Elder Lee expressed the thought that there was much wisdom in this suggestion, and that he was recently in Idaho Falls, and Brother William J. O’Bryant, who is the mayor, is coming up for re-election either in April or July, and his enemies are trying to make the delay in the decision regarding Ricks College a political matter.
I said that if the election is in April, it would be best not to make the announcement at this time, but if it is not until July, we perhaps should not wait. The Brethren unanimously approved of the suggestions made regarding this matter.”
Thurs., 18 May 1961:
“Today at Council meeting, Elder Ezra Taft Benson, who had attended, at the request of General Dwight D. Eisenhower former President of the United States, a meeting of President Eisenhower’s former Cabinet members (Elder Benson having been Secretary of Agriculture), held at Gettysburg, on May 11, 1961, gave us a rather disturbing report of that meeting.
Brother Benson, referring to the meeting which was held at the College in Gettsburg, said that 15 were present. Stated that General Eisenhower was in excellent spirits and robust health, and that he sent his warmest best wishes to me. *(see note below by cm)
At the meeting they discussed the current situation (General Eisenhower leading the discussion), and also the speech which the General proposes to give June 1, this being the first speech he will have given since his retirement from office, and which is to be given at a meeting in Washington, D.C. The General wanted to know how he could best help the country and the present administration in that talk. The Cuban problem is giving deep concern to both President Kennedy and General Eisenhower.
The General feels that the situation has been badly fumbled, and thinks part of it has been due to the fact that there has not been sufficient counseling together, and General Eisenhower felt, too, that the military tactics were bad. President Kennedy is sick at heart over the situation and General Eisenhower is very much concerned over the situation. There was a long disucssion at the meeting over the way the Monroe Doctrine has been flouted, and the blunt violation of the Declaration of the Assocation of American States. It is quite apparent that Cuba is being used as a base for infiltrating Latin America with Communistic philosophy. The Laos situation is also giving great concern to the leaders, and it would seem that probably the Communists are going to make the next attack in Berlin.
Elder Benson said the situation in the Executive Branch generally, he felt, is not good at the present time; that President Kennedy is certainly feeling the strain of his terrible responsibility according to the reports that he received. He said that there is a unanimous feeling that the Country faces some very serious problems, and that we ought to do what we can to be of assistance. General Eisenhower feels that the country needs to unite behind the President, particularly on international matters.
*Note by cm
When sending his best wishes to President McKay, General Eisenhower said in Elder Benson’s presence, that he considered President McKay ‘the greatest spiritual leader in the world today.’
Fri., 26 May 1961:
“Telephone Conversation with Elder Ezra Taft Benson
Re: Serving on a Committee to look into the question of exchange of humans for tractors in Cuba.
Elder Ezra Taft Benson telephoned to me at 3 o’clock this afternoon and said that Dr. Milton Eisenhower had been appointed by President John F. Kennedy one of a three-person committee to look into the question of exchange of humans for tractors in Cuba. One thousand two hundred and fifteen freedom fighters that are imprisoned in Cuba may face death — we do not know. Castro has made the proposition that he would exchange them for 500 American tractors. It may be black mail. President Kennedy has appointed Mrs. Franklin D. Roosevelt, Walter Reuther, and now he has asked Dr. Milton Eisenhower, and has authorized him to add two or three members to his committee to deal with the agriculture aspects of the deal. Brother Benson said Dr. Eisenhower called him to see if he would lend his name to the committee.
I answered: ‘You cannot lend your name on that Committee.’ Brother Benson said: ‘I do not feel that I should; Dr. Eisenhower apparently feels that I cannot refuse the President. He said that our duty will be largely to raise the funds for the tractors. They propose to get the names of the prisoners, and send one-fifth of the tractors as Castro cannot be trusted.’ I said Castro cannot be trusted any more than Khruschev — their word does not mean a thing!’ Brother Benson said the sentiment in South America is very strong against Castro, and some of the people are raising funds to help purchase the tractors so that the prisoners can be freed. I said, ‘Well, it is a terrible thing, but you must not associate yourself or your name with this committee — with Mrs. Roosevelt, and Walter Reuther.'”
Wed., 14 June 1961:
“9 a.m.
The regular meeting of the First Presidency was held. The following are some of the items we took up:
2. Prayers for Divine Guidance of Nation
Consideration was given to a letter from U.S. Congressman from Utah, Blaine Peterson, suggesting that the First Presidency appeal to the congregations of the Church to invoke God’s intervention in regard to the satisfactory outcome of the problems with which our nation is confronted. It was the sentiment of the Brethren that Congressman Peterson be informed that our people pray for the blessings of the Lord upon the nation in their private as well as their congregational prayers.
Thurs., 15 June 1961:
Letter to U.S. Representative Ralph R. Harding of Idaho re: Federal Aid to Education.
On May 31, 1961 received a letter from Ralph R. Harding U. S. Representative from Idaho asking whether or not the Church has taken an official stand against federal aid to education.
It was decided that I should write a letter to him telling him that this matter was discussed by the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve sitting as members of the Board of Trustees of Brigham Young University and the Board of Education of the Church, and that we were unanimously of the opinion that the proposed legislation before the Congress is unnecessary and unwise. Certain facts and figures to be inserted in the letter were prepared by President Ernest L. Wilkinson, President of the B.Y.U.
Thursday, June 15, 1961
May 31, 1961
David O. McKay, President
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
L.D.S. Church Offices
Salt Lake City, Utah
Dear President McKay:
I want to tell you how much I enjoyed my delightful visit with you the last of March. It was certainly a pleasure and I appreciate your giving me a few minutes of your valuable time.
I am writing to obtain information on something that I consider very vital to the welfare of the nation. Probably the hottest issue before the United States Congress is federal aid to education, and our LDS people by the thousands are involved in this question on both sides. I have received hundreds of letters from Bishops, Stake Presidents and other loyal members of the Church, who are primarily educators and teachers, supporting federal aid to education. By the same token I have received hundreds of letters from Bishops, Stake Presidents and other loyal members of the Church, who are primarily members of the National Farm Bureau and of the chambers of commerce, opposing federal aid to education.
Up until this last week it was never assumed that the Church had any official stand on this subject. However, a statement that President Wilkinson made on May 23 in opposition to federal aid reads as follows: ‘The Board of Education of the Unified Church School System and the Board of Trustees of Brigham Young University whom I represent, oppose, as a matter of principle, any plan of general federal aid to education, irrespective of whether that legislation permits or does not permit parochial schools to share in any grants thereunder.’
It is common knowledge that the Board of Education of the Church school system and the trustees of Brigham Young Univesity are the members of the Council of the Twelve, and opponents of this legislation are now using this argument that the Church has taken an official stand against federal aid to education. Should this be true I would like to know about it.
I can assure you that I have spent considerable time studying this matter and praying about it, and I feel that if we are to remain an educated nation which can stay free from the threats of international communism, we must immediately meet the problems of substandard teachers’ salaries and inadequate buildings that face a majority of our schools. Inasmuch as the federal government controls most of the revenue in this nation through the federal income tax, I feel that this can be done only through federal aid to education. This matter is non-partisan. Congressman H.A. Dixon last year voted for federal aid to education. He is a fine man and one whom I believe certainly understood the problems of education.
However, if my Church is opposed to federal aid to education I want to know about it and am sure that every other Church member interested in this vital problem should be made aware of it. I intend to share your reply with Congressmen David S. King and M. Blaine Peterson of Utah, both of whom hold and honor the Melchizedek Priesthood and serve with me in the House of Representatives.
I await your reply as to whether or not the Church does have a position on this all-important issue.
Best personal regards,
Ralph R. Harding
Member of Congress
RRH:cb
cc: The First Presidency
Council of the Twelve
Congressmen King and Peterson
Thursday, June 15, 1961
June 15, 1961
Honorable Ralph R. Harding
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C.
Dear Brother Harding:
Re: Federal Aid to Education
I appreciate your letter of May 31 and the spirit in which it was written.
I am advised by President Wilkinson of Brigham Young University that you are a graduate of that institution where you were a recognized student leader and that you are a faithful member of the Church. I congratulate you on this background and again on your election to the Congress of the United States at such an early age.
As to your inquiry as to whether the Church has taken an official stand against a general program of federal aid to education as embodied in the bill already passed by the Senate, please be advised that this matter was discussed by the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve sitting as members of the Board of Trustees of Brigham Young University and the Board of Education of the Church. We were unanimously of the opinion that the proposed legislation before the Congress is unnecessary and unwise. In accordance therewith President Wilkinson was requested to prepare and forward to Washington the statement, which I understand was placed in the congressional Record by Senator Bennett.
I note your statement that you have received hundreds of letters from bishops, stake presidents, and other loyal members of the Church who are primarily educators and teachers supporting federal aid to education; that on the other hand you have received hundreds of letters from bishops, stake presidents, and other loyal members of the Church, primarily members of the National Farm Bureau and chambers of commerce, opposing federal aid.
It is apparent from this statement of yours that you detect in a number of these letters a certain bias because of personal interest involved. In our delibertaions, however, we approached the matter entirely from what we considered to be right from the standpoint of the nation, for we have no personal interest to serve. While our record shows our dedicated interest in education, we are not on educational payrolls.
In this respect I note your comment that you feel that if we are to remain an educated nation we must meet the problems of substandard teachers’ salaries and inadequate buildings that face a majority of our schools. We gave consideration to both of these matters before expressing our deep convictions and came to the conclusion as set forth by President Wilkinson in his statement that local communities and the states are doing a pretty good job in taking care of school teachers’ salaries. We have noted, for instance, that over the last 30 years (from 1929 to 1959) the increase in teachers’ salaries was 106% in constant dollars. During the same period other state and local employees had an increase of only 58% and federal civilian employees only 73%.
We noted further that the average annual salary of school teachers rose from $3,126 in 1950-51 to $5,389 in 1960-61 (or 72.4% in a decade). The number of teachers with salaries below $3,500 decreased from 62% in 1952-53 to 9.6% in 1960-61, and the number with salaries of $4,500 or more rose from 13% to 63% during the same period. The significant aspect of the matter is that the teachers’ salaries rose sharpest in the states where they have been lowest. Between 1938 and 1954 for instance, teachers’ salaries rose 101% in dollars of constant value in the 12 lowest income states as compared with 28% in the 12 top income states. The differences in salaries in different parts of the country are narrowing perceptibly each year.
With respect to the so-called building shortage, we have the following comments to make:
The present drive for general federal aid to education gained its momentum during the 1950’s — in part from the unusual demand for school construction during that period, which was occasioned in turn by the very large ‘crop’ of babies born during the war years, but in larger part from incorrect reports of government officials as to existing shortages of classrooms and even more incorrect estimates as to future classroom shortages. That these reports and estimates were flagrantly wrong has been demonstrated by Mr. Roger A. Freeman, who directed the research of the Education Committee of the U.S. Commission on Intergovernmental Relations in 1954-55, (of which Dr. Adam S. Bennion was chairman), in his testimony before the subcommittee on Education of the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, United States Senate, on March 13, 1961. (For a local example, Circular No. 490 issued by the U.S. Office of Education, indicated that Utah was constructing only 124 new classrooms during the 1956-57 school year. But data published shortly thereafter by the Utah State Department of Public Instruction reported that 345 new classrooms, almost three times the federal estimate, were actually completed during the 1956-57 school year.)
Summarily stated, as shown by Mr. Freeman, the ‘incontestable fact is that over the past decade more than 600,000 classrooms were completed while the increased attendance required the addition of only 400,000. This means that over 200,000 new classrooms were made available to replace old ones and to reduce class sizes. This record is the result of thousands of communities voting bond issues and higher taxes year after year. It may be well to note that the new public schools, built in the postwar period, now house close to 20 million American children — compared with schools for 9 million children which — according to their own claims — the Russians built in the same span of time.’
With respect to the future, President Kennedy in his message to Congress on February 20, 1961, based on estimates of the Federal Office of Education, stated that ‘if every child is to have the oppotunity of a full day’s education in an adequate classroom, a total of 600,000 classrooms must be constructed in the next ten years,’ or 60,000 classrooms per year. The fact of the matter is, however, that states and local communities have been building about 70,000 classrooms each year for the last 5 years! If, therefore, the present rate of construction is continued, we will build more than the number of classrooms which, according to the President’s own estimate, are needed.
And the fact of the matter is that such a remarkable achievement is actually taking place. The Investment Bankers of America have reported that the amount of school bonds approved in school elections in 1960 reached a new high of $1,800,000,000. Futhermore, January of 1960 was again eclipsed by January of 1961. The Department of Commerce has estimated that public educational construction would increase 8% in 1961 over 1960.
This progress has been made possible by the fact that very few local school districts have exhausted their bonding capacity. A survey made by the Federal Department of Health, Education and Welfare about 1 1/2 years ago revealed that only 237 out of 40,000 school districts had exhausted their legal capacity to borrow — less than 1% of the total number of districts. Instead of proving that these 40,000 school districts cannot continue to assume their traditional responsibility, this survey shows that they can, and the rate at which building is going on, shows that they will.
Admittedly, out of 40,000 school districts, there will be some who are lagging, particularly those who have been waiting to pass their responsibilities to the federal government to do their job for them. But on the whole, the record has been excellent, and it demonstrates there is no justifiable basis for the present drive for general federal aid for school house construction. To the extent there was an emergency, that emergency is passed, for there will only be one-half the increase in school attendance over the next ten years there has been in the past ten years. If, therefore, we keep building as many classrooms as we have built over the last ten years (which is probable), we will build double the number we need for new students.
Consequently, we finally came to the conclusion that federal aid, unless of mammoth proportions, might slow down, rather than accelerate, the construction of needed buildings. Support for this claim can be obtained from the report of the study committee on ‘Federal Responsibility in the Field of Education’ made in 1955 to the Commission on Intergovernmental Relations appointed by President Eisenhower. (This is the committee of which Dr. Bennion was chairman) That report read, in part:
‘Research does not sustain the contention that Federal funds are essential to support the elementary and secondary school system — it is our opinion that the appropriation of relatively small sums of federal aid to school construction — amounting to 10 per cent or 20 per cent of the present state and local outlay of almost $2 billion a year* — may delay rather than advance school construction. Districts not eligible in one year may hold off their building plans on the chance of being able to buy their school houses at 50 cents on the dollar a year or two later.’
__________________
*A National Education Association Survey published in December of 1960 revealed that school construction during 1960-61 had reached a new high of $3,094,000,000 in capital outlay; which suggests that local communities, now they know the problem, are responding to the need.
This report, as to the amounts involved, is admittedly out of date, but its fundamental theory, is, we think, still sound.
We agree completely that this matter is non-partisan, which is the reason we believe it proper for us to take a position on the matter. We are frankly gravely concerned over the increasing tendency of the Federal Government to assume more responsibilities with an ever-increasing indebtedness. In this respect we note your statement that the Federal Government controls most of the revenue in this nation through the federal income tax, and that you therefore think that the Federal Government should take on this new burden. In our judgment, the tendency of the Federal Government to more and more control the revenue of the country should be reversed, not increased.
It goes without saying that we are not attempting to control your vote in this matter, which should be determined by you in the clear exercise of your own conscience. But we have given to you our best advice based on no little study on our part.
We conclude with the prayer that you will be continuously blessed in your work in the nation’s capitol. We are grateful for your inquiry as to our advice.
Sincerely yours,
/s/ David O. McKay
(President)
Tues., 20 June 1961:
“8:30 to 9 a.m.
Mr. Frank R. Milliken, President of Kennecott Copper Company, called at the office of the First Presidency to pay his respects to Presidents Clark and Moyle, and me. He was accompanied by Mr. John O’Keefe, General Manager, Utah Copper Company; C.D. Michaelson, General Manager of the Western Mining divisions, and Mr. Leland B. Flint, a director of Kennecott Copper Co.
Mr. Milliken expressed great appreciation for the friendly relationship that has existed with the Church over these many years. He discussed at considerable length the negotiations they have in contemplation with the unions with which they have to deal and that each of these unions has different ideas as to what should be done. The point having been mentioned that we have many members of the Church in the company’s employ who belong to the unions who are at a loss to know what to do to improve the situation, Mr. O’Keefe remarked that the difficulty with the unions is that many of the sensible people remain home and do not attend the meetings and allow a few radicals to make the decisions. Mr. Milliken said there is no reason why a responsible group of Church people could not secure some position in the running of the unions. As it is now those who take charge of the mine and mill unions are communist-minded people. These union leaders have been convicted repeatedly of conspiracy to violate the anti-communist provisions of the Taft-Hartley Act, but their attorneys have been clever enough to appeal from the conviction and avoid sentence. However, they have never been absolved from the charges.”
Tues., 27 June 1961:
IV. Federal Aid to Education – President Wilkinson inquired whether President McKay had had an opportunity to answer the letter sent to him by Congressman Ralph Harding of Idaho with respect to federal aid to education. President McKay in turn inquired of Miss Middlemiss, who informed him that the letter had been sent to Congressman Harding essentially as drafted by President Wilkinson.
Tuesday, June 27, 1961
August 12, 1961
President David O. McKay
47 East South Temple
Salt Lake City, Utah
Re: General Program of Federal Aid to Education
Dear President McKay:
This morning’s newspaper carried the news that the administration has finally abandoned its plan to try and force through Congress a general program for federal aid to education at this session.
Of course, I expect them to renew it at the next session but at least those of us who think that such a program is bad have had a temporary victory. I appreciate very much the support you have given me in the position I have taken. When I started to speak out against this a year ago I was informed by nearly everyone that the federal aid bill was inevitable and I was wasting my time. My answer was that I was going to continue because I felt that I was right and I hope we can ultimately prevail.
Sincerely,
Ernest L. Wilkinson
ELW:ln
Thurs., 29 June 1961:
“8:15 a.m.
Elder Ezra Taft Benson came in and asked about the disposition he should make of his many government records and also his personal records. I told him that we would leave to him and President Joseph Fielding Smith, Church Historian, the matter of going over the papers and recommending what papers, if any, should go into our records here in the Historian’s Library, and which, if any, should be placed in the Congressional Library. They are to report back.
I stated that Brother Benson gave a grim report of conditions in Washington from which place Brother Benson has just returned. Brother Benson has received an invitation from the senators and congressmen to go back to Washington as an adviser. I feel that if this matter comes up again that Brother Benson should remain here; that we need him at home.
Tues., 25 July 1961:
“8:30 a.m.
Met with Presidents Henry D. Moyle and Hugh B. Brown, President Clark still confined to his home.
President Kennedy’s Montevideo Committee
We then talked about a committee that is to be sent to Montevideo appointed by the President of the United States; the suggestion having been made that someone be appointed to represent the intermountain area. It was the understanding of the Brethren that this was to be a citizen’s committee largely gotten together by Nelson Rockefeller, which committee would go to Uruguay to attend this diplomatic conference representing industry in the United States rather than the government. It was suggested that Leland Flint, who is director of the Kennecott Copper Company might be chosen for this assignment, and, if necessary, the Church would pay his expenses. In connection with this discussion, mention was made of the fact that President Kennedy, before he became President and when he visited the First Presidency, was told by me, ‘When and if you are elected President, we will support you.’ It was felt that in this matter we should be of such assistance as we can. It was later decided that Orval W. Adams whould go to Uruguay.
President Kennedy’s Letter of Congratulations to President Brown.
President Brown reported that he had a very nice letter from President Kennedy congratulating him on his appointment as a counselor in the First Presidency; that it was a personal letter, and that the President wrote on the bottom with his own hand: ‘I hope to have the pleasure of seeing you again soon.’
Wed., 23 Aug. 1961:
9:00 a.m.
Dr. O. Preston Robinson, manager of the Deseret News, met with the First Presidency. Brother Robinson had just returned from Washington, D.C. where he had spent an hour with President Kennedy. He made the following brief report regarding the Berlin crisis. The President indicates, he said, that the East Germans and the Russians are going to sign a peace treaty, and there is nothing much that can be done about it. We will preserve access to Berlin as we have done in the past, maintaining the freedom of the city. The administration hopes there will be no change in connection with that. If the peace treaty is signed we will be forced to recognize East Germany. The closing of the border is one step, and the treaty will be the next. The President said we would not stand for any interference in the freedom of West Berlin. Wherever there are military check points, wherever the military is involved, we will stand firm. The President warned that this is only the beginning of a series of worsening crises.
There are three things the western powers are sitting tight on and demanding no change: 1) The free life of the West Berliners, 2) Their right for self determination, 3) The existence of western forces in Berlin. We were led to believe there would be no change, he said, but we have increased our garrison by 1500. We had 11,000 troops and they wanted us to decrease it to 5,000. He said he did not think the President nor his associates know what to expect. The administration is very much concerned about our ability to conduct a conventional war. We have built up our strength in atomic weapons, we have a lot of strategic weapons that can be used by foot soldiers, but we are not equipped adequately to meet conventional war with conventional weapons. It is the concern of the administration now to build up that to the point where Khrushchev will not think he can beat us with conventional weapons.”
Mon., 18 Sept. 1961:
“Note: Statement made regarding Right-to-Work Laws. (See following copies of letters and newspaper articles regarding this matter.)
Note by C.M.: President McKay made the following statement: ‘We stand for the Constitution of the United States, and for all rights secured thereby to both sovereign states of the Union and to the individual citizen.
‘We believe it is fundamental that the right to voluntary unionism should once again be re-established in this nation and that State right to work laws should be maintained inviolate. At the very basis of all of our doctrine stands the right to the free agency of man. We are in favor of maintaining this free agency to the greatest extent possible. We look upon any infringement thereof not essential to the proper exercise of police power of the state adversely.’
Monday, September 18, 1961
July 6, 1961
Mr. Joseph Anderson
Secretary to the First Presidency
The Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints
Salt Lake City 11, Utah
Dear Mr. Anderson:
Thank you so much for your June 23 letter expressing the views of President McKay on voluntary unionism.
I think the statement is an excellent one, and should be brought to the attention of business and professional men everywhere. May we have your permission to quote it in our publications or newsletters?
Sincerely,
Harry J. Lambeth
Labor Attorney
Monday, September 18, 1961
COPY
June 23, 1961
Mr. Harry J. Lambeth
Secretary, Right to Work Committee
United States Chamber of Commerce
Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. Lambeth:
I am directed by President David O. McKay, President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to advise you that we stand for the Constitution of the United States, and for all rights secured thereby to both sovereign states of the Union and to the individual citizen.
We believe it is fundamental that the right to voluntary unionism should once again be re-established in this nation and that State right to work laws should be maintained inviolate. At the very bassis of all of our doctrine stands the right to the free agency of man. We are in favor of maintaining this free agency to the greatest extent possible. We look upon an infringement thereof not essential to the proper exercise of police power of the state adversely.
Sincerely yours,
Secretary to the First Presidency
HDM:dp
Monday, September 18, 1961
August 8, 1961
Mr. Lambeth phoned from Washington in regard to his letter asking permission to use the statement we had sent him regarding voluntary unionism, asking if they might quote it in their publications and newsletter. He said they are getting out a booklet, which will give the views of clergymen and prominent religious leaders on right to work. Ezra Taft Benson has promised to give them something, a revision of what he has heretofore said. Among those contributing will be the President of DePaul University, Mr. Irwin Cannon of the Christian Science Monitor, three Catholic priests and others. They would like to use the second paragraph of our letter of June 23, and they would also like to use it in their labor relations letter. He said they think the desire for the right to work is growing, and any support from men like President McKay will help to persuade others to look into it.
Mr. Lambeth and others are going to Idaho in September to meet with forum and business groups to see if they are interested in what they are doing. They will meet in Boise and Twin Falls they will hold a public meeting on labor problems, and will then come to Utah for a conference. Mr. Lucius Kohler will be with them.
Monday, September 18, 1961
COPY
August 17, 1961
Mr. Harry J. Lambeth, Labor Attorney
Chamber of Commerce of the United States
1615 H Street, N.W.
Washington 6, D.C.
Dear Mr. Lambeth:
Referring to your letter of July 6, 1961 and also our telephone conversation of August 8th with reference to your desire to reproduce in certain publications the second paragraph of my letter of June 23, 1961 regarding the attitude of the Church in regard to State right to work laws, I am pleased to tell you that it is the sentiment of the First Presidency that if you are to make use of the statement contained in the letter referred to for the purpose you have indicated, they would appreciate your quoting the entire letter indicating that the letter was signed by Joseph Anderson as Secretary to the First Presidency, rather than merely quoting the second paragraph of the letter.
Sincerely yours,
Joseph Anderson
Secretary to the First Presidency
A:G
Note; Original correspondence regarding ‘Unionism and Right to Work Law’ is filed in First Presidency’s office.
Monday, September 18, 1961
LETTER EXPLAINS CHURCH VIEW ON WORK RIGHTS
WASHINGTON, D.C. – A two-paragraph letter setting forth the views of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in support of state right-to-work laws has been released here by the United States Chamber of Commerce.
The quoted letter was dated June 23, 1961, which the Chamber received over the signature of Joseph Anderson, Secretary of the First Presidency, and written at the direction of President David O. McKay. The Chamber officials had queried President McKay for his views on compulsory unionism.
The letter is as follows:
‘I am directed by President David O. McKay, president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to advise you that we stand for the constitution of the United States, and for all rights secured thereby to both sovereign states of the Union and to the individual citizen.
‘We believe it is fundamental that the right to voluntary unionism should once again be re-established in this nation and that State right-to-work laws should be maintained inviolate. At the very basis of all of our doctrine stands the right to the free agency of man. We are in favor of maintaining this free agency to the greatest extent possible. We look upon any infringement thereof not essential to the proper exercise of police power of the state adversely.’
Permission was granted Chamber officials to use the letter provided the full text was used. The Chamber’s labor relations letter described President McKay as the spiritual leader of 1,618,000 American Mormons.
Deseret News and Telegram, Salt Lake City, Monday, September 18, 1961
Monday, September 18, 1961
The Salt Lake Tribune, Sunday, September 17, 1961
LDS LEADER SUPPORTS ‘WORK’ LAW
By Frank Hewett
Tribune Washington Bureau
Washington, Sept. 16 – The United States Chamber of Commerce featured this week a letter from President David O. McKay of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints supporting state right to work laws.
The Chamber’s labor relations letter described President McKay as ‘the spiritual leader of 1,618,000 American Mormons’ and said ‘he has declared the church supports voluntary unionism through state right to work laws.’
U.S. Chamber officials said they queried President McKay for his views on compulsory unionism and that the LDS head directed Joseph Anderson, secretary of the first presidency, to state his views, which were received in a letter of June 23.
The Chamber officials said authority was asked to publish President McKay’s letter and they were told it was permissible provided the full text of the letter was used.
Following is the letter from Mr. Anderson:
‘I am directed by President David O. McKay, president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, to advise you that we stand for the Constitution of the United States and for all rights thereby to both sovereign states of the union and to the individual citizen.
‘We believe it is fundamental that the right to voluntary unionism should once again be reestablished in this nation and that state right to work laws should be maintained inviolate.
‘At the very basis of all our doctrine stands the right to the free agency of man. We are in favor of maintaining this free agency to the greatest extent possible. We look upon any infringement thereof not essential to the proper exercise of police power of the state adversely.’
Monday, September 18, 1961
CHURCH LEADERS QUOTED ON ‘RIGHT TO WORK’
Messages of President David O. McKay and Elder Ezra Taft Benson are included in a recent United States Chamber of Commerce publication entitled ‘The Right of the Right to Work – The Moral Case for Voluntary Unionism – Views of Clergymen and Church Leaders.’
The collection of short essays on the subject supports the view that ‘compulsory unionism violates the fundamental human right to work without paying tribute to any individual, society or union.’
President McKay is quoted in part as saying:
‘We believe it is fundamental that the right to voluntary unionism should once again be reestablished in this nation and that state right to work laws should be maintained inviolate. At the very basis of all of our doctrine stands the right to the free agency of man.’
Elder Benson declares his deep personal convictions about freedom and then is quoted as saying:
‘I have always felt that our system of government and way of life have succeeded so well because it has been based on freedom of the individual. It disturbs me that in our great nation it is necessary to vouchsafe this elementary principle by statute … I am fully sympathetic with the problems of the laboring man. His rights should be protected…When Congress has had under consideration important labor legislation, the right of a worker to walk off the job without the limitation of requiring that a worker join a union or any other organization should be equally protected.
‘Unions may be necessary to our complex society but they are not an end in themselves. It is my firm conviction that a person should get and keep a job on the basis of his ability and performance. This is fair. It is the American way.’
Deseret News – Church Section – Saturday, February 10, 1962
Monday, September 18, 1961
COPY
June 16, 1961
Mr. David O. McKay
President
Church-Jesus Christ Latter-Day Saints
47 E. South Temple
Salt Lake City, Utah
Dear Mr. McKay:
A new book has come across my desk that I thought you would find of interest. It is a full review of the violence-ridden Kohler strike, and is written by Prof. Sylvester Petro of New York University. Prof. Petro is a former union organizer, practicing attorney and now professor of labor law. He is a staunch supporter of voluntary unionism.
If you have given thought to voluntary unionism and state right to work laws, I would very much like to hear from you. I hope you’ll take time out to let me have your views. Meantime, I hope that you’ll find ‘The Kohler Strike’ interesting and informative’ reading.
Sincerely,
Harry J. Lambeth, Secretary
Right To Work Committee
Encl.
Monday, Septebmer 18, 1961
Letter written by President McKay to Mr. Gus P. Backman, Salt Lake City Chamber of Commerce, in acknowledgment of Birthday Greetings from Brother Backman, and in answer to Brother Backman’s letter of September 20, 1961, commenting upon the statement in the newspapers regarding the Church’s attitude toward the Right-to-Work Laws.
September 22, 1961
Dear Brother Backman:
Thank you for your birthday greetings on my Eighty-eighth Birthday. It was thoughtful and gracious of you to think of me on my Natal Day.
For the past several years, I have been prone to consider Old Age as a disagreeable, unwelcome trespasser, skulking along to claim any faculty that might show the strain and usage of the passing years; this year at eighty-eight I look upon him with a degree of compassion akin to appreciation. Indeed if it were not for ‘Old Age’ I should not have seen seventy-five, or eighty, or eighty-five, and most assuredly not Eighty-eight.’
Now I am content to let him walk by my side, but shall continue as long as possible to deny the demands of Old Age to take from me the good health Kind Providence still gives me.
Thank you also for your letter of September 20, 1961, commenting upon the statement in the newspapers regarding the Church’s attitude toward the Right-to-Work Laws, and also for the leaflet entitled ‘Labor Relations Letter’ issued by the Chamber of Commerce of the United States, Washington, D.C., September 1961, in which is published a reprint of that statement.
I want you to know that I appreciate your loyal support and value your friendship.
Sister McKay, thankfully regaining her strength and activity, joins me in this expression of appreciation, and in sending to you and Sister Backman greetings and best wishes.
Cordially and sincerely,
David O. McKay
(President)
Mr. Gus P. Backman
145 South 5th East
Salt Lake City, Utah
Monday, September 18, 1961
President of Mormon Church Calls for Free Unions via Right to Work Laws
David O. McKay, president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and spiritual leader of 1,618,000 American Mormons, has delcared the church supports voluntary unionism through state right to work laws. He explains that the LDS church believes it is fundamental that the right to voluntary unionism should once again be reestablished in the United States.
Queried by the Labor Relations Letter for his views on compulsory unionism, the LDS leader directed Joseph Anderson, secretary to the first presidency, to state his views. The letter from Mr. Anderson, dated June 23, 1961, reads:
‘I am directed by President David O. McKay, president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to advise you that we stand for the constitution of the United States, and for all rights secured thereby to both sovereign states of the union and to the individual citizen.
‘We believe it is fundamental that the right to voluntary unionism should once again be re-established in this nation and that state right to work laws should be maintained inviolate. At the very basis of all of our doctrine stands the right to the free agency of man. We are in favor of maintaining this free agency to the greatest extent possible. We look upon any infringement thereof not essential to the proper exercise of police power of the state adversely.’
LABOR RELATIONS LETTER
September, 1961 Vol. 4, No. 9
Chamber of Commerce of the United States
Washington 6, D.C.
Monday, September 18, 1961
September 20, 1961
President David O. McKay
Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-day Saints
47 East South Temple
Salt Lake City 11, Utah
Dear President:
May I take this opportunity to congratulate you on the wonderful statement carried in the September ‘Labor Relations’ letter of the United States Chamber of Commerce.
This letter is placed in the hands of every Chamber of Commerce and every trade association in the United States. In addition, it is distributed to all of the members of the governmental affairs committees of all of these associations, which together would possibly represent not less than a quarter of a million men. It likewise is placed in the hands of the labor relations director of every large American corporation.
Based on this type of distribution, a tremendous reflection for good on our wonderful church will occur as every freedom loving person in America unquestionably is in accord with your philosophy, and I am sure that the vast majority of the Union membership feel as we do.
Thanks once more for a great contribution.
Sincerely,
Gus P. Backman
Secretary
GPB/lld”
Fri., 27 Oct. 1961:
“Note by cm
Unions – Right to work
President McKay’s Statement on Right to Work to be a Booklet Published by Chamber of Commerce of the United States. (see following for letters and statement to be used)
Friday, October 27, 1961
October 27, 1961
Mr. Harry J. Lambeth, Labor Attorney
Labor Relations and Legal Department
Chamber of Commerce of the United States
1615 “H” Street, N.W.
Washington 6, D.C.
Dear Mr. Lambeth:
Your letter of October 19th refers to your desire to reproduce in a booklet you are preparing the statement by President David O. McKay setting forth the Church’s attitude regarding right to work laws. I note that you have deleted a portion of the introductory sentence in the letter from which this statement was taken. However, there would seem to be no objection to your using the statement in the form submitted by you, with one slight correction as indicated on the enclosed copy.
I was please to have the opportunity of a brief interview with you when you were in the city, and shall look forward to meeting you again at some future date.
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Joseph Anderson
Secretary to the First Presidency
A:G
STATEMENT FOR PRINTING IN CLERGY RIGHT TO WORK BOOKLET
‘We stand for the Constitution of the United States, and for all rights secured thereby to both sovereign states of the Union and to the individual citizens.
‘We believe it is fundamental that the right to voluntary unionism should once again be reestablished in this nation and that state right-to-work laws should be maintained inviolate.
‘At the very basis of all of our doctrine stands the right to the free agency of man. We are in favor of maintaining this free agency to the greatest extent possible. We look adversely upon any infringement thereof not essential to the proper exercise of police power of the state.’
–David O. McKay, President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Friday, October 27, 1961
COPY
Re: Unions – Right to Work
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE UNITED STATES
1615 ‘H’ Street, N.W.
Washington 6, D.C.
October 19, 1961
Mr. Joseph Anderson
Secretary to the First Presidency
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
Salt Lake City 11, Utah
Dear Mr. Anderson:
I enjoyed our brief chat in Salt Lake City, and I hope that we can have some assistance from you in the campaigns for voluntary unionism in Idaho and Wyoming.
I mentioned our clergy right to work booklet. We plan to use President McKay’s statement, which you so kindly provided, but we will delete a portion of the first sentence, because it is introductory material. I am sure you will have no objection to this; and so you can see how we plan to use the statement, I am enclosing a copy for you.
I hope this is satisfactory.
Sincerely,
/s/ Harry J. Lambeth, Labor Attorney
Labor Relations and Legal Dept.
Enclosure”
Tues., 31 Oct. 1961:
“8:30 – 10 a.m.
Attended meeting of the First Presidency. We took up many problems pertaining to the general administration of the Church.
We gave consideration to a letter from Senator Frank Church of Idaho, a member of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, stating that he is holding ‘field hearings’ in Pocatello, Idaho, November 13, and in Boise, Idaho, November 15, regarding Federal State activities in the field of aging. He refers to the interest the Church has taken in the matter of looking after its older people and says that he would be happy to schedule brief presentations by representatives of the Church at these meetings.
It was decided to ask Elder LeGrand Richards to attend the meeting in Pocatello, November 13, representing the Church.
In discussing this matter I said that I am opposed to the government entering into the matter of care for the aging. I explained that we have many old people who can be properly helped within the local area. When they are incapacitated they have to go to the hospital, but before such care is needed, many of them can be taken care of by their children in their homes.
I feel that the proper arrangement is to have homes for the aged in local stakes where the people can live and have favorable environment, and where they can be taken to their Church meetings by their relatives on Sunday, also if they are under the charge of the Church, what the Bishop gives them can go to the support of the old folks home. I mentioned the home that is being erected in the 17th Ward, and said that the architects have drawn a motel sort of thing where the people do their own cooking. I do not feel that that is the proper idea, nor do I feel that we should have ‘poor houses’ such as heretofore has been the case.”
Fri., 3 Nov. 1961:
“7:45 a.m.
Elder Ezra Taft Benson came in and discussed with me the fluoridation issue which is to come before the vote of the people next Tuesday. He prepared a statement which he thought might well be included in an editorial in the Deseret News. I took the statement into the meeting of the First Presidency, and we approved of its being used. The statement is as follows:
‘In the fluoridation controversy all parents should decide for themselves how much responsibility for their children’s teeth they wish to retain and how much of their responsibility they wish to transfer to the government. Our citizens should carefully weigh the issue of the loss of part of their freedom in exchange for the proffered benefits.’
After the meeting, I called Dr. O. Preston Robins, General Manager of the Deseret News, and told him to use the statement in an editorial in the Deseret News before Tuesday. (see copy of conversation following.)
(see also copy of editorial following. NOTE: The statement as given to Dr. Robins was evidently not used.)
Friday, November 3, 1961
Conversation between President David O. McKay and O. Preston Robins of the Deseret News, November 3, 1961, at 11:20 a.m.
President McKay: Hello.
Brother Robins: Good morning, President McKay.
President McKay: Good morning, Brother Robins. What is your feeling and attitude on this matter of Fluoridation?
Brother Robins: We have taken the point of view that we could remain kind of neutral, because my board told me to.
President McKay: What do you mean, ‘kind of neutral’, how is that? Why not be entirely neutral, there is no ‘kind’ about it. As per your editorial in last evening’s paper, people are saying that you are favoring Fluoridation.
Brother Robins: It depends upon which side you look at it. We try to balance it on the editorials. If you will look at Wednesday’s paper, we had a pro and con view on it. We are trying to keep it equal.
President McKay: Here is something I think we ought to do:
‘In the fluoridation controversy, all parents should decide for themselves how much responsibility for their children’s teeth they wish to retain and how much of their responsibility they wish to transfer to the government. Our citizens should carefully weigh the issue of the loss of part of their freedom in exchange for the proffered benefits.’
Brother Robins: I think we can say that with full confidence.
President McKay: All right, we are sending it right over.
Brother Robins: We will run it.
President McKay: Thank you, nice talking to you.
Brother Robins: Thank you.”
Thurs., 16 Nov. 1961:
“7:15 a.m.
Arrived at the office — was busy with regular duties until 8:00 a.m. at which time President Brown and I met by appointment Congressman David S. King who reaffirmed his allegiance to the things of the spirit and the things of the kingdom. He discussed what he thought were actions that indicated that perhaps there was an abandonment by the Church of its neutrality in politics. He mentioned cases that had come to his attention that Sunday School teachers are making broad hints and innuendoes in classes that those who follow the Democratic program are handmaidens of Communists, and cannot expect to consider themselves in full fellowship in the Church. He urged that the First Presidency say something in print as to where the Church stands on politics. He said he understood the Church had spoken officially sometime in the past, but he thinks that the average Democrat does not know where to find it. He then discussed the general direction of the Democratic administration which he thinks is in complete harmony with Gospel principles. He also set forth his political philosophy.
I remarked to him that the action of the President of the Church in choosing two Democrats for counselors should be sufficient indication that the Democrats have a definite place in the Church. I said that all we need to do is to republish what we have heretofore said on the political stand of the Church.
I told Congressman King that he has my confidence and very best wishes. I asked him to convey my kind regards to President Kennedy.
Fri., 5 Dec. 1961:
“8 a.m.
Brother George W. Romney, President of the Detroit Stake, came in to the meeting by appointment previously arranged. He expressed appreciation for the opportunity to have the counsel of the First Presidency. He reviewed a meeting he had some time ago with us, and the encouragement he was given to continue his interest and participation in the ‘Citizens for Michigan’ movement. He said that this organization had succeeded in bringing about a constitutional convention in Michigan with the purpose of enlarging the powers of the state to cope with the problems that are now carried to Washington. He stated that the Michigan purpose could be a pattern of national importance.
He said that he is a delegate to the State Constitutional Convention and an officer, and now the pressures are building up for him to run for Governor of Michigan. He said the situation is now developing where he must make some clarifying statement, and he must make some reasoned decision. He will make a decision by February 10th whether or not he will become a candidate for Governor in Michigan. He said his primary concern is that there are problems which are being ignored in the country ‘that are going to wreck us.’ He stated that his real concern is the decline of the rule of the state and local government, and the concentration of power which will bring about government control. He said we are approaching a point where the Federal Government will step in and exercise control over wages and prices, and that the minute the Federal Government goes that far, then our present economic system which is premised upon the people exercising ultimate power, will be ‘out of the window,’ and we shall have some form of statism.
Brother Romney said that he must make a decision that would completely set the future of his life for some time to come. He said he knows how to settle that; he has fasted and prayed at intervals when he has had a decision to make, but there is a Church aspect that the First Presidency only can resolve.
He said that if he goes into the political situation in Michigan, and campaigns for Governor, the Church will be involved because the Democratic party and the union groups in the Democratic Party will use anything they can in the campaign. He said the Church has always been an asset to him, and that it will continue to be in this situation, but he said that he is sure critical things will be said about the Church.
I said to Brother Romney: ‘They know your relationship to the Church. You are well known in the United States as a member of the Church, and as President of the Detroit Stake.
Brother Romney said ‘That is well known, and it is an asset to me. One aspect is our position on the negro holding the Priesthood.’ He said that Detroit has a very large negro population, and so had the state of Michigan, and that he is sure that the charge will be made against him that he has a race bias. He said he has no race bias; that he has worked with the negroes in these programs as much as he has worked with others; that some of the people with whom he has been closely associated in the ‘Citizens for Michigan’ effort have been negroes; that some of the negroes in Michigan are some of the finest people in the state, and are very able people. But he feels that there is no question but that this particular point will receive a great deal of publicity and public discussion, not only in Michigan, but more broadly. However, members of his High Council to whom he had talked, think the negro issue will figure in the campaign, but that they think that should not stop him from running; they think he should run; they think that it will do the Church a great deal of good; they think the situation is different from the situation two years ago, and in this President Romney expressed agreement.
I said that there is no question but that the negro question will come up. I asked Brother Romney if the prominent negroes are well informed as to the Church’s attitude toward the negro, and Brother Romney said that he could not say that they are. I said that the negroes are admitted into the Church by baptism; they are welcome to become members of the Church, and members of a ward, and to partake of the Sacrament and have full fellowship in everything but not to be ordained to the Priesthood. President Romney said he thought it would be correct to say that the negroes do not have a complete picture, but they do have a picture that has been widely distributed among the negroes in this country that we do not permit them to have the Priesthood, and they build upon that, and say we have a race bias. I said that ‘we can offer them all that any other Church can offer, and we do advocate care in marriage; we advocate that Mexicans marry Mexicans; Japanese marry Japanese; Catholics marry Catholics; and Mormons marry Mormons; for the good of family harmony and peace. We look with hesitancy, and, one might say, suspicion on our Church allowing negroes, Chinese, Japanese, Hawaiians, to mingle with each other. That, of course, would encourage marriage.
President Romney said he thinks there is no question that most people would agree in this position, and that people of other religious faiths, who have given serious thought to the question, favor intrafaith rather than inter-faith marriages.
I said that so far as the colored question is concerned, we offer the negroes, and the Indians from India, and the Mexicans, the Japanese, and the Chinese every privilege of the Gospel that any other Church can offer excepting only that the negro is not permitted to hold the Priesthood. I said, ‘Now, I think we can stand on that.’
President Romney said that it becomes a point you have to deal with and that so far as he is concerned, he is going to stand on it as long as that is the position of the Church. He said he wanted to be sure from the Church’s standpoint, the First Presidency is not reluctant to have him determine what he should do as best he can, knowing that if he should decide to take a whirl at the political situation, it is going to focus public attention upon this particular part of the Church’s point of view.
I then asked Brother Romney if he did enter this political campaign, if it would necessitate his being released as President of the Detroit Stake. President Romney said that he would have difficulty discharging both responsibilities, but that he would do what we wanted him to do when the time comes.
He said that if he enters the campaign that he would like to go into it with the blessing of the Brethren; that he would not want to go into it if it does not meet with our accord. We then went into a long discussion regarding the wisdom of his running for Governor at this time, the feeling of his Board of Directors regarding his seeking political office, etc. We talked about his efforts in Michigan with the ‘Citizens for Michigan,’ and the Constitutional convention. I asked Brother Romney if it would not be better for him to run for Governor two years from now, and President Moyle asked him if he would not be in a better political position if he said he would not make any decision until the Constitutional Convention had completed its work; that now he is leaving the job in the middle, unfinished, and seeking public office for himself — that he would not be the same George Romney the minute he announces himself for public office.
We had quite a discussion regarding the pros and cons of his running for governor. President Moyle asked him if he is not willing to agree that he is a greater man than any governor of Michigan, and that he has greater prestige and a greater following, greater respect today than any governor of Michigan has ever had. He said further, ‘Are you not stepping down from a high pedestal to a lower one?’ I said that I think there is no doubt about it.
President Romney said there are people who say that from his present platform he can have influence; that our argument is the argument of the Democratic National Committee; that he has to weigh this argument because they have done everything to keep him out of the political picture for two years.
We talked about his success in labor negotiations and felt that this success probably was due to the fact that he has been non-partisan in Michigan, to which Brother Romney
agreed, but added that with Reuther, and his top associates there has been a spirit of respect; that has been an important factor. He said that he had just started a series of discussions with Reuther on the premise that neither of them had had a chance to discuss a philosophy; that he started and said to Reuther, ‘Do you believe in a Creator, the Declaration of Independence, and the constitution?’ and that Reuther agreed with him.
We then discussed the Negro question again, and we told Brother Romney about Brother LaMar Williams’ visit to Nigeria and of the 4,000 Nigerians who want to be baptized into the Church. We told him that these people had been told that they cannot hold the Priesthood, yet they still want to be baptized.
After a brief discussion on this matter, our interview came to a conclusion, and I told Brother Romney that we were very much interested in the presentation he had made; that we were glad to get the picture clearly in mind. Brother Romney said he would keep everything which had been said in mind in undertaking to arrive at a decision, and I said that the Lord would guide him; that he is to retain his presidency of the Detroit Stake, and realize that he has an obligation to the Church. Brother Romney said he had no question about complying with our desires in that respect. He said that he left with the definite feeling that the counsel of the Brethren would be for him not to go into this campaign at the present time, and I said that we felt that his present influence, great as we recognize it, would be maintained by having him remain just as he is as President of the Stake, and head of his organization and bring about this Constitutional Convention. I said that I think as a Republican governor he would have less influence than George Romney, President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Detroit, and head of this Citizens movement; that he should see that to a successful conclusion, and President Moyle added, ‘And head of American Motors.’ I said that he would have Democrats and Republicans honoring George Romney and doing what he says.
Brother Romney said that in connection with his company – that they had reached a point where he has the undivided top responsibility. Said that they are doing a billion dollars worth of business, and that he is still running the whole thing. Said that he must have an operating head, and that he has to do that and make a decision indicated by our discussion; that then he would probably get himself in a position to devote himself to policy.
Brother Romney then said that the American Motors was happy to have the opportunity to be associated with the Choir presentation on television; and said, ‘We are going to keep what we say institutional, and not commercial, not as I do when I talk ‘product.’ He said they were happy to do what they are doing as a public service and I said that if it were not for George Romney there would be no connection with the Choir on this occasion; that it is through him that the American Motors is sponsoring this program.
Thurs., 21 Dec. 1961:
10:30 a.m.
We interrupted our meeting long enough to receive a courtesy visit from Mr. E.F. Nauman, General Superintendent of Thiokol Chemical Corporation at Brigham City, Utah, and his associate, Lawrence C. Taylor who is a member of the High Council of the North Boxelder Stake.
Mr. Nauman said that he had wanted for a long time to meet the First Presidency. He explained briefly the functions of the Thiokol plant in its relationship to the space flights launched at Cape Canaveral.
I said that I have always been very much impressed by the following lines from a Latter-day Saint hymn:
‘If you could hie to Kolob,
In the twinkling of an eye,
And then continue onward,
With the same speed to fly,
D’ye think that you could ever,
Through all eternity,
Find out the generation
Where Gods began to be?
Or see the grand beginning,
Where space did not extend?
Or view the last creation,
Where Gods and matter end?
Me thinks the Spirit whispers,
‘No man has found ‘pure space.’
I told Mr. Nauman that this hymn was written over 75 years ago. Mr. Nauman replied that modern mathematics and thinking are pretty much along the same line. President Moyle said that the author of that hymn got his idea from Joseph Smith. I said, ‘It is quite an idea, and now we are pioneering part of it. It staggers the imagination.’
Mr. Nauman briefly reviewed plans for the expansion of Thiokol and mentioned work being done in Cache Valley and Logan in connection with the State University. He said he had wanted to meet the First Presidency primarily for personal reasons, since, he said, ‘I appreciate very much what you and your people have done for Thiokol. Your teachings have made a really unusual labor force for us and we are happy.’
He said that the company has made plans for factories at various parts of the United States and that one of the reasons which led the company to come here was the kind of labor force available here. He said that in addition to the people who reside in that area, Thiokol Corporation has attracted back many people who formerly lived here, some of whom are engineers and other skilled workmen. He said he is impressed by the unskilled laborers they hire. He related one instance where a small fire occurred and the only witness found proved to be a truck operator on a partly skilled job. In the interview with this man he gave a most coherent account. Mr. Nauman was surprised that such a capable man was a truck driver and learned that most of the truck drivers have the same capabilities. The ability of the men here to communicate their ideas and instructions he said is unusual.
I said that this man was probably a returned missionary and may have had training in the Priesthood. Mr. Nauman said that he would usually put men of such ability in positions such as foremen and supervisors and that the labor force here is highly competitive for such positions because so many men can do these things well.
I then said, ‘Your confidence, as you express it, increases our responsibility. That is just what it means to be worthy of your confidence. In response to my inquiry as to whether or not there is much trouble with agitators, Mr. Nauman said that with as many employees as the company has there are bound to be a few, but that usually the group of workers must rely upon an agitator to be their spokesman, but that the workers at Thiokol do not need anyone to speak for them, they speak well for themselves.
Mr. Taylor, in response to my inquiry as to the number of employees in the company who come from the Box Elder area, said that a very high proportion are people from the local, small communities. Mr. Nauman estimated that 80% are native in the area and 20% are not from this area; 60% are people living in Brigham City. Quite a few live in Ogden, and some as far away as Malad, Idaho. Some come from Salt Lake City. 80% of them are native to the general area included in the intermountain region. Almost all are homeowners.
Mr. Nauman said that he had heard that I suggested that men work eight hours for industry and eight hours on the farm, and a commander had asked if that did not make them pretty busy, and I said that it keeps them out of mischief.
Mr. Nauman said that there is considerable activity in home construction in the area.
I said, ‘Some of our leaders devote so much time to their Church work that their Church work becomes their vocation and their business their avocation, but they do not neglect their business.’
Mr. Taylor said that quite a number of Thiokol employees are bishops who work at the plant, and bishops are busier than anybody else. They also do a very good job. Mr. Nauman said that certainly a bishop would have a job which would require more than eight hours a day.
Mr. Nauman said that he had read somewhere that a ‘jack-Mormon’ in the early days of the Church was a person who was not a member of the Church, but was nevertheless willing to fight for the Church and for the Latter-day Saints. He said if this is the meaning of the word, he would like to be regarded as a ‘jack-Mormon.’
In reply to President Brown’s inquiry, Mr. Nauman said that his first contact with the Mormons was in Kansas City where there are two churches, and he knows the difference.
Mr. Taylor said that the son of the President of the Kansas City Stake works at Thiokol. Mr. Nauman recalled his first trip to Salt Lake City as a visitor to Temple Square in 1934, and he said that he has been there several times since. He said he was in Salt Lake City with the General Manager of the company’s Longhorn plant. This man was a well-educated engineer. At first he declined to accept the invitation to go to Temple Square; he was afraid that someone would grab him and convert him. He remained away for a time, but finally joined Mr. Nauman. The man being an engineer became very much interested in how the Tabernacle was constructed. The guide was a very good speaker, and by the time the tour was over, Mr. Mackelvoy was the most interested one of the group. When they got inside the Tabernacle the speaker was giving him the facts about the building. There were some hecklers in the group who brought up the old questions, but the guide gave excellent cogent answers, and Mr. Mackelvoy was very much interested.
Mr. Nauman said, ‘The tour you have for tourists is very good.’
I told Mr. Nauman that the guides are doctors, lawyers, teachers, businessmen, etc., who contribute their time.
Mr. Nauman said, ‘I have talked with some of them privately, and I know what they do.’
I also told Mr. Nauman that ‘A million visitors visit the temple grounds in a year.’
Mr. Naumann said, ‘I know of some conversions which have originated from the tourist’s trip there. I am sure it is effective for you.’
President Moyle read Section 88 of the Doctrine and Covenants, and passages relating to the kingdoms and space and the laws by which they are governed.
Mr. Taylor referred to the account of the Creation in the Pearl of Great Price.
Mr. Nauman said, ‘I have read that but not with full understanding.’
President Moyle explained how the Prophet Joseph acquired the manuscript of the Pearl of Great Price, and that that is the source of the Latter-day Saint idea of the Creation, that never was anything created out of nothing, and that matter could not be destroyed — it may change its form, but nothing could be destroyed or nothing could be made out of nothing.
Mr. Nauman said that even the atom bomb does not change that idea; that matter and energy are the same thing. I replied, ‘That gives you an idea of the world as seen through the telescope and it is equally wonderful if you look through the microscope. At one time it was the atom, now we have split the atom into electrons, protons, and neutrons, and we are still as far away as when we thought only of the atom.’
President Moyle said, ‘I think with the concept we have received of our universe and the knowledge we have through the Prophet Joseph Smith, it would be difficult to have any conflict of the truths of science and the truths of our faith.’
President Brown said, ‘Incidentally, you are talking to an engineer.’
President Moyle remarked, ‘…of ancient origin.’
Mr. Nauman said: ‘I used to be one, too.’
President Brown: ‘He strayed away into the law.’
Mr. Taylor: ‘Are you a lawyer also?’
President Brown: ‘I confess.’
I said: ‘They are hard men to handle.’
President Moyle: ‘We are not too hard for this man. He knows how to handle us, and we love to be handled that way.’
Mr. Nauman said: ‘I am very much flattered to have so much of your time. I realize that your time is very valuable.’
I replied: ‘We appreciate your calling on us. We are always pleased to have you call and see us, and your associates also.’
Mr. Nauman said: ‘If there is anything I can do, I will be happy if you will let me know.’
After the departure of Mr. Nauman and Mr. Taylor, we continued with our meeting of the First Presidency until 11:30 a.m., at which time I returned to my private office.’
Wed., 3 Jan., 1962:
“8:30 – 10:30 a. m. Was engaged in the meeting of the First Presidency.
Among other matters, we considered a letter from President George Romney of the Detroit Stake. President Romney expressed his appreciation for the interest, advice and counsel given him by the First Presidency on the occasion of his visit. He reviewed recent developments in Michigan; the meeting last week of the Board of Directors of “Citizens for Michigan” at which the consensus was that he had fully discharged his obligations and should feel free to enter his candidacy for governor of Michigan; that several Democratic members and independents have urged him to run; that “Citizens for Michigan” is hopeful of receiving a grant from the Ford Foundation. which will enable them to carry out some of its broader objectives; that the state ‘s leading negro Democrats strongly advises that Brother Romney be a candidate, and that it would help rather than to hurt in the writing of the state constitution if he is a candidate; his prospective candidacy is being sought by conservative Republicans. The constitutional convention is starting its decisive period and this will be completed by January 31st. Brother Romney’s maximum influence will be given in that period. He expects that by the time the committee reports the situation will be cleared
He reported that American Motors is working out an interim management plan and his company responsibilities will not be an obstacle to his running.
He expressed the desire that his candidacy would not be hurtful to the Church by reason of the negro question.
He reported that his counselors in the stake presidency and members of the high council are unanimous in their advice to him to be a candidate for governor. The letter from his counselor, President Jensen, addressed to him was read. It expressed the advice of himself and high council that President Romney be a candidate, and promised their support and their willingness to take on more responsibility in tile stake so the stake work will not be adversely affected.
A newspaper clipping from the “Letter Box” signed by Gerald L. Morron supporting his candidacy was also read.
After careful consideration, I said that we do not want to take the responsibility of telling him not to run, and it is not right for him to give us that responsibility. President Moyle said we should say that we want him to remain as stake president, and that he should make his own decision without any feeling that if he decides to run it will be detrimental to the Church.
I said that it will not be detrimental in any way, but it will be detrimental to his candidacy if he is released before. We should let him run as president of the Detroit Stake and win as president of the stake. If he fails in nomination or election, he is still president of the stake.”
Tues., 9 Jan., 1962:
1:10-1:25 p.m.
Called President Ernest L. Wilkinson at Washington, D.C. in accordance with his request regarding Columnist Drew Pearson and Senator Barry Goldwater; also regarding letter from Professor Richard D. Poll of B.Y.U. with reference to W. Cleon Skousen and his book.
(For complete details, see copy of conversation following.)
“Telephone call to President David 0. McKay from President Ernest L. Wilkinson-President of the Brigham Young University–in Washington, D. C., January 9, 1962, at 12:30 p.m.
Wilkinson: President McKay?
McKay: Yes.
Wilkinson: I made bold to call you today, despite knowing how busy you are, because I knew from Preston Robinson that you were meeting him in the morning — Wednesday morning. You afforded me the privilege of going to an Educational Convention in the East, and I have spent one day here in Washington, and I have some new information on this matter that you will be talking to him about, and I thought that it was my duty to get to you.
First, I find in Washington here that Jack Anderson, who is the assistant to this Drew Pearson–Anderson being a member of our Church–is a very, very close friend and goes around all the time with young David King.
Second, I find also, I learned from two sources when I got here on Sunday, that young David King has been telling prominent Church people here that this attack he made on Benson for Benson’s Los Angeles talk was done after he received information from the General Authorities as to a Thursday Conference they had in the Temple, in which they disapproved of Benson’s talk.
Third, Senator Bennett has been so concerned if the news continued with Pearson that Pearson may do as he has done in five or six other instances just before election — come out with some attack or smear on Bennett at the last moment, which is too late to be mentioned or to repute it. Pearson, of course, has had a reputation for doing that. He has done it five or six different times, and everyone who does not agree with his philosophy — he, of course, is an extreme left-winger — is afraid of him, and so Bennett went to Robinson when he was out in Utah this last year — this last fall, and asked Robinson if there was any attack of that kind on the part of Pearson, if he (Bennett) would have time to answer it in the News, and all that Robinson said was that he would have to wait and see at the time — he couldn’t promise him in advance that he could answer it, they would have to judge it as things come up.
Now, I mention those three things that I have learned since I have been in Washington. I placed my opposition to Pearson, of course, on the grounds which I think were solid — that he was just too undependable to be worthy of the traditional Deseret News published by the Church. But if we should continue, of course, to publish his articles and he should make some type of an attack on Bennett at the last moment, and even if the News did not carry it, other papers who have Pearson’s column would carry it, and then if we did not carry it, of course, the News would then be subject to a lot of criticism upon the grounds that they refused to run Pearson’s article, which he was actually against Bennett. In other words in addition to Pearson being entirely undependable and unreliable, there is now introduced into the problem the political danger in this situation, which to me is very, very unhealthy from the standpoint of the Church and the News. Now, that is the first subject I wanted to cover with you, and they all have to do with Pearson.
The second subject I wanted to cover with you is that of Goldwater. On the way back here, and I had to take the train because the planes were down for a couple of days, I had a chance to read the news releases of Goldwater for a period of three or four months, and I would like just to have the opportunity to sit down the minute I get back for one day and make a careful memorandum for you on them — not the summary of all of them.
McKay: Well now, of course, their objection there is that he is a presidential candidate. That is the only objection they had.
Wilkinson: That is the only objection. Now Preston Robinson agreed with me again on Friday, or Saturday, that all that Goldwater says is more nearly the Mormon viewpoints than any other writer. He admits that. Well now, why simply because he may be a presidential candidate, should we deny ourselves the writing of someone who writes more constant with our ideals than anyone else. I should say that Preston told me and, of course, he told me about his conference with you. He told us all about it, so I know about it through him. He told me that if, when he had his further conference with you you then directed him to take Pearson out, that he already had a conservative writer that he would put in in his place. And I asked him who the conservative writer was. He gave me his name. I do not now recall the name, but certainly he is a man completely unknown. Now with Goldwater being known as well as he is. . .
McKay: Wasn’t it Littman?
Wilkinson: No, he has got another man now.
McKay: Oh, I haven’t heard.
Wilkinson: Well, he will tell you about it. He has got another man now.
Of course, Littman is a liberal writer and he is not Conservative. But my
point is if as Preston says, Goldwater echoes our traditional Mormon beliefs
more closely than any man in public life, why should our readers be denied
the rights to read him merely because he might be a presidential candidate?
We are printing every day in the week statements of Kennedy. Certainly
Kennedy is going to be another presidential candidate. Why shouldn’t we put
down side by side — if they want Littman, Littman is liberal, print him side against Goldwater. I am in favor of both sides being expressed, but I do not think we should deprive ourselves of the leading political apostle right now of the views that we believe in. Now that’s on Goldwater. In other words, my own deep feeling is that you should not settle for some third or fourth-rate man whom the public do not know at all, and who very few people would ever read. They would read Goldwater, even if they did not believe in him, because he is well known in public life. My final suggestion on that point is that it seems to me that this whole question of whom these feature writers are should be reviewed all at one time, and unless you want to decide it yourself, it would seem to me that either you or the First Presidency should sit down with the Board of Directors of the News and decide all at one time on the writers who they should be. Some of them may be liberal. I would not object to some of them, a man like Littman being liberal, provided at the same time we were able to put in a man like Goldwater, who admitedly represents our views more than anyone else. Now that is all, President McKay, that I need to bother you with. This thing admittedly has troubled me a lot, but I wanted to get that over to you.
McKay: I thank you very much for it.
Wilkinson: Now, finally, just one comment on another matter. A Richard Poll, a professor of Political Science at the BYU, asked permission of me to send you a letter with respect to Skousen. I did not think that I ought to deny him the privilege if he wanted to. I saw the letter. To me it is rather academic. It has been sent to you, you maybe haven’t opened it yet.
McKay: No, I have not seen it yet.
Wilkinson: May I just tell you on that. Brother Poll, and President Brown have been talking about this somewhat. I do not know whether President Brown suggested that he send it to you, but I have seen correspondence between the two, and it may be that there was some such suggestion, but when I get back, I could talk to you about the entire thing too, if I may, and there is no need for you to answer it immediately. It is an attack on Skousen. I think it is trivial. I do not agree with all that Skousen has done. I think Skousen has been a little careless in some of his statements, but certainly his motives and his purposes are good.
McKay: Yes, and he is nearer right than he is wrong.
Wilkinson: He is much nearer right than he is wrong.
McKay: Right.
Wilkinson: And these mathematitions are just altogether too trivial in their harping and their criticisms. They cannot see the forest for the trees.
McKay: That is what I think.
Wilkinson: Well, now, I apologize again for intruding, but I wanted to bring you up to date as far as I knew.
McKay: Thank you very much, I appreciate it.
Wilkinson: Well, thank you, President McKay.
McKay: All right, Good bye.
Wilkinson: I am grateful for the privilege of telling you.
McKay: Thank you.
Wilkinson: Thank you, good bye.
McKay: Good bye.”
Wed., 7 Feb., 1962:
8:00 a. m.
Received a courtesy call in my private office from Lawrence L. Winship,
editor of the Boston Globe. He was accompanied by Mrs. Winship and
Mr. Nicholas G. Morgan.
I mentioned to Mr. Winship that next Saturday George Romney will make his decision as to whether he will attempt to secure the nomination for Governor of Michigan, and asked him what he thought about this. Mr. Winship said that he was hoping that Mr. Romney would accept the nomination for candidate for the Presidency of the United States. I said that I was very glad to learn that President Romney would have the hearty support of one of our leading newspapers in the East, and Mr. Winship said, “He certainly will have!” He also said he would report that to President Romney when he met him. I told Mr. Winship that I hope that President Romney will be nominated and win the election.
I later learned from President Moyle that a letter had been received from Kathleen G. Keller in Boston, a neighbor of Mr. Winship, saying that Mr. Winship was sent out here by the Globe to get all the background he could on George Romney, so that their paper would have it on file, and for that purpose he is spending a week or ten days here, learning what he can about President Romney.
(See report by Ted Cannon following)
“The following is a report made by Mr. Ted Cannon of the Church Information Service regarding the visit of Mr. Lawrence L. Winship, editor of the Boston Globe.
On Wednesday, February 7, 1962, President McKay received in his office Mr. Lawrence L. Winship, editor of the Boston Globe, and Mrs. Winship. The visitors were accompanied by Brother Nicholas G. Morgan, Sr. to whom they had been referred by a mutual friend.
Mr. Winship is in Salt Lake City doing some research on Elder George Romney in connection with the latter’s expected announcement to run for the governorship of Michigan. He had visited earlier in the week with Mr. Romney in Detroit. The conversation was concerned largely with Mr. Romney whom Mr. Winship seemed to hold in high esteem.
Later in the day Elder Ted Cannon of the Church Information Service took the visitors to lunch, and they made a tour of Temple Square and attended an organ recital. Mrs. Winship was taken on a tour of the Beehive House while her husband interviewed members of Elder Romney’s family living here.
The visitors seemed very much interested in the Church, asked many questions and were given a number of tracts, booklets and pictures which they requested. After returning to Boston Mr. Winship called Elder Cannon on the telephone requesting additional information and pictures which he plans to use in an article he is writing for his newspaper.”
“Telephone Conversation between President David O. McKay of Salt Lake City, Utah, and Mr. Jack Goodman, regional correspondent for the “Newsweek Magazine”, February 7, 1962, at 12:30 p.m.
McKay: Hello
Goodman: President McKay, I would like to ask you a few questions about Mr. George Romney, if I may.
McKay: Of course.
Goodman: May I ask if you are a very close friend of Mr. Romney?
McKay: Yes, I have known him for several years–since he became President of the Detroit Stake of the Church.
Goodman: Another thing, do you think he would make a good governor?
McKay: Yes I do, in every sense of the word.
Goodman: In every sense of the word?
McKay: Yes, in every sense of the word.
Goodman: Thank you for the opportunity of speaking with you.
McKay: You’re welcome.
Goodman: Good-bye.
McKay: Good-bye.”
Fri., 16 Feb., 1962:
“[First Presidency Meeting] Federal Aid to Education
Attention was called to a letter from a Mr. Loren Searcy suggesting that I issue a statement to all members of the Church against the government’s aid to the education program. It was decided to do nothing about this matter.
Fri., 23 Feb., 1962:
8:15 – 8:45 a. m.
President Henry D. Moyle and I represented the First Presidency
(President Brown being en route to Pittsburgh) in a courtesy call from
Senator Kenneth B. Keating of New York. Accompanying Senator Keating
were Senator Wallace F. Bennett, Mr Vernon Romney, Mr. Fred
Finlayson, Mr. Mitchell Melich, Mr. Sherman B. Lowe, and Mrs. Helen
H. Brown.
The following conversation ensued:
Keating: “This fellow (indicating Senator Bennett) is the best representative of your Church. That would be solid for every member of the Senate regardless of his political affiliation. They all feel the same way about Wallace. “
McKay: (to Senator Bennett) “You have a new competitor. ”
Bennett: “You mean George?”
McKay: “George Romney is way off.”
Moyle: “He is talking about Calvin Rampton.”
Bennett: “We must quote the Book of Mormon: ‘There must needs be opposition in all things.'”
Keating: “I want to tell you, Mr. President, how he saved me.
During the debate on the civil rights bill, they had the junior senators in the chair to preside. The Vice President does not sit there all the time to preside over the Senate, so I was sitting up there and a real crisis in the debate that was unexpected due to a parliamentary maneuver, made it necessary to have a new parliamentary day start, so now the Vice President and the Majority leader Johnson said, ‘I move the Senate do now adjourn for three minutes and we start a new day.’ In about two and a half minute I was still in the chair, and I leaned down to the sergeant at arms and said, ‘Is there not a statute that we start each session with prayer?’ And he said, ‘Yes.’ I said, ‘Go get the chaplain.’ He said, ‘He has left for the day.’ I said, ‘Don’t leave this to a heathen like me to give a prayer.’ He said, ‘You can recite the Lord’s Prayer.’ I said, ‘I know the Lord’s Prayer, but if I have to do it in front of the Senate of the United States, I might stumble. Go get Wallace Bennett.’ So he went into the cloakroom and got Wallace. I banged the gavel and he gave a beautiful prayer, just like that. So he certainly got me out of the box.”
McKay: “That is the returned missionary. He has got to be equal to every occasion.”
Bennett: “Now I have the title of Assistant Chaplain.”
Keating: “The Hotel looks out on the Temple. It is beautiful. I arrived here at four o’clock your time, took a little snooze, and just before dusk I got up and looked out of the window. It is as beautiful a view as I have ever seen — it is an inspiring sight.”
McKay: “Do you have a good room?”
Keating: “Yes, it is a very nice hotel.”
McKay: ”One of the best in the United States.”
Keating: “Mr. President, when I was in the House before I went to the Senate, my congressional delegation was from Palmyra.
McKay: “Then you are our representative. “
Keating: “I believe you are building a chapel. “
McKay: “We have just organized a stake and dedicated a chapel. The Church is growing in spite of those who don’t like us. “
Keating: “I have never heard anybody say they don’t like the Mormons, but I suppose you encounter that. “
Moyle: “You haven’t been on a mission. “
Keating: “It has always interested me. Your history is so very interesting.”
Romney: “I wonder if the Senator is acquainted with our missionary service. We have something in the neighborhood of 10,000 young men.”
Keating: “And they serve a couple of years?”
Romney: “They pay their own way and all their expenses “
Moyle: “In foreign countries they serve 30 months.”
Romney: “My own son came back from the British Mission a few weeks ago. He was in the presidency. Brother Moyle in the Bonneville Stake said there had been more baptisms in the Northwestern States Mission than our membership of that big stake, something around 4000; in one year in the Northwestern States, they baptized more than the membership of that entire stake.”
Moyle: “Finally it was over 5,000. They promised to double it this year in baptisms.”
McKay: “One of the most interesting phases of the missionary work is the fact that young men and young women look forward and save their money for the purpose.”
Keating: ”Isn’t that wonderful . “
McKay: ”Individually it develops character. They have high ideals. Even during the war [a] young man saved his pittance received from the government, and it is a mere pittance. Instead of spending his money as soldiers usually do, he sent it to his mother who was a widow, and he said, ‘Mother, save this for me, and when I get out of the army I would like to go on a mission,’ and she did that. He also made the stipulation that if he didn’t come back, ‘use the money to send some other young man to represent me’, and he didn’t come back.”
Keating: “He didn’t? He was killed?”
McKay: “He gave his life for his country, and she was true to his request and used the money for another young man to go on a mission. That’s a phase of missionary work that is seldom appreciated by others. I received a letter only this morning from a young woman who is 19 and she was writing about another question about ideals of married life. She said ‘I want to go on a mission; I am not worried about marriage yet’ — so they look forward to it during their teens and save money to help pay their expenses. Of course, most of the expenses are paid by their parents and friends who contribute, but this phase of missionary work is very contributive to character building. “
Keating: “That’s right.”
Moyle: ”There was a sad but wonderful experience yesterday. A missionary’s father was killed in Bancroft, Idaho, helping others to clean up after the flood and he got tangled up in a machine and his neck was broken instantly. The missionary was notified, and he said he would do what his mother wanted him to do with reference to coming home to the funeral. She said, ‘My boy, you stay where you are. That is what your father would have wanted; ‘ so he stays in the mission field. “
Keating: “That’s real dedication.”
Romney: “I remember an occurrence in this building when President George Albert Smith was president. He related it to Guy Gabrielson. We visited President Smith and he was telling him about Ted Peterson who became president of the Standard Oil. Guy was one of his closest friends. President Smith told this story: He said that he went to Albany to visit and he was met there by two young elders. He asked them to direct him to the capitol and they did. I don’t remember which one of the governors was in the chair, but one of the New York governors, and President Smith went to visit him as a courtesy call. It was during the World War, and in the conversation the governor inquired of President Smith, ‘What do you think is the future and the outcome of this war and of the country’ and so on. President Smith said, ‘You get your Book of Mormon and open to such and such and read it and that’s your answer. That’s the outcome.’ The governor turned around to his swivel bookcase by the side of his desk and took a Book of Mormon and read that this country will never be ruled by a king, and so on. President Smith smiled and said to Guy, ‘You know, I took an awful chance, but I knew he had one because I had presented him one a few years ago. ‘ One of the young elders was Peterson who became president of Standard Oil. “
McKay: “When my call came, I was a student at the University of Utah and my call went to my home in Huntsville. My father was the bishop, and he was a little worried about his rambunctious son. He didn’t know just whether he would accept that call, so he sent a letter with it and said how the decision in accepting this or rejecting this is yours. You pray about it and let us know.’ I received it in the morning before I went to school, and I said to my brother, ‘Isn’t that awful.’ My father was about right. Well, I thought it would interfere with my future. William Stewart was head of the normal department, you remember him.”
Moyle: “Very well. “
McKay: “He offered me a position here in Salt Lake when I graduated at $1800.00 a year, and that was a good salary. I didn’t know what to do. William Stewart said we want you to take the school in Salt Lake County, so I thought I would go to President Joseph F. Smith who was president of the Church. This was in
January. I said, ‘I graduate in June, and my folks have gone to considerable expense to have their three children in the University, so I would like to accept the position as teacher in the schools and pay them back.’ President Smith listened. ‘Well, you continue your school until June and graduate, and when you are ready to go just let us know.’ (Laughter) I went on my mission on the 1st of August of that year. “
Keating: “Where did you go? “
McKay: “I went to Scotland and received an appointment to teach in the Weber Stake Academy before I was released from my mission.”
Bennett: “At more than $1800.00 a year? “
McKay: “Yes, and that was the beginning of my teaching career and the beginning of my Church work. “
Romney: “They can make decisions for us always. “
Keating: “This call was entirely voluntary?”
McKay: “Yes, they are all volunteers. I was hopeful that
the President of the Church would say ‘accept the position in the schools. When you graduate let us know.”‘
Moyle: “We asked one young man not long ago if he had been coerced to go on a mission. He smiled and he said, ‘I haven’t been discouraged.'”
Romney: “Would you tell the Senator about the increase in baptisms from year to year. “
Moyle: “Well in 1959 our conversions, baptisms resulting from conversion, were around 35,000 in all the world; in 1960 they were 48,000; and in 1961 there were 88,807.”
Keating: “You are going to take us over. That’s terrific. “
Moyle: “And added to that would be our natural growth as our children become eight years of age. We look upon that as the year of accountability. When they are eight they know what they want to do, and for the most part they are baptized at eight, and when we add that we will have close to 150,000 increase last year.”
Keating: “That’s marvelous. “
Moyle: “The way it has started out this year it looks like it might make 200,000.”
Bennett: “150,000 is not quite 10%. “
Romney: “Is there any church that is exceeding that? “
Moyle: “Unfortunately I do not have any statistics on the other churches.”
Keating: “I wouldn’t think so off hand. “
McKay: “I think the percentage of increase is higher. “
Moyle: “The remarkable thing about it is in the European countries that are predominantly Catholic like France, we have as much as 600% increase in a year. I think there is no doubt but this year they will have 2500 conversions in Frances whereas in 1959 they had about 200.”
Melich: “At what do you estimate your total membership now? “
Moyle: “It will run close to 1,800,000, maybe between that and 900,000.”
Melich: “You have had your most rapid growth in the last ten years.”
Moyle: “In arriving at that figure I have not taken into
consideration the deaths. I am on the receiving end. So we would have to reduce that a little on account of the mortality. “
Romney: “That is divided up between 1100 and 1200 wards. “
Moyle: “There are over 3,000 wards, going on 4,000. “
Romney: “And all of these have their chapels in which they worship. “
Moyle: “We are building 47 meetinghouses under construction in the British Isles alone. We will have 96 under the program this year, either completed or under construction, just in the British Isles. Where we had last year 11,000 and some odd conversions in Britain alone, we have 47 buildings under construction or ready to begin in Europe outside of Great Britain. “
Romney: “I was not exaggerating when I said they are finishing one a day.”
Moyle: “That’s right. “
Keating: “Do you have missionaries in the undeveloped countries?”
Moyle: “No, we have so many missionaries needed that we are having a hard time covering other parts of the world. “
McKay: “We have a mission in South Africa. “
Bennett: “It is not a mission to the blacks. “
Keating: “Do you have missionaries in the Arab countries?”
Moyle: “We have no missionaries now in the Arab countries. “
McKay: “In Syria we had a mission years ago, and it is now carried on by the Swiss Mission. “
Moyle: “We have some members of the Church in Arab countries, and as President McKay says they are taken care of by our Swiss Mission, but we have no missionaries in the Arab countries. “
Bennett: “We are having a tremendous growth in the South Seas. That is one of the richest missions among the Polynesians. “
Moyle: “We had over 4,000 converts in Samoa. We are organizing a stake in Samoa next month. Our baptisms in the South Sea Islands have more than doubled over the year before. That includes New Zealand and Australia. “
Keating: “What about South America?”
Moyle: “We have missions in Chile, Peru, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay, and two missions in Brazil. And then we have missions in all
the countries of Central America, three missions in Mexico. We have a mission in Japan and in China, at Hong Kong, Formosa and the Philippines. “
Romney: “I imagine these folks have other things to do, don’t you.”
Keating: “We have to get some breakfast and catch a plane. It is very nice of you, and I appreciate the honor of being received.”
McKay: “We are very happy to make your acquaintance. I hope you will have a pleasant association. “
Keating: “I hope we will be back again, and very best wishes to you. You have honored me, and I thank you.”
At 8:45 a.m. the delegation withdrew from the meeting.”
[First Presidency Meeting] Right-to-Work Law
A letter was received from a Ronald W. Inkley asking for clarification of the position of the First Presidency on the Right-to-Work Law. He mentions a statement made by George Romney to the editor of the Boston Globe to the effect that the statement of the First Presidency on the subject was merely the personal opinion of the members of the First Presidency.
I said that so far as we are concerned we will be united. President Moyle said we are united in that as we are in everything else.
President Moyle explained that the Chamber of Commerce was given permission to use the statement provided the full text was left. The statement said that I was the spiritual leader of 1,600,000 Mormons. President Moyle said that he had written that so that is his sentiments, and I agreed that we will all stand on that. **(See Over)
(For details, see Minutes of the First Presidency for this day.)
**President Moyle dictated the letter regarding the statement on the Right-to-Work Law, at President McKay’s request. See Diary dated September 18, 1961 for copies of letters.”
10:45-10:50 a.m.
Office call of William Smart of the Deseret News. Gave him permission to print the syndicated article by Victor Riesel regarding President George Romney and the Right-to-Work Law, as it was presented to me. (See diary dated September 18, 1961 for copies of letters, and for statement made by President McKay. See also diary dated September 19, 1961, regarding visit of Victor Riesel.)
Wed., 7 Mar., 1962:
“MEMORANDUM OF CONFERENCE WITH PRESIDENT McKAY
ON MARCH 7, 1962, FROM 7:45 A. M. TO 8:45 A. M.
I met with President McKay at his office at the above time. The following decisions were made:
3. Congressional Record for President McKay’s reply to Congressman Harding on Federal Aid. President McKay authorized me to have Senator Goldwater put in the Congressional Record his reply to Congressman Harding’s inquiry on Federal aid to education.
4. Deseret News for President McKay’s reply to Congressman Harding on Federal aid. President McKay authorized me to have his reply to Congressman Harding printed in the Church Section of the Deseret News.
5. Roger Freeman. President McKay authorized me to engage Roger Freeman to bring our research on Federal aid to education up to date .
10. Ernest L. Wilkinson Running for Senate. President McKay and I discussed the political situation this year as well as two years from now, as a result of which he told me that if I wanted to run for the Senate in 1964 he would give me a year’s leave of absence to make the race. He thought I ought to begin preparing for it and probably do it. I told him very definitely, however, that I had not made any decision in that direction but it was agreed that if I did make such a decision I would have his blessing.
12. Goldwater Articles in Deseret News. I recalled to President McKay that I had summarized Goldwater articles for him and told him I thought that since they represented Mormon viewpoint they ought to go in the Deseret News. He replied that since Goldwater is a candidate for president, he didn’t think we could do this. I seem to have lost this battle.
13. Goldwater Speech at Notre Dame. I urged upon the President that Senator Goldwater’s speech at Notre Dame, which was extremely religious in character, be published in the News. He authorized me to see Henry Smith and have it published.
14. Ezra Benson’s Devotional Address. I informed President McKay of Ezra Taft Benson’s address to the Brigham Young University studentbody on public and private debt and urged that it be printed in the News with deletion of certain political references. He agreed and authorized me to have Henry Smith print it.
I informed him that on both the Goldwater and Benson speeches, as well as his own reply to Congressman Harding, I would have Henry Smith check with him.
Fri., 20 Apr. 1962:
Telephone Call
Governor George Dewey Clyde called me about the following: 1) Referred to the National Prayer Day which is to be held May 12, 1962. He is planning a breakfast at the State Capitol Cafeteria on that day and would like to invite from 25 to 50 of our people – Stake Presidents and Bishops – at which time this day would be remembered in prayer. I said that so long as this Nation accepts Christ, we are safe, and that I think his idea is good. I told him that I would make up a list of 25 or 50 people. 2) The Governor then took up the matter of preparations by the government for protection from Atomic Fallout in case of an attack. The government will make a survey of the State, and the Governor wants to know if we would notify the proper Church officials – Bishops of Wards, or Presidents of Stakes – to open their houses so that inspectors may see what available basements or rooms can be used as shelters in case of a Fall-out. 3) In answer to a request that had come to me from Gunn McKay, I mentioned to the Governor that Gunn McKay is one of four Democrats who have been recommended from the Ogden area to fill the vacancy in the State Legislature. I told the Governor that I had said to Gunn McKay, ‘Gunn, you are a Democrat, I am sorry to say, but I shall recommend you to the Governor.’ I told the Governor that Gunn is a brother to Ernest who was a nominee for Congress of the Weber District – a life-long Democrat as was his father before him – that that branch of the McKay family were all Democrats. The Governor said that there was a branch of Democrats in the Clyde family. We both had a good laugh over that. The Governor said that he knew of the recommendation of Gunn, and that he wanted to get more acquainted with Gunn, and that he would do that as soon as possible.”
Thurs., 3 May 1962:
2) Political Meetings in Church Buildings
President Brown reported to us that he had received a long distance call asking whether the stake house in the Los Angeles Stake might be used for Pat Brown to make a speech. President Brown said that he answered that we did not allow our chapels to be used for that purpose. Pat Brown is the governor of the State of California, and is running for re-election against Richard Nixon. President Brown said that the one who called him answered by reading to him a newspaper clipping to the effect that Mr. Nixon is to speak before the Mutual Improvement Association in the Wilshire Ward. He said the report further indicates that permission for the use of the building by Nixon to speak before the M.I.A. was cleared by President John M. Russon of the Los Angeles Stake. President Brown further said that when he spoke to President Russon about the matter on the telephone President Russon said that the question came to him while he was in stake conference to see if it could be advertised, and that he turned to the visiting brother who was Ezra Taft Benson and asked him about it, and he said it would be all right.
I said that it is the rule of the Church that we do not open our houses for political purposes; that under the circumstances in this case, however, we should give Governor Brown the same privilege that was given to Nixon, and then tell them that this has to stop. I said that in fairness, both parties should be given the same privilege. President Brown will get in touch with President Russon and convey this word to him.
Thurs., 17 May 1962:
Telephone Calls — (note by c.m.)
Mr. John M. Harvey called long-distance from Los Angeles, California. He said he is an Elder in the West Los Angeles Second Ward. He wanted to talk with President McKay. He stated that he is a write-in candidate for the office of Governor of the State of California on the Republican Ticket, and wanted President McKay to endorse him on the Republican Ticket.
I told him that that would be impossible — that President McKay could not endorse any person who is running for a political office.
He said, ‘Well, he did it for Nixon and Kennedy!’
I said, ‘That was a different thing. Those men were presidential candidates and were on a speaking campaign in the City and made a courtesy call on the First Presidency. President McKay did not endorse either party.’
Brother Harvey then started to tell what he had done in the way of giving hundreds of dollars worth of ivy for the chapel, had given over 500 orchids for one event, etc., and that he thought the Church owed him something.
I told him again that President McKay does not endorse any person running for a political office.”
Wed., 27 June 1962:
“7:45 – 8:15 a.m.
Met by appointment at their request the following educators: Paul Rose, President of the Murray Stake, and President of the State School Board Association; Dr. Lynn Bennion, Superintendent of City Schools; Dr. Dean Belnap, President Elect of the State School Board, former Bishopric member; Darold Long, Executive Secretary of the State School Board, and High Councilman of the East Jordan Stake; and Dan Peterson of Lehi, President of the Alpine School District, and President of Society of Superintendents.
We discussed the school and economic situation which has greatly changed in Utah. It has come to the point where teachers must have higher salaries. They are going into government and economic phases, some leaving the state, where their remuneration is so much higher.
I advised that they should choose men of both parties before the election who will favor education — that that is the first step. Then when we get men in the legislature, laws which will encourage more efficient teachers and better pay should be passed.
It seems to be a serious situation, and we shall have to get men who will give the matter the best intelligent judgment that they have.
Wednesday, June 27, 1962
UTAH SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION
June 29, 1962
David O. McKay, President
Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints
47 East South Temple
Salt Lake City, Utah
Dear President McKay:
We certainly wish to express our appreciation for your graciousness in receiving us last Wednesday morning. We are very grateful to have had an opportunity to discuss with you our concerns about education in Utah.
We feel a mounting anxiety as we observe the shortage of teachers to fill already existing positions. We are concerned about the inadequacy of teacher compensation, the decline in educational attainment of late, the radical viewpoints of some teachers leading even to threats of strikes to gain the things they are demanding. We feel, as you know, that these problems are becoming increasingly pressing and serious. In great detail they might be described as follows:
Teacher Shortage: Many districts in our state are finding it virtually impossible to find teachers to fill classrooms.
Teacher Salaries: The paramount reason given by teachers for not entering the profession in Utah is that salaries are way too low in comparison with other states and private industry. The reason given by students for not entering the field of education is the inadequacy of the financial compensation. This is a very serious problem.
Educational Attainment: Utah can well be proud of her accomplishments of the past. However, we are rapidly losing our position of leadership in many areas.
Viewpoint of Some Teachers: There are at the present time about six local districts that have not come to an agreement on salaries for the coming year. Talk this past spring, undoubtedly spurred by the New York City Teacher’s Strike, has been more radical and belligerent than ever before. There is growing sentiment among teachers to adopt the strike methods of enforcing their demands. The Unions are waiting to move into the ranks of our teachers.
Your counsel has already proved to be extremely helpful. We are grateful for your suggestions as to ways in which the Church might help us.
a) to encourage both parties to nominate candidates as representatives to the legislature who are favorable toward education.
b) to encourage the people to elect representatives to the legislature, regardless of political affiliations, that are favorable toward education.
c) to inform the public that teachers do need to be adequately compensated to live under our present economic conditions.
d) to encourage legislators and Governor to find necessary funds for education.
Your philosophy of education and the role of the teacher is most refreshing. The dedication of teachers to service of which you spoke is certainly present in the large majority of our teachers. We were thrilled with your suggestion that the Church can encourage especially young men to enter the field of education as a real service. We would concur that there is no higher calling than that of teacher. If in the minds of students in college we could couple the ideal of service with the assurance of a more adequately compensated future, we would be able to attract more and better people into teaching. We can then keep them here at home where they really want to be.
One of the most important factors in holding teachers in the past has been their desire to remain in Utah where the Church is. Many of our educators are very active in the Church, as you know. They find now, however, that they can go most anywhere and enjoy higher salaries while at the same time living in organized wards and stakes.
The importance of an education cannot, as you have said, be over estimated. That ‘education is an investment … not an expense,’ is certainly a concept everyone should espouse.
We hope this review of some of the things we discussed the other morning is accurate. As we strive to maintain local control of our schools and to solve education’s serious problems, we are most happy to know that you feel as we do.
Thank you once again for the time you took to listen to us. We are extremely grateful to you for your kindness.
If we can be of any assistance to you in any fashion, we would certainly feel thankful for the opportunity. Please call upon us.
Our Love and Respect Always,
Paul S. Rose Darld J. Long
President Executive Secretary”
Fri., 27 July 1962:
Telephone Calls:
1) President Ernest L. Wilkinson called from Denver, Colorado, and wanted my advice about his giving the keynote address at the Republican State Convention. I said that I am in accord with his political activities two years hence, and that I did not mind any appointment that may have come to him under President Eisenhower, but that that is passed and done with. I said, ‘However, I question the advisability of your entering into politics as President of the Brigham Young University, and I should like to talk to you about it.’ I arranged for him to come in to the office tomorrow morning at 8:00 a.m.
Sat., 28 July 1962:
“8:00 a.m.
Went over to the office and met by appointment President Ernest L. Wilkinson. He discussed with me the matter of his accepting an invitation to speak at the State Republican Convention to be held in the near future.
As I told him over the phone when he called yesterday, I question the advisability of his entering into politics as President of the Brigham Young University.
In discussing matters with President Wilkinson pertaining to the conditions in the world and the government here in our own United States, I said that I had a letter suggesting that at the forthcoming October Conference of the Church, or in some other way, that I make a statement which would once again be an official pronouncement for the Church in favor of the continuation of the American form of government, and at the same time a condemnation of Communism and all species of socialism. I shall give serious consideration to this matter.
I gave President Wilkinson permission to invite President A. Ray Olpin of the University of Utah to give the Commencement Address at the B.Y.U. August Commencement.”
Fri., 3 Aug., 1962:
“Telephone Calls:
I considered carefully the following message left for me by my secretary Clare Middlemiss:
“President McKay: Brother Lynn Richards called today (August 1, 1962) and said that he and Dr. Moroni Brown, Chairman of the State Board of Education, would liked to have an appointment with you to present a matter of extreme importance involving a choice for the State Superintendent of Public Instruction. He said that they are having some very serious problems. They would like to take Dr. Harvey Taylor, Vice President of the Brigham Young University. President Ernest L. Wilkinson of the BYU has given his consent to this, but Brother Taylor loves his work at the BYU, and has a new home in Provo, and wishes to stay where he is. They want you to put pressure upon him to accept the position of State Superintendent of Public Instruction.”
I then called my son, Lawrence, and asked his opinion of this matter, and asked him if he had been consulted by Brother Richards.
After discussing this situation with Lawrence, I called Brother Richards
and told him that I did not feel it wise to influence Dr. Taylor to accept
the above mentioned position, but that this decision should be left entirely to Brother Taylor.
(See copies of telephone conversations following)”
Telephone conversation between President David O. McKay and David Lawrence McKay, August 3, 1962, at 8:20 a. m.
DLM: Hello
DOM: Lawrence, did Lynn Richards speak to you about this appointment of Dr. Harvey Taylor ?
DLM: Yes, he asked me what your reaction was. I told him that you had not answered. He did not say anything. He wanted to know whether the present Chairman of the Board wanted an appointment with you, and if he could have one. I said that was up to you and Clare.
DOM: There is a note on my desk this morning that he has called and wants an appointment. They want me to pressure Brother Taylor. Well, I do not feel like doing it.
DLM: It seems to me that that is a matter of his personal life, rather than the Church, isn’t it?
DOM: I do not see why I should get into it at all. Do you ?
DLM: No, I do not.
DOM: I believe I will just leave word that that is up to Brother Taylor.
DLM: That would be my reaction.
DOM: They want me to pressure him. Well, I will not do it. I do not see why I should.
DLM: They want you to do it for the good of the State.
DOM: I am not so sure that he would be very good at it either. Are you? Do you know him?
DLM: I do not know him well enough.
DOM: Well, I do know him.
DLM: I have never been impressed that he could turn the world around with his influence .
DOM: No. Well, I believe I will tell them that I would rather leave that with him, and not use any pressure.
DLM: It seems to me that would be wise.
DOM: All right, thank you.
DLM: Fine.
DOM: Good-bye.”
“Telephone conversation between President David O. McKay and Lynn Richards, August 3, 1962, at 8:40 a. m.
McKay: Hello .
Richards: President McKay?
McKay: Good morning.
Richards: This is Lynn. How are you this morning?
McKay: Very well, thank you. I am glad to hear your voice.
Richards: I am always sorry to impose on your time.
McKay: I just came back from Huntsville, and there is a note on my desk from you.
Richards: Yes. Now, President McKay, the Chairman of the School Board–the State Board of Education–wanted to wait on you to see if you would care to use your influence to prevail upon Dr. Harvey Taylor to become the State Superintendent of Public Instruction. President Wikinson favored it very much, knowing the necessity of having a strong man in that office and the threat to release time in our Seminary System if anything went wrong up there, but we have discussed this matter with Brother Taylor and attempted to prevail on him, and he told me yesterday he was disposed not to take it. Now, we would not take your time to discuss this further if you felt that you would not like to urge him against his will to take this office.
McKay: Well, I am very strongly in that opinion. I would rather not use my influence in urging him to take it.
Richards: At all ?
McKay: 0h, no! I will leave that entirely with him and you folks. I think I had better not. I think it would be unwise .
Richards: All right. And he has decided that he would rather not take it. So, I appreciate your time in calling back, and thank you very much. We will let it stand at that.
McKay: Well, thank you, Lynn. I will appreciate it if you will .
Richards: Mother is always asking about you.
McKay: Give her our love, will you please?
Richards: I will. She is fine, and we hope you are.
McKay: Sister McKay is much better. She cannot write or she would have answered personally the sweet letter your mother sent. She is a darling mother, and we appreciate her friendship.
Richards: We just hope you are both well.
McKay: Yes, thank you!
Richards: Fine. Good-bye.
McKay: Good-bye.”
Wed., 15 Aug., 1962:
8:30 a. m.
The First Presidency met with O. Preston Robinson. General Manager of the Deseret News, who came in to report his meeting with President John F. Kennedy in Washington, D.C., in response to the President’s invitation. Brother Robinson explained that he received an invitation by telegram from the President of the United States to come to Washington to exchange views. The nature of the meeting was not known. The President had invited eleven men from the State of Utah. The metropolitan and local weekly newspapers of the State were represented. Mr. Claybaugh of Brigham City, president of the American Press Association of small weeklys was present. The group was exclusively from Utah. The group drew lots for places to sit at the farmily dining room table at the White House. The meeting was informal and friendly. Brother Robinson said that he drew a place which put him at the head of the table. President Kennedy sat mid-way on one side, and Pierre Salinger, the press chief, sat on the other side of the table facing the President.
Mr. John Gallivan of the Salt Lake Tribune, sat at one side of the table opposite Mr. Salinger. Brother Robinson said President Kennedy asked about me, and asked Brother Robinson to carry to me his personal
greeting and his expression of appreciation for the most gracious reception he had received from the First Presidency on the occasion of his visit here.
President Kennedy did most of the talking. He talked first about the general foreign situation: He expressed the thought that the general
situation has improved. He felt all right about everything but Berlin, where he expected there may be trouble before the end of the year. He
expects that the East Germans and the Russians will sign a peace treaty and that will pose a problem. The newspaper men asked about the President’s purpose to protect our interests in Berlin, and he said that had not changed and that under no circumstances would we be forced out of Berlin.
President Kennedy was also very much concerned about South America and what is happening in Brazil, Argentina, Peru and Cuba. He said that is a source of great concern. The alliance for progress is not moving along as they had hoped and they do not expect much of it. If we put as much money into South America as has been put into Europe, it would be as much as our economy would stand. This is one of the broad concerns of the President and it is primarily economic. The President said the aid which may be given could not be as effective in South America because the level of scientific attainment is not high. President Kennedy did not talk about Peru specifically, except to indicate the concern about South America. He had a deep concern about that and emphasized it three or four times. Before Brother Robinson went to Washington he had a long talk with Governor Clyde and all of the four members of the Congressional delegation of Utah in Washington. The Governor and Senator Moss said the federal government had been lagging in carrying on the survey of public lands in the State Of Utah and that this has seriously delayed various developments in the state affected by the public lands through the neglect of the survey. President Kennedy asked Brother Robinson to write him a memorandum on the subject.
Jack Gallivan asked President Kennedy about the Clearfield Naval Base being declared surplus. A group of private citizens is trying to make it a private industrial center.
I recited the genesis of the Clearfield Naval Base Depot under the administration of President Franklin D. Roosevelt when Senator Thomas and a representative of the government selected the large acreage of very choice sugar beet land for the depot when other much less productive agricultural land could have served as well for the depot, but that the government officers said it would be in that area of choice agricultural fields or not at all. President Moyle said his father, though retired, had opposed the selection of the area and appealed to the President of the United States and thought he had convinced the President but the navy overruled them and had its own way finally.
Brother Robinson said that putting so much warehousing upon the market will have a great impact upon business here. It will be the biggest warehouse facility in the United States. The property will be available at extremely reasonable rental. The three chambers of commerce are trying to see what can be done to work out the problems.
President Kennedy talked at some length about the tax cut. Though by that time no public announcement had been made, the President’s remarks indicated about what his decision would be. The group of newspaper men were prepared to give the President some opinions on medicare, the tax cuts and other subjects, but he did not give them opportunity to speak.
President Kennedy is well informed and has done well with foreign relations through Secretary Dean Rusk of the State Department, who is working at present on the Soblen case.
I asked if President Kennedy said anything about coming West. Brother Robinson explained that the President will be in Colorado this week and will go to California, but that he does not contemplate coming to Utah on this trip, and does not know what his future plans this year will be and whether Utah may be included. The President is hopeful that Democratic senators will be elected this fall who will support his plans. The President talked about deficits and government debt and the gross national product. He thinks the country is not in bad shape, if we relate other economic matters to the gross national product which is high.
The President did not ask any questions to get opinions of the group. When the group asked him questions he gave his answers. That was the nature of the interview. It lasted from 1:00 p. m. to 3:00 p. m. The group was shown around the White House by Pierre Salinger. The President left after 3:00 p. m. to fly at 3:45 p. m. for an appointment for the weekend with Gene Tunney, then he was going to start his trip into the west.
I inquired as to the President’s physical condition. Brother Robinson said the President appears to be physically well. He seems to have lost a little weight, but he looks very healthy and strong. Dean Rusk is a bigger man. He is tall and has broad shoulders.
I inquired if Dean Rusk is an intellectual man. Brother Robinson said he thought he was a fine, capable man. Outside of Cuba and Berlin, Brother Robinson said he thought Dean Rusk had guided things very well.
I asked if the subject of Mexico had come up. Brother Robinson said Mexico had not come up except as a part of Latin America. Neither did Cuba. The President concentrated more on Argentina and mentioned Peru and the army take-over there. He realizes that we have a real problem in Latin America. He seems to be worried about Communist infiltration. I asked if the President had said anything about his withdrawal of the contribution to Peru. Brother Robinson said he had said nothing about that.
At this point, I related my having attended a similar gathering with
President Dwight D. Eisenhower, when, after the President had entertained the group most graciously and brilliantly, I said to him, “Mr. President we have been greatly entertained and we do not wish to tire you. ” I thought I would give him a chance to say, “all right, we will be excused,” but President Eisenhower said, “Now President McKay, this is my gathering, and when it is time to rise, I will give the indication.” He put me very graciously in my place. We continued for another forty-five minutes.
Brother Robinson said the group waited for the President to rise. He said he had better get back to his business. Brother Robinson said he had opportunity once to meet with President Eisenhower. Comparing the two men, he said President Eisenhower seemed to be a man of greater experience and stature and a man who delegated more responsibility. President Kennedy is closer to all things. He said “I think he pretty much runs the State Department through Secretary Rusk.” The President is a very rapid reader and he absorbs a lot, even better than President Eisenhower. He said, “My concern for President Kennedy is — he seems to be seeking more and more power to be brought to Washington. That is evidenced in the legislation he has sought. ” President Eisenhower had a feeling for protecting the State’s rights domestically. Brother Robinson said he asked the President about the meeting in Seattle of 13 State Democratic Chairmen when someone said, “There is no sense in trying to cooperate with big business. ” The President said he was much disturbed about that, and he would ask his brother the Attorney General to issue a statement retracting it. Then he said, “I want to say that the government should do nothing that private enterprise can do better.” He is trying hard at the present time to heal any wounds that were opened at the time of the steel situation. There have been some unfortunate things and this gave us opportunity to bring that subject in and he made that comment.
President Brown asked, “He is pretty astute, isn’t he?”
Brother Robinson replied, “He is extremely astute and a capable strategist. He is a very capable politician. “
I asked if there is any indication that he is an opportunist or a real statesman. Brother Robinson said his youth leaves him still with some wisdom to build which will lead to statesmanship. He has been sobered these past few months by the reaction of Congress. The President’s experience with the tax cut is good. Brother Robinson sent to Pierre Salinger the Deseret News editorial on the subject. The President had much pressure from the labor unions for the tax cut. He is not an opportunist. He has given the American public a feeling that he is going to give the tax problem very careful attention. He said under no circumstances can we allow the dollar to weaken in the confidence of our people or the people of the world. We must keep it strong. He said we cannot possibly stand a recession in 1963. Some economists indicate that there is some indication leading to that situation. The tax situation may have some bearing on that.
I asked if there is any indication that the President is trying to influence local politics. Brother Robinson said that President Kennedy did not seem to want to talk about local political problems; he wanted to talk about depressed areas. He had a sheaf of notes on Utah before he came in and he occasionally referred to them. He asked what proportion of the State is Mormon, and commented that there are portions of other states where Mormons live. Brother Robinson expressed to the President the opinion that there are 300,000 or 400,000 or 500,000 Mormons in California. The President was interested in that aspect of the local situation .
I inquired briefly about the Soblen case, who went to Jerusalem when convicted of traitorous acts to this country. Brother Robinson said it is complicated by some legal and diplomatic problems which Israel and Great Britain are trying to untangle. He expressed the opinion that the matter would end with some other air line returning the man to the United States.
President Moyle made the comment that Lord Denning, the English judge who is working on the Soblen problem, is the one who is the judge who heard the Church’s appeal on the tax matter of the London Temple.
Wed., 22 Aug., 1962:
“Note: Before leaving the office, I signed a letter to be sent to all Stake Presidents in the United States pertaining to the political campaigns that are now going on in our country, and reiterated our advice given from time to time to the leaders of the Church that it is the duty of every citizen to exercise the voting franchise in accordance with his or her convictions. General Authorities do not favor one political party over another, etc. The letter points out that it is contrary to our counsel and advice that Ward, Branch, or Stake premises – chapels or other Church facilities – be used in any way for political campaigning purposes.
(See copy of letter and newspaper clippings following)”
“August 22, 1962
TO PRESIDENTS OF STAKES IN THE UNITED STATES
Dear Brethren:
The citizens of this great country are in the midst of a political campaign for the purpose of selecting candidates for office in local, State, and National positions.
We reiterate the advice given by the leaders of the Church from time to time that it is the duty of every citizen to exercise the voting franchise in accordance with his or her convictions. We have not in the past, nor do we now seek to bring coercion or compulsion upon the membership of the Church as to their political actions. On the contrary, we have urged and do now urge that all citizens, men and women, vote according to their honest convictions. The voter should study this government and make up his mind as to what he wishes his government to be, and then, if he is so minded, vote for the one he believes will most nearly carry out his ideas about our government and its free institutions.
The General Authorities of the Church as such do not favor one political party over another; the Church has no candidate or candidates for political office; we do not undertake to tell people how to vote. We do, however, most earnestly urge every citizen of our beloved country to take advantage of the privilege and opportunity to participate in the local primaries where representatives of both political parties will be selected, and that they exercise their God-given franchise to make their wishes known at the election polls.
It is contrary to our counsel and advice that ward, branch or stake premises, chapels or other Church facilities be used in any way for political campaign purposes, whether it be for speech-making, distribution of literature, or class discussions. Needless to say, we are unalterably opposed to the use of our Sacrament or other Church meetings for any such purposes, and those who attempt to use the Church facilities to further their political ambitions are injuring their cause and doing the Church a disservice.
We appeal to all candidates for public office to take notice of this instruction and conduct their campaigns in such manner as strictly to comply with this requirement pertaining to the use of our Church buildings.
Again we urge every member of the Church who is qualified to vote to exercise his God-given franchise.
Sincerely yours,
David O. McKay
Henry D. Moyle
Hugh B. Brown
The First Presidency”
Thurs., 27 Sep., 1962:
“Excerpts from remarks made by President David 0. McKay on the decision of the United States Supreme Court on Prayer in Public Schools April 1962, at the pre-Conference meeting of all General Authorities held in the Upper Room of the Salt Lake Temple, Thursday, September 27, 1962.
So we are meeting in an Upper Room today as General Authorities, having direct authority from the Savior Himself, from Peter, James, and John, John the Baptist, and other heavenly messengers. And do you know that I feel this morning that there never was a time in the history of the world when so much responsibility depended upon a group of men as upon this group this morning. Never before was there such a responsibility to declare the name of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the world, the literal Son of God, as today. I shall just cite one or two instances.
Since we met in this Upper Room last April, the Supreme Court of the United States has made a momentous decision. They have ruled as unconstitutional the offering of a prayer in the public schools, ostensibly, because it was really by a stretch of their imagination a violation of the amendment to separate the Church and State. Mr. Justice Black said it did not interfere with the Church nor with religion. The very fact that he had to make an explanation shows there was a doubt, and one man voted against it.
But whether it affects religion, whether it is a step towards Communism and atheism, we are not going to discuss today. The greatest lawyers in the land are debating that question now. But this I think we can say: The highest court in the land in the United States has cut the cord that connects the public school system with the eternal source of intelligence — God, and I think that is tragic, even to think of such a thing, in a Christian land.
The very Constitution of our land, inspired by great men, appeals to God our Eternal Father. The coin of the realm, passed in business from man to man, says “In God We Trust”. Why should they deprive children, the future citizens, the future rulers of our great nation, of the privilege every morning of just turning their minds to God, having in mind the occasion.
At the same session, they refused to make illegal the publishing of a pamphlet that displays the picture of a nude woman. We are creeping, creeping toward the condition which draws the line between our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, faith in God, His Father, the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the plan of salvation, individual salvation and exaltation, and the enemy of righteousness, sin, the false philosophy of Communism, atheistic teachings of that pernicious organization.”
Wed., 3 Oct., 1962:
Note by CM
At this meeting President McKay commented on decision of the United States Supreme Court’s regarding Prayer in New York public schools stating that that “decision severs the connecting cord between the public schools of the United States and the source of Divine Intelligence.” “This calls attention to the responsibility of revitalizing religion in the Church and in the home, making prayer much more important than it has ever been in the lives of our children,” he said.
Later, Sister Belle S. Spafford, General President of the Relief Society, reported to Clare Middlemiss, Secretary, that there was in attendance at the meeting a Relief Society Stake President from the New York Stake. She came up to Sister Spafford following the meeting and said, “I was thrilled with President McKay’s talk–is it going to be published? If it is, I should like to place a copy of it in the hands of every member of the Board of the New York Public Schools.””
Thur., 18 Oct., 1962:
10:00 – 12: 30 p. m.
Meeting of the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve was held in the office of the First Presidency.
Negroes — Baptism of
At this meeting, Elder Howard W. Hunter reported that recently a negro was baptized in the Great Lakes Mission, he being the husband of an Hawaiian woman who accepted the gospel when presented by the missionaries. This man was informed prior to baptism that he could not hold the priesthood, and had a full understanding of what the situation would be. Now it appears that this man’s father, who is a Pentecostal minister and has a congregation, has become interested in the gospel. The missionaries have not been to see him, although they have been asked to do so, and the mission president wants direction. The negro’s son, who is now a member of the Church, says his father wants to join the Church and bring in his whole congregation of colored folks.
I said that Elder N. Eldon Tanner, President of the European Mission, is arranging to go to Nigeria following the November election, and that he will be accompanied by LaMar Williams; that Brother Williams’ wife will not go with them; that, however, two other good brethren will be selected to go, taking their wives to assist in opening the work there; that four thousand of those negro people in Nigeria are asking for baptism. Elder Tanner has been requested to go to the rulers of Nigeria when he arrives there, and tell them exactly what we intend to do, and if the rulers look upon the project with favor we may have a whole nation in that country joining the Church. However, they have a right to be baptized if they are thoroughly converted, and want to come into the Church, although they do not have the right to the Priesthood and they understand that this is the case. I said the same thing applies to these negro people in the Great Lakes Mission.
We felt that it was best that nothing be done about the matter until after the November election for the reason that if we were to baptize a considerable number of negro people at this time, certain politicians might take the view that it was done to influence the negro vote in favor of George Romney in his candidacy for Governor of Michigan.”
Fri., 19 Oct., 1962:
“9:15 a.m.
Visit of Vice-President Lyndon B. Johnson
Received a courtesy call from Vice-President Lyndon B. Johnson. He was accompanied by Senator Frank E. Moss, Congressman Blaine Petersen, Democratic candidate Bruce Jenkins, William Henderson –candidate for State Attorney General, Mrs. Reese, Mrs. Stephen Smoot, John Preston Creer, and newspapermen and photographers.
As I greeted Vice President Johnson, I said to him, “I am glad you accepted the Vice Presidency.”
In the course of conversation, Mr. Johnson expressed admiration for the Church Missionary System, and explained that foreign countries, in which efforts are being made to have the United States Peace Corps serve, announced that the good will and the work of the missionaries encouraged them to hope that the Peace Corps could be successful. He stated that in six nations in the last twenty months, the decision has been made to organize their own version of a Peace Corps. He explained the rigorous course of training which volunteers to the Peace Corps of the United States must pass through successfully to prepare them for the difficult assignments they receive. He reported one 67-year-old woman who passed the test successfully, and when she was given her diploma by the Vice Presidency he said, “I just could not suppress myself and I said we are just mighty proud of you,” and she looked at me like a flippant flapper and said “I am kind of proud of myself.”
He explained that teachers, nurses, engineers, sanitary experts, trained to rigid standards, volunteer for service in the Peace Corps.
I commented upon Vice President Johnson’s mention of Peru, and said that the Church has a mission in Peru and in Chili, and that communists are encountered in the course of presenting the gospel. Mr. Johnson said that though the governments there are not dominated by Communists, there are members of the Communist party in these countries. I commented upon the plight of the Communists who do not believe in God, but who, when they become converted to the Church, must reverse themselves.
President Moyle called to the attention of Vice-President Johnson a provision of the State Department of the United States which refuses visas to young people from Australia and Great Britain when they desire to come here on missions, and yet the United States Government is promoting the Peace Corps, and asking other nations to accept our youth on missions of service. Vice President Johnson said he had not been aware of this untenable position and that he would look into it. Senator Moss reported that the matter is in process of being rectified. Vice-President Johnson said the proposal has a good deal of merit.
Vice-President Johnson asked why these young people from foreign countries are not brought in, as Fulbright scholars are admitted. President Moyle said the Church is not interested in resorting to any subterfuge to get them in, but feels that they should be admitted forthrightly on merit of the purpose for which they come.
Vice-President Johnson recalled his visit to Salt Lake City in 1960 and expressed appreciation for the opportunity to come again. He said he is always warmed and inspired by an opportunity to meet the First Presidency. He recalled that he had a roommate, Truman Young, who was a Mormon and who helped him very much at the time Senator Smoot was leader in the Senate.
He reviewed also accomplishments of the President Kennedy’s Committee on equal ernployment, of which he is chairman, in getting firms having contracts with the federal government to adopt the practice of employing people on the basis of competency and without prejudice because of race. He said there are twenty million negroes in the United States and many are untrained, they get on the relief rolls and tax payers maintain them. He said there are 290,000 government contracts upon which one hundred billion dollars are being spent. The President’s committee has power to cancel any contract after proper adjudication if discrimination is practiced in hiring. He mentioned the American Telephone and Telegraph Company and the Lockheed Aircraft Company which have been completely integrated. He said competent negroes have been hired. He said that a plant in Mississippi has been integrated similarly. He said the federal government has three million employees where the principle of integration has been established. The people are employed on the basis of their qualifications regardless of race.
Vice-President Johnson said a civil rights bill was passed in 1957 after 80 years and a right-to-vote bill in 1960. He reviewed the recent Development in Texas where minority groups elected Henry Gonzales, a Mexican, to Congress.
I said that the United States has come a long way in twenty years over conditions which prevailed formerly when negroes were prevented from voting by threat of violence if they did.
Vice-President Johnson said the negro people are developing some wise and able leaders. He said an effort is being made to persuade the labor unions to adopt the policy which will allow negroes to have membership in the unions and so the negroes can equip themselves as skilled laborers.
At this time the delegation which came with Vice-President Johnson withdrew from the meeting.
Note by Clare Middlemiss, Secretary
Vice-President Johnson talked with President McKay forty-five minutes.
As he passed through the double doors of the First Presidency’s Office with President Moyle by his side, he saw me standing in the doorway of the hall leading to President McKay’s private office. He immediately came over to shake hands with me. He thanked me for arranging for the appointment. Then, at the request of Brother Darcey U. Wright, Building Manager, he went over to sign the guest register. In the meantime Senator Frank E. Moss came through the door, and I showed him the framed picture of President John F. Kennedy, showing him speaking at the pulpit in the Tabernacle when he visited Salt Lake City as a presidential candidate in 1960. Standing back of President Kennedy in the picture are: President McKay, President Moyle, President Brown, Senator Moss, and other prominent persons who had come to hear him speak. Senator Moss was very interested in the picture and brought it to the attention of Vice-President Johnson. Mr. Johnson was very interested in the picture. Turning to me, he said: “I suppose I have overstayed my welcome.” I said, “Not at all, President McKay is always happy to meet you.” Mr. Johnson answered, “Well. if I could have more frequent visits with President McKay, I should be a better man.” I said, “All right, we shall see that you do come more often,” to which Mr. Johnson said, “Isn’t he a wonderful man?” I said, “Yes, he is; you should have seen him conducting seven sessions of the General Conference of the Church held recently.” Mr. Johnson said, “Well, I don’t know how he keeps up the pace.” (See newspaper clippings following.)
Following the departure of Vice-President Lyndon Johnson’s party, we resumed our regular meeting of the Presiding Bishopric.”
Tues., 8 Jan. 1963:
“Tuesday, January 8, 1963
MEMORANDUM OF CONFERENCE WITH PRESIDENT MCKAY AT HUNTSVILLE ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 8, 1963, AT 3:30 P.M.
UNIFIED CHURCH SCHOOL MATTERS
At a meeting held with President McKay at his home in Huntsville on January 7 where he graciously received me, the following decisions were made:
5. Letter from Jefferson Eastmond
I reminded President McKay that Jefferson Eastmond, who is Assistant Secretary of the Utah Educational Association had written him a long and critical letter about the President’s statement on Federal Aid to Education, which letter the President had sent to me. I suggested to the President that he merely make a short response to Brother Eastmond’s letter and that he give me the burden of answering that letter in detail.
6. Letter from Glenn E. Snow of National Education Association
I reminded the President that Glenn Snow of the N.E.A. had written asking the position of the Church as to Federal Aid for Parochial Schools. I suggested that I draft a letter for President McKay to send to Snow on this subject and he agreed.
Thurs., 24 Jan. 1963:
“8:30 a.m.
Meeting of the First Presidency was held. President Brown still absent in South America.
Telephone call from Senator Wallace F. Bennett, regarding John Birch Society. While in the meeting, I received a long-distance call from Senator Wallace F. Bennett, who reported for my information that the Democrats in the Senate were contemplating presenting an attack on Brother Ezra Taft Benson because of his interest in the John Birch Society. He said this was based on a Drew Pearson article concerning the First Presidency’s statement on the John Birch Society, and they have asked the Republicans to join with them, but the Republicans have refused to do so.”
Thurs., 31 Jan. 1963:
“8:00 a.m.
Sunday Closing Law
Met by appointment at his request, Brother George L. Nelson of the Legislature. We discussed the proposed Sunday Closing Law. I told Brother Nelson that as far as I know, the members of the Twelve are in favor of the passing of the law, but that we should be very careful about giving the legislature the idea that we are looking upon the law as a religious act; that we do not want the members of the Legislature to feel that we are using undue influence, and that if any of the members would like any advice on the matter they might come down and seek it. I said I felt sure the members of the Twelve would be glad to tell them where we stand. I reported to Brother Nelson that I had met Governor Clyde, not on that particular matter, but did mention the possibility of having a Sunday Closing Law, that I said to the Governor that I think Utah ought to have such a law, to which the Governor agreed.
Mon., 4 Feb. 1963:
Note by Secretary
Brother Wright reported that while driving the car he asked President McKay what he thought about Charles De Gaulle, French Leader, and of his attitude toward us regarding France joining with us on plans for missiles, etc. President McKay said that it looks to him like De Gaulle is trying to show himself as being a ‘little Hitler’. He then quoted from memory the following from the Doctrine and Covenants 121:39-45, which he said is one of the most wonderful statements ever given to man:
‘We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.
Hence, may are called, but few are chosen.
No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;
By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile —
Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy;
That he may know that thy faithfulness is stronger than the cords of death.’
President McKay then said: ‘That section alone is proof that the Prophet Joseph Smith was one of the great — there is no question about it!’
Wed., 27 Feb. 1963:
“8:30 a.m.
Was engaged in the meeting of the First Presidency. Many matters of general importance to the Church were discussed and passed upon. Among them were:
Sunday Closing Bill
I commented upon the Sunday Closing Bill before the State legislature, and said that when the Governor had asked about it, I told him that if there is any State of the Union that ought to have a Sunday closing law, it is Utah.
Wed., 13 Mar. 1963:
“8:00 a.m.
At their request, met by appointment, Dr. Moroni L. Jensen, President of the Utah Education Association, and Mr. John C. Evans, Jr., Executive Secretary. I invited them in to meet my counselors who joined in the consultation.
For the next hour we discussed the present school situation. Mr. Jensen explained the organization of Cooperative Agencies for Public Schools in its efforts to raise the professional level of school teachers, and to provide for elementary and secondary schools in the State of Utah. He said this organization has been working for 18 months to prepare a suitable bill to present to the Legislature to accomplish the purpose, to attract qualified people into the teaching profession, and to provide many necessary facilities for better education in the State. He referred to the meeting of the members of the Utah Education Association to be held in the coliseum at the Fair Grounds on Saturday which the members have requested to give them opportunity to evaluate the results of the present Legislative session.
Mr. Jensen said his purpose in coming to the First Presidency with Executive Secretary Mr. Evans is to say that the teachers are not interested alone in better salaries, but also in a better educational program for the children of the State. He said that the Saturday meeting may turn out to be one where the teachers will feel that enough has not been done for education through the Legislature, and will suggest that services be withheld with the beginning of the next school year.
I said that that would be a fatal thing to do, and Mr. Jensen said many of the membership feel that this is the only way to bring the problems of education and the needs of education in Utah to the attention of the public.
I asked him what their visit this morning has to do with the teachers and the AFL-CIO. Mr. Evans said that this is one of the greatest concerns of the organization. He said if teachers do not get some sort of satisfaction, they may feel that they are not able to carry on as professional people. At the present time, the American Federation of Teachers would not have more than a handful of members. There are significant numbers in Salt Lake City who, he estimated, would be about 500 and 600, are waiting to see what will be done for education this year before giving the AFL-CIO encouragement to come in.
Mr. Evans said the history of Utah schools prepared by Dr. Moffatt is intimately associated with the Church. He said they are proud of the professional manner of the teachers in facing their responsibilities, but there comes a time when the significant number of people are beginning to question whether it is more professional to continue to take part in the program which is entirely inadequate, and which prevents their doing a professional job because of lack of material and working conditions, and because of the great load which makes it almost impossible to do the job they are prepared to do.
A long discussion then ensued regarding ways and means of meeting the problems that are facing them.
I asked Mr. Jensen what could be done, and he said that they would not come here with any egotistical opinion that they could counsel us as far as this is concerned, but that they have felt so often that just a favorable editorial in the Deseret News or actually refraining from downright criticism would help. The CAPS program has not been given any kind of support by either newspaper, despite the fact that there has been grass roots meetings in 35 of the 40 school districts.
In answer to my inquiry, Mr. Evans said the bill is in shifting committees in the House of Representatives. He said education should not be political, and that they feel that regardless of political party the leaders of the State should be in sympathy with providing the best kind of education, but the legislators vote almost wholly on party lines. He reviewed the action taken in the committees of the Senate, and the House on the Governor’s bill indicating the political element in consideration thereof. He said that it is a one-man rule, the governor is running the Legislature as well as his own office.
I asked if there is a possibility that the organization will attempt to force the Governor’s hand, and Mr. Evans said there is, and that the school people have tried to maintain a professional attitude towards this problem.
He said that Saturday the membership at the UEA is going to decide whether it is more professional to take just what the Governor is willing to give and come back into the classroom next Fall knowing that there is no possibility of doing the kind of professional job of teaching that really needs to be done, or whether it will be more professional to say there comes a time and a place beyond which we do not think it is professional to continue to teach under these conditions.
Mr. Evans expressed thanks to us for receiving them and giving so much time to them, and I said that we are deeply interested in education, and that we do not want to see our teachers go on strike. Mr. Evans said education will be irreparably damaged; that they do not want that either, but time is so short now, and that they feel they are closer to the pulse of our people than anyone else, and thanked us for giving them an opportunity to communicate this matter to us as to what would be best to do. They said they have sat on the lid of this power keg as long as they can unless something is done with the Governor.
I asked them if they had spoken to the Deseret News, and Mr. Evans said he had had a conference with Preston Robinson, and his whole staff of editorial writers, and that they had sent down their research documents and bulletins but that they get meagre notice. I asked them what their immediate question is, and Mr. Evans said that if there is anything that could be done to that end that it would be the saving factor. Raising the state level to 15 million, and give opportunity to the local districts to do more, he said, would be helpful.
I think we had a very profitable meeting, and that it will have the effect of modifying the action of the meeting to be held next Saturday by members of the teachers’ association. I am sure the CIO Labor Organization would like the teachers to join the union of the Utah Education Association, and it is hoped that they will not do that. I think that these representatives of the Utah Education Association left with a good spirit and will do the right thing. I wish that we could help them to get more money, but this is a matter that is in the hands of the Legislature.
The next day at the meeting of the First Presidency, we considered with favor the advisability of publishing a suitable editorial in the Deseret News emphasizing the giving of the local communities authority to act in the interest of the schools, and to take steps to keep the schools out of the control of labor organizations.
At this time these men withdrew from the meeting.
Tues., 9 Apr. 1963:
“UEA Officers Claim of Approval of the First Presidency
President Moyle mentioned a claim reported to have been by Mr. Jensen, President of the Utah Education Association, that the First Presidency of the Church approve their course urging teachers to refuse to sign contracts. President Moyle said the UEA is reported to be attempting to have graduates of the schools of education of the University of Utah and Utah State University sign powers of attorney giving the UEA the right to represent them in teaching contract negotiations. The advice given and expressly noted to the effect that encouraging the teachers to strike would be disastrous was reviewed from the meeting with the First Presidency attended by Mr. Jensen and Mr. Evans.”
Thurs., 11 Apr. 1963:
“Tobacco Companies Mailing Packages of Cigarettes to Homes in the Redondo Stake (California).
President Moyle stated that President Prestwich of the Redondo Stake had related that Bishop Alfred R. Ostergren had received from a tobacco company through the mail a package of cigarettes. He was very much concerned about the effect upon the children in families receiving this form of advertising and inducement to use cigarettes. Apparently others had received the same kind of complimentary package. President Prestwich asked advice in the matter.
I said I think we ought to take action, and notify our Congressmen to get a bill passed to stop this sort of thing. President Brown suggested that other Senators and Congressmen be asked to cooperate.
I said that we had better not sit by and do nothing. It was agreed that we present the subject to the Council today.”
Fri., 12 Apr. 1963:
“11:00 a.m.
BYU Meeting – Regarding Utah Education Association
Held a special meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Brigham Young University to consider the request of the Utah Education Association that the Brigham Young University encourage its students who are going into education to refrain from entering into individual contracts with school boards in this State, and to give powers of attorney to local teachers’ associations so that if the present ‘controversy over school finance has not been satisfactorily resolved ‘from the standpoint of the UEA, teachers may refuse en masse to enter ‘into the actual performance of duties until negotiations between the local education association and schools districts have come to a satisfactory conclusion.’
At 3:30 p.m. that same day we held a meeting with the following:
President Ernest L. Wilkinson of the BYU; Royden Derrick, Executive Committee, University of Utah; Wilford M. Burton, Executive Committee, University of Utah; Leland B. Flint, Board of Trustees University of Utah; Henry Hurren, Executive Committee, Utah State University; and Alma Sonne, Chairman of the Board, Utah State University.
Public statements were issued by these schools in criticism of the UEA action, particularly of the letter they had written to Utah teacher-training institutions asking them to support the UEA by informing teacher trainees of the situation and advising them to sign only conditional contracts, and to turn their bargaining rights over to local UEA units.
It was decided that a public statement be issued protesting such actions by the UEA. (see newspaper clippings following, also letter from Clyde Sandgren of the BYU).
Friday, April 12, 1963
April 10, 1963
President David O. McKay
47 East South Temple
Salt Lake City, Utah
Dear President McKay:
Pursuant to your authorization, I am today sending notices to all members of the BYU Board of Trustees that we will hold a special meeting of said Board at 10:00 a.m. on Friday of this week, April 12.
At the suggestion of President Wilkinson, I am informing the Brethren that the meeting will last approximately one-half hour and will deal with the request by Utah Education Association that BYU encourage its students who are going into education to refrain from entering into individual contracts with school boards in this state and to give powers of attorney to local teachers’ associations so that if the present ‘controversy over school finance has not been satisfactorily resolved’ from the standpoint of UEA, teachers may refuse en masse to enter ‘into the actual performance of duties until negotiations between the local education association and school districts have come to a satisfactory conclusion.’
Kindest personal regards.
Sincerely your brother,
Clyde D. Sandgren
Vice-President and General Counsel
CDS:er”
Mon., 15 Apr. 1963:
“10:00 a.m.
Left for home. Later, my son Lawrence came and had me sign income papers for both the State and Federal taxes. It is unbelievable that the government can take so much money from the people! Something must be done about the power that has been given to them.”
Fri., 10 May 1963:
United States Department of State
On May 1, 1963, I received a letter from Dean Rusk, U.S. Secretary of State, extending a personal invitation for me to attend a Foreign Policy Conference for representatives of non-government organizations interested in international affairs to ascertain their thinking and exchange thoughts on current world developments. The letter stated that President Kennedy and ranking officials of the Department of State and other government agencies would participate in this conference.
In answer to this invitation, I dictated the following telegram to Clare:
‘Honorable Dean Rusk
Secretary of State
Washington, D.C.
I appreciate your kind invitation of May 1, 1963, to attend Foreign Policy
Conferences, but pressing appointments and Mrs. McKay’s illness deprive me of
of the privilege of attending this important gathering.’ (see copies of letter and
telegram following.)
Tues., 11 June 1963:
“8:15 a.m.
Education – State Board of – Meeting Regarding UEA Situation
By appointment at their request, I met Brother Moroni Brown, Chairman of the State Board of Education, and Lynn Richards, member of the Board.
They came in about the teacher situation in the schools in Utah. They said that the situation is quite serious; that the Utah Educational Association officers have been insisting that the teachers give the UEA the right to vote for the teachers on the controversy that has arisen between the Governor and the UEA — the officers of the UEA saying that the schools will not open at the usual time next Fall unless certain conditions are met, and those conditions will be specified by the UEA.
I said: ‘The Governor’s stand is right in upholding the law as passed by the Legislators — that the Legislature is composed of able men, duly elected by the citizens. In the Legislature they unanimously passed certain resolutions effecting the educational welfare of the State, and the Governor’s stand by the decision of that Legislature is right, and he should be upheld in that. The UEA should wait until the Legislature meets again at which time they can present their proposition.’ I said further, ‘I commend you, Brother Brown, as Chairman of the State Board of Education and you, Brother Richards, in your stand that you have a right to put a plea before the people and let them vote on the question, and do not have any thought of having the teachers fail to meet their obligations as teachers in our schools.’
I said further, ‘You need not have any concern about Dr. Moroni L. Jensen, President of the UEA, and Mr. John C. Evans, Executive Secretary of the UEA ‘saving face’ — they haven’t any face to save.’ If these teachers who have sold their right to be represented will not come back and teach school, we shall get enough old teachers to take charge of the schools to insure the people that the schools will be open. These brethren went away feeling pretty well.
Note by CM
During a discussion in the Committee on Expenditures meeting on June 11, 1963, regarding the accepting of ‘Hill Burton Funds’ (government funds) for use in the improvement of the Logan Nursing Home, President McKay made the following statement:
‘If our Government continues on the path it has been following
(referring to deficit spending), the end of our present system
will be just like that which took place in Germany in 1923. At
that time, we (the Church), purchased a large hotel including
a chapel and furnishings on a $1 to 1,000,000 Marks ratio,
and got this property for a ‘song’.
The German Government paid its debts with inflated Marks
which destroyed the savings of private investors and those
who held life insurance policies. In the end there is no
other way out of our problem than for the people to pay it.'”
Thurs., 13 June 1963:
“6:00 a.m.
Arrived at the office. Read many letters and memorandums on my desk. Also read telegram received from President John F. Kennedy inviting me to attend meeting of religious leaders to be held in Washington to discuss civil rights matters. (see Diary on this day, page 2)
7:30 a.m.
Brother J. Willard Marriott of Washington, D.C. came in for a few moments. We talked about the Civil Rights and the negro problem and disturbing conditions as they exist in the government today. I took the liberty of letting him read President Kennedy’s telegram. He agreed with me that it would not be wise for me to go.
9:00 to 9:50 a.m.
Following the departure of Brother and Sister Wilkins we held the regular meeting of the First Presidency. The following matters were taken up:
White House Meeting with Nation’s Religious Leaders – Telegram of Invitation from President John F. Kennedy.
I asked that the following telegraphic invitation from President John F. Kennedy be read:
‘At four o’clock on Monday, June 17, I am meeting with a
group of religious leaders to discuss certain aspects of the
nation’s civil rights problem. This matter merits serious
and immediate attention, and I would be pleased to have
you attend the meeting to be held in the east room of the
White House. Please advise whether you will be able to
attend.’
I then read the answer that I propose to send to President Kennedy, as follows:
‘Appreciate telegram June twelfth extending invitation to
attend meeting of religious leaders to discuss certain
aspects of the Nation’s Civil Rights problem. Owing to
health problem, will you please grant President Hugh
B. Brown, member of the First Presidency of the Church,
privilege to represent me next Monday at four o’clock.’
I suggested that President Brown arrange his affairs to be ready to go to Washington if President Kennedy wishes a representative.
The above wire was sent this morning to President Kennedy; however, no answer was ever received from him, so President Brown did not go to the meeting. To further show the lack of his personal attention to these matters, I received a letter signed by President Kennedy, dated June 21, 1963, saying, ‘Dear Dr. McKay: I was pleased that you were able to accept my invitation to meet earlier this week to discuss the expanded role which the religious community can play in helping to solve the difficult problems which face us all in the matter of race relations,…’ (see copies of telegrams and copy of letter from President Kennedy following.)
2:00 p.m.
Left my private office to talk to Brother T. Bowring Woodbury, who wanted to know if there would be any objection to inviting Governor George Romney of Michigan out here to talk at the Brigham Young University Student Assembly, and at the same time have him speak at a Republican Rally dinner.
I told Brother Woodbury that I think it would be very unwise to do this.
Thursday, June 13, 1963
(Original in ‘Kennedy Section’ of Scrapbook)
Western Union Telegram
148A PDT Jun 12 63 LAO32 BAO20
B WWY125 WWZ19 WWZ19 GVT NL PD WUX THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON
DC 11
DR DAVID O MCKAY, PRESIDENT, REPORT DELIVERY
CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS 47 EAST SOUTH TEMPLE ST SALT LAKE CITY UTAH
AT FOUR O’CLOCK ON MONDAY, JUNE 17, I AM MEETING WITH A GROUP OF RELIGIOUS LEADERS TO DISCUSS CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE NATION’S CIVIL RIGHTS PROBLEM. THIS MATTER MERITS SERIOUS AND IMMEDIATE ATTENTION AND I WOULD BE PLEASED TO HAVE YOU ATTEND THE MEETING TO BE HELD IN THE EAST ROOM OF THE WHITE HOUSE. PLEASE ADVISE WHETHER YOU WILL BE ABLE TO ATTEND
JOHN F KEENDY.
FCD CORPORATION OF THE PRESIDENT
JUNE 13, 1963
PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON, D.C.
APPRECIATE TELEGRAM JUNE TWELFTH EXTENDING INVITATION TO ATTEND MEETING OF RELIGIOUS LEADERS TO DISCUSS CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE NATION’S CIVIL RIGHTS PROBLEM. OWING TO HEALTH PROBLEM WILL YOU PLEASE GRANT PRESIDENT HUGH B. BROWN, MEMBER OF THE FIRST PRESIDENCY OF THE CHURCH, PRIVILEGE TO REPRESENT ME NEXT MONDAY AT FOUR O’CLOCK.
DAVID O. MCKAY, PRESIDENT
THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS
Thursday, June 13, 1963
The White House
Washington
June 21, 1963
Dear Dr. McKay:
I was pleased that you were able to accept my invitation to meet earlier this week to discuss the expanded role which the religious community can play in helping to solve the difficult problems which face us all in the matter of race relations. I was encouraged by the support demonstrated at the meeting and by the progress which has already been made. It is my hope that as a result of the meeting more intensive activity in the area of race relations will be undertaken by the religious community.
Although I did not have the opportunity to talk personally with every one who was present, the generally cooperative atmosphere of the gathering was reassuring, as was the fact that so many busy religious leaders took their time to come to Washington to discuss this vital national issue.
Sincerely,
/s/ John Kennedy
Dr. David O. McKay
President
Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints
47 East South Temple Street
Salt Lake City 1, Utah”
Sat., 15 June 1963:
“Following Brother Smith’s departure from the office, I made preparation for tomorrow’s MIA meeting to be held under the direction of the First Presidency.
While engaged in this, I received a telephone call from my secretary, Clare, who reported that President Brown had tried to reach me about his trip to Washingon, D.C. She said that no answer to the telegram I sent to President Kennedy has been received. Evidently, the President does not want a representative, so I told Clare to have President Brown call me at the Hotel. A little later he called and it was decided that he (President Brown) should accept his speaking appointment in Seattle, and that we would not wait any longer for an answer from President Kennedy.”
Mon., 17 June 1963:
“Monday, June 17, 1963
Statement made by President David O. McKay on the recent ruling of the United States Supreme Court on Prayer.
For a hundred years boys and girls born in America, and they who later obtained citizenship in this great country have felt that they are ‘endowed by their Creator’ with certain inalienable rights; that among these are: ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,’ and that these rights are endowed by our Creator.
Recent rulings of the Supreme Court would have all reference to a Creator eliminated from our public schools and public offices.
It is a sad day when the Supreme Court of the United States would discourage all reference in our schools to the influence of the phrase ‘divine providence’ as used by our founders of the Declaration of Independence.
Evidently, the Supreme Court misinterprets the true meaning of the First Amendment, and are now leading a Christian Nation down the road to Atheism.
Monday, June 17, 1963
Comments Made By President David O. McKay in Council Meeting held in the Salt Lake Temple, June 20, 1963
On The Ruling on Prayer in Schools by the United States Supreme Court:
‘The President mentioned that since our last meeting, a decision had been made by the Supreme Court that it is unlawful to have prayer in the schools. The President said he thought it was terrible in a Christian country for the Supreme Court of the United States to look with disfavor upon our pleading for assistance from the Almighty in the presence of students.
‘The President said that he was not too greatly disappointed that we cannot do it, because where it has been done it was without much spirit, but the fact that we do it reminds those boys and girls that we acknowledge the existence of our Heavenly Father. For a whole generation to grow up in secular schools with the thought that religion is a thing apart from their lives, he felt was a step toward atheism, because parents are not discharging their responsibilities, and the boys and girls who need that religious impression will not be at Sunday School or church at any time, and therefore we separate them entirely from the presence of the Almighty and he thought that that was a tragedy. He thought that it was terrible that because some atheistic woman objected to her boys being subjected to having to listen to prayer in school that such an action should be taken. It seemed to him, he said, that the Supreme Court jumped at an opportunity to take us down the road to atheism, that it is a misinterpretation of the First Amendment, that the Founding Fathers never did approve of combining Church and State, but that all they were against was making a State Church.
‘President Joseph Fielding Smith moved that the Council approve President McKay’s views. The Brethren voted their unanimous approval.’ (From Council Minutes, dated June 20, 1963)
Monday, June 17, 1963
Comments made by President David O. McKay in Council Meeting held in the Salt Lake Temple, June 27, 1963, on the Ruling on Prayer in Schools by the United States Supreme Court.
Plan for Counteracting Supreme Court Decision
President McKay mentioned the recent decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that it is contrary to the Constitution that prayers or other matters of a religious nature be used in our public schools. The President said that our young people now are subjected more than ever to conditions in society, here in America particularly, making it necessary to leave God out of scholastic training, and said he felt that the recent ruling is a very serious one indeed, that it is a misinterpretation of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, and that while we all agree that religion should not be made a State religion, we have adopted that attitude all our lives, to say that it is wrong to refer to Deity, or even to pray to Him in school, is Atheism. He said that the worst part of the ruling now is that young boys and girls will grow up feeling that it is unnecessary to appeal to Deity for help in their education.
The President said the best way we can counteract this is to hold special meetings with our parents during the Conferences, and at every other opportunity, and tell them that the responsibility is just as the Prophet Joseph gave it, that parents who have children in Zion and ‘that teach them not to understand the doctrine of repentance, faith in Christ the Son of the living God, and of baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost … the sin be upon the heads of parents.’ The President said that the General Authorities of the Church should call parents together in the various stakes and tell that that they have a greater responsibility than heretofore in teaching the children in the homes. The President said that parents who need this instruction do not get a proper realization of their responsibility from a public sermon, that they should be called together in special meetings during the Quarterly Conferences. President McKay said that the Brethren should leave to the Spirit the matter of telling them what they should do.
Monday, June 17, 1963
COMMENTS MADE DURING THE COMMITTEE ON EXPENDITURES MEETING HELD JUNE 25, 1963
Commenting on the recent Supreme Court ruling outlawing prayer in schools, President McKay stated, ‘The unintentional result is that our schools will become atheistic and the students will get the impression from our schools that a belief in God is not a part of life. This is a fatalistic tendency in the United States.’
**************
President McKay later commented, ‘If we eliminate God, we have no place to go but to the State and that is an arbitary Institution.’
**************
Still later in the meeting, he commented, ‘We had not ought to have let the power of taxation get out of our hands locally.’
**************”
Tues., 18 June 1963:
“7:00 a.m.
President Joseph Fielding Smith came in, principally to tell me that he heartily approved of the statement I had made to the newspapers on the ruling of the United States Supreme Court on Prayer in Public Schools.
Wed., 19 June 1963:
“8:30 a.m.
Went into the First Presidency’s room for the regular meeting of the First Presidency. President Moyle had brought in James E. Faust, President of the Cottonwood Stake, and asked him to explain what he had told him earlier. President Faust said that as President of the Utah Bar Association he had received telegraphic invitation from President Kennedy to attend a conference at the White House on civil rights legislation.
I told Brother Faust that he should go and find out what President Kennedy is trying to do. I said that I did not like to see a law passed which will make the Hotel men violators of the law if they refuse to provide accommodations for a negro when their hotels are filled with white people, or restaurant men made violaters when they decline to serve colored people.
I said that business men ought to be free to run their own businesses, and not become law breakers if they choose to employ certain people; that if we have such a law as that, then it is unfair to the majority of the citizens of this country.
President Moyle expressed the opinion that it is unconstitutional because it takes away a man’s right to contract, and to do business. He said there is no such power given to the Federal Government by the Constitution.”
Tues., 2 July 1963:
“8:30 a.m.
Civil Rights – President James E. Faust reports meeting with President Kennedy.
Went into the office of the First Presidency where we met by appointment President James E. Faust of Cottonwood Stake, and past president of the Utah Bar Association, who attended at the invitation of President John F. Kennedy, the White House Conference on legislation for Civil Rights. He reported that 244 leaders of the bar from all parts of the country, including Puerto Rico, Alaska, and Hawaii, were present. These included members of the Colored Bar Association. The President was accompanied by Vice-President Lyndon Johnson, and Attorney General Robert Kennedy. President Kennedy conducted the meeting which met for two hours. The essence of the meeting was the President’s advice that members of the bar associations of the country can be helpful by taking appropriate action on a local basis to solve racial problems in the communities and states of the country. He thinks communication between the races can take place on a local level in the local communities and states and by these means each community can solve its own problems and it may not be necessary for the Federal Government to act. If solution can come from the ground up it will be better than to come from the top down. If the solution can come that way, federal legislation may be unnecessary. President Faust commented that he gained the impression that the President had some doubt that his recommendations for legislation can be enacted.
He made some specific recommendations to the colored people. He said they are creating a social problem in the United States; they drop out of school; 20% are on relief; this continues from one generation to another; they have no incentive to get themselves the necessary skills, and as a consequence they are not holding up their responsibility as citizens. President Faust said that if ‘I had been a colored man, I would have been upset because he was hard on them.’
The President also recommended that an informal committee be organized to function within the local areas and that lawyers participate on this in the local committees. The President said he had met with labor, business and Church leaders. He reommended that lawyers be catalysts in the local communities and keep the lines of communication open between the two races so matters would not break down and get into a shooting proposition. He recommended that the lawyers with public officials and also with the local committees do something to work on the problem of school dropouts, and to provide legal aid and counsel for indigent colored people; to uphold respect for law, not only by white people but by colored people as well. It was thought he was referring to the demonstrations throughout the country. He said that breaches of the peace cannot be committed by negroes any more than they can be by whites and that he intends to enforce the law. He urged that colored men be admitted to the bar without regard for color.
The Vice-President spoke. He is head of the Civil Rights Committee.
President Kennedy asked the attorney general to speak. The attorney general was immoderate.
The President opened the conference up for discussion. The men from Puerto Rico commented that they had come from a part of the country where the problem does not exist. Some of the delegates had written speeches or statements; the President asked them to summarize them and said that he would be pleased to receive their statements. The discussion went back and forth until everyone had opportunity to present his ideas. Then the President invited all who were present to be part of the informal local committees and said he would not be expected to support the legislative program, but they can function by helping to keep the lines of communication open. He called upon the president of the American Bar Association — the bar commissioners had previously authorized appointment to the committee of the American Bar, and President Faust was invited to be a member of that committee. This special meeting of the American Bar will meet in Chicago a week from this coming Friday (July 12). The president of the Bar Association appointed Harrison Tweed, a distinguished New York lawyer, and Bryan Seigel, to be co-chairmen of this committee.
The President left the meeting and the two men, chairmen of the Bar Association committee, spoke briefly and invited members of the Bar to come into the Rose Garden and talk more informally.
Afterward, the President gave the delegation freedom to see his office and the group was given rather free reign to go where they may want to go. Mrs. Lincoln, the President’s secretary, and Pierre Salinger were present. President Faust saw the children playing nearby.
President Faust said he had a sense of responsibility to know whether or not it was the desire of the First Presidency that he accept membership on the committee to which he was appointed. He said he does not anticipate trouble, but he does anticipate problems will arise. He expressed the opinion that the present legislative program of the President is good as far as it goes with relation to educational aspects and communication. He expressed the opinion that it intrudes upon individual rights in the matter of making private contracts.
The Attorney General is more extreme than the President. The President handled the situation with considerable ability and grace.
I told President Faust that I think it will be all right for him to join the committee. President Faust said he felt it encumbered upon him to accept the request of the American Bar Association and since the other legislation was involved he thought the First Presidency should guide him. President Faust said that in the Church there is little problem. He said they have Brother Abe Howe and are grateful he is doing as well as he is.
I said that we are on the fringe of having the NAACP on us, and that I had heard recently something enlightening about Nigeria. My cousin, who is going to Nigeria to teach in the university, will be about one thousand miles from the area where the ‘members’ are who call themselves The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. There are about 5,000 of them and they have been active. I further said that we are going to respond to their call for missionaries to go down there, but they have been putting some obstacles in our way. We have concluded that we will let them make the advance and extend the invitation, which they are going. They wanted certain conditions with which we would not comply. I said that this young man told me he had been studying conditions down there before he accepted the position of teaching in the university and there is united effort since Nigeria received independence from Great Britain to keep aloof from the ‘white man’s yolk’, so they are going to resent the putting white people over the negro groups. This is the clash. We find resentment right from the head of the government if we send down white people to be bishops and presidents of branches. They can take care of the auxiliaries, but they will resent having a white man preside over them.
I told President Faust in the meantime to join the committee and keep us informed. President Faust asked to whom he should report, and I told him to report to the First Presidency.
President Fuast then departed from the meeting.
11:00 a.m.
Left for home. I feel it necessary to get some reserve energy to meet the heavy responsibilities before me.
Soon after I arrived home, I received a call from Sister Belle S. Spafford who said that she had received an invitation from President Kennedy to attend a meeting of representatives of women’s organizations to discuss the Civil Rights question. I told her she should accept the invitation, and report to me, as did Attorney James E. Faust this morning. I also said that I had received an invitation by wire asking me to attend a meeting of ministers on the same question. “
Tues., 16 July 1963:
“Utah Education Association
Was pleased to note in this morning’s paper that the crisis in the teacher situation in Utah is being satisfactorily resolved, and that the Utah Education Association leaders said they would recommend that teachers ‘proceed with negotiation of contracts for the 1963-64 school year.'”
Wed., 11 Sept. 1963:
“Syndicated Newspaper Article by Clare Boothe Luce regarding Political Future of George Romney and the stand of the Church on the Negro.
President Moyle read a clipping from the Arizona Republican dated September 1, 1963, being a syndicated article by Clare Boothe Luce, about George Romney’s ’64 deadlock choice, the article being based upon the writer’s erroneous understanding of the position of the Church upon the Negro question. (see September 13, 1963, Diary for President Moyle’s letter to Mrs. Luce.)”
Fri., 13 Sept. 1963:
“Regular Meeting of the First Presidency held.
Luce, Clare Boothe – Letter to her regarding her article on Church Position on the Negro.
President Moyle read a draft of a letter he had prepared, addressed to Clare Boothe Luce about her syndicated article written for the North American Newspaper Agency on George Romney’s chances, and this with reference to the position of the Church on the Negro question.
I suggested a minor revision, and approved the sending of the letter. (see following copies of the letter and article written by Mrs. Luce.)
Friday, September 13, 1963
September 13, 1963
Mrs. Clare Boothe Luce
Ridgefield, Connecticut
Dear Mrs. Luce:
Your article on George Romney, syndicated by the North American Newspaper Alliance and appearing in the Arizona Republic on Sunday, September 1st, 1963, was sent to me by a friend who commended your article to me. Your article so pleased me that I immediately took the opportunity to read it to President David O. McKay and President Hugh B. Brown. We were all equally pleased with your commendation of the membership of the Church and your somewhat detailed knowledge concerning us and our peculiarities.
It is our belief that the Mormon doctrine certainly does not contradict the spirit or the letter of the Constitution, and is not at variance with the teachings on the quality of souls of all other Christian denominations. This we do not believe to be one of our peculiarities.
For the article in its entirety we are deeply grateful to you and wanted to extend to you our appreciation. It is our sincere desire that you might know more about that phase of your article which caused you to feel that our doctrines ‘contradict the spirit if not the letter of the Constitution.’ We did not feel to presume upon your time unless you so desire us to do. If you would kindly indicate a desire to know more about our doctrine on negroes, it would be my very great privilege to send you somewhat in detail our position on this matter.
I hope it will not be presumptuous for me to say at this time that we baptize any worthy negro into the Church on the same basis of worthiness which we do all other people. It is a tenet of our faith that baptism when performed by one having the authority opens the door to the Celestial or highest kingdom of God. We, therefore, integrate ourselves to our negro brethren and sisters not only for time but for all eternity. We, therefore, may be pardoned when we say that we have more to offer the negro than any other church.
From the beginning of time the conferring of the priesthood of God upon others has been a selective process. We, therefore, believe that our position on the priesthood is rather one of selection than of discrimination. The Lord gave to Adam the priesthood but did not confer it upon Eve. We look upon the priesthood as a sacred trust given to us by the Lord to be conferred upon those whom the Lord designates.
You will recall in biblical history that as among the sons of Jacob it was Levi and the tribe of Levi to whom the Lord gave the Lesser Priesthood. That is to say, the Aaronic Priesthood. There would be no hesitancy upon the part of the priesthood of the Church today to confer the priesthood upon the negro were we so authorized.
There is not the slightest possibility of our announcing any revelation upon this subject or changing the direction which the Lord has already given, until the Lord actually so directs. Until a revelation upon this subject is actually received no change can be made. When or if such a revelation is to be received, obviously we do not know.
Thanking you once again for the consideration that you have already given us, I am,
Very sincerely yours,
Henry D. Moyle
HDM:ldp
Friday, September 13, 1963
CLARE BOOTHE LUCE SAYS ROMNEY ’64 DEADLOCK CHOICE
Phoenix, Sunday, Sept. 1, 1963
The Arizona Republic
Clare Booth Luce is one of America’s most brilliant women, a former congresswoman, ambassador, authoress, and playwright. In the following article she sizes up the pros and cons of George Romney as the GOP presidential nominee in ’64.
By CLARE BOOTHE LUCE
North American Newspaper Alliance
New York – In the event of a Goldwater-Rockefeller deadlock for the 1964 GOP presidential nomination, Gov. George Romney of Michigan looms as the most likely compromise candidate.
Successive Gallup Polls in recent months show that while he is still running a poor third, he is steadily gaining support not only from Republicans but from independents.
The governor has much to recommend him. He has proved himself a solid vote-getter in an important industrial state that has had a Democratic governor since 1948. It is reasonable to suppose that in 1964 Romney could swing Michigan’s 20 electoral votes into the Republican column.
His ideas on domestic and foreign issues are, at this point, necessarily a trifle vague. But it is getting about that politically he is a solid middle-of-the-roader, ready, if necessary, to make a pragmatic swerve a little to the left or right to pass his opponent on the campaign stretch.
American Motors is a great industrial complex. Running it has always required statesmanlike qualities. There can be no question that the former chairman of the board is a man of great executive ability whose experience gives him a wide understanding of the national and international economic situation, and what is most important, of the role of the labor unions in the American Power Structure. Romney has considerable charm, abundant vigor, and looks more like a president than any man since Warren G. Harding. His devoted and handsome wife, four fine looking children and five grandchildren are all gilt-edged assets in a presidential campaign.
The governor is also a member in high standing of the Mormon faith, or the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. As religionists, the Mormons are a people of sterling, even extraordinary virtues. Their courage, moral and physical, their self reliance, honesty, sobriety, their rectitude in their dealings with non-Mormons, their sense of civic and community responsibility, their unfailing charity and support of their own (represented by voluntary tithings) are proverbial. If Romney should become the Republican Party’s standard bearer, one teaching of his church, unhappily, is bound to open a religious issue: The Mormon doctrine on the Negro which teachers that Negroes have souls inferior to souls of men of all other races.
It may be said that the letter of the U.S. Constitution derives from the spirit of the Declaration of Independence which holds that ‘all men are created equal,’ and consequently are ‘endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights…’ The Mormon doctrine certainly contradicts the spirit if not the letter of the Constitution, and is at variance with the teachings on the equality of souls of all other Christian denominations.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was founded in 1830 by Joseph Smith. Mormons derive their doctrines from the King James version of the Old and New Testaments plus Smith’s revelations and writings. According to the Mormon belief, the Book of Mormon and certain writings of Abraham and Moses not found in the Christian Bible were revealed to Prophet Smith by God. Thus, Smith’s Book of Mormon, ‘Doctrines and Covenants’ and ‘Pearl of Great Price,’ together with the Christian Bible compose Mormon scripture.
Joseph Smith derived his Mormon doctrine on Negroes from Genesis, Chapter 9, in which Noah cursed Ham, one of his three sons, saying, ‘Cursed by Canaan (the son of Ham); a slave of slaves shall he be to his brothers.’ In ‘Pearl of Great Price,’ the Negroes are identified as the cursed descendants of Noah’s son Ham, bearing forever the ‘Curse of Cain’ on their brows: A black skin.
The Mormons have no professional priesthood. A Mormon male is baptized at age 8, ordained at 12 to an office in the Mormon priesthood. At age 15, he is qualified to become a teacher: at 18, a priest, and at 20, an elder. This priesthood and church office is both the prerogative and duty of all Mormon males, except Negroes, who, consequent to prophet Smith’s doctrine on Negroes, are barred from the priesthood as a race accursed. The Mormons have absolutely no other racial prejudice, although certain inferiorities also attach to women.
The Mormon heaven consists of three circles or states of glory. Only Mormons are believed to be able to enter heaven. A Negro male Mormon may enter the first, or outer circle. But the inner two are reserved for non-Negro Mormons. Consequently, regardless of his merits, as the Negro is not eligible for the priesthood, he must therefore remain in the outer circle, segregated even in the sight of the Almighty.
The Mormons, vigorous proselytizers, have missions all over the world, but none to any Negro nation. As of today, their only mission to the ‘dark continent’ is in apartheid South Africa.
It is not surprising, in view of this, that of the almost two million members of the Mormon church in the United States, only a few hundred are Negroes. And these may neither marry one another in the Mormon temple, nor marry anyone of another race, without losing their Mormon membership.
Negroes represent nearly 9 per cent of the population of Michigan. Romney’s personal record in American Motors, and later in his gubernatorial campaign, has been one of scrupulous fairness to Negroes. Indeed he has made great efforts in their economic behalf. In his campaign he repeatedly stressed the legal equality of the Negro as a citizen. His success can be judged by the average percentage of Negro votes cast for Democratic candidates in the previous 14 years, as against those cast for Romney in the 1962. Eighty-six per cent voted Democratic in the Romney election.
A hopeful sign for Gov. Romney’s candidacy is that his co-religionists seem to be having second thoughts on the subject, and there are indications that the Mormon doctrine on Negroes may soon be repealed.
The elected president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is considered the infallible voice or prophet of the church in matters of doctrine.
Hugh B. Brown, one of two counselors to President David McKay, said recently, ‘We are in the midst of a survey looking towards the possibility of admitting Negroes (to the priesthood)…believing as we do in Divine Revelation through the president of the church, we will await his decision…It would be a doctrinal revision of Mormonism of a magnitude matching the abandonment of polygamy.’ (The Mormons abandoned polygamy in 1890, as a result of the Supreme Court decision in a hard-fought Mormon case of multiple marriage. The decision made polygamy illegal in America.)
In recent years many Mormons have vigorously protested the Negro doctrine of their church. It is not at all unlikely that in the months to come President McKay may have a Divine Revelation on the subject which will assure the Negroes equality of soul with that of men of other races. And those who know Romney personally believe that he is devoutly praying that such will be the case.
Meanwhile, until Romney has made his own view on this controversial Mormon doctrine as unmistakably clear to the nation as Sen. Kennedy made clear his view on the separation of church and state, the Romney candidate will be handicapped. And in the absence of clarification, it should not come as an unpleasant surprise to Romney and his backers that Negroes and most non-Negroes will be bound to feel that Romney, as well as his church, consents to hold the human dignity of the Negroes in low esteem. Consequently they will be somewhat less than enthusiastic about the prospects of his becoming president of the United States.
The most serious aspect of this question is the propaganda which the Communists could make of it around the world. If Romney were to be nominated, and this Mormon doctrine retained, Moscow and Peking could announce that the Republican Party candidate was a ‘white supremist,’ submitting indisputable proof from the teachings of his own church.
This would be manifestly unfair to Romney whose own views on the Negro issue, if one judges by his record in private life and his public actions, are really contrary to those of his Mormon faith.”
Wed., 18 Sept. 1963:
11:30 a.m.
President John F. Kennedy Extended Invitation to take Breakfast With Him
President Brown came in with Senator Frank E. Moss who referred to President John F. Kennedy’s visit to Salt Lake City. Senator Moss said that President Kennedy wants to have President Brown, the Senator, and me, together with our wives, at breakfast in his suite Friday morning, September 27. If it is impossible for Sister McKay to come to his suite, the President is willing to come to our apartment for the breakfast. I said I feel that this will be a good chance for me to entertain the President in our apartment. The Senator said that he thinks this would be agreeable.
Later, on September 23, I received a telegram from Senator Moss, saying: ‘President Kennedy is pleased with your acceptance of his invitation to take breakfast at 8:30 a.m. on Friday, September 27, and accepts your kind invitation to meet in your apartment at Hotel Utah. Besides you and Sister McKay and President Kennedy, President and Sister Brown, and Phylis and I will be present.’ (see Diary of September 27, 1963.)
Mon., 23 Sept. 1963:
“President John F. Kennedy’s Invitation to Take Breakfast With Him
Last Saturday Senator Frank E. Moss called and said that President Kennedy would like to have President Hugh B. Brown and me, together with our wives, at breakfast on Friday morning, September 27, following his speech in the Tabernacle Thursday night (September 26). I told Senator Moss at that time that this would be a good chance for me to entertain President Kennedy in our apartment, and asked him if he thought this would be agreeable to the President.
This morning, I received a wire from Senator Moss stating that President Kennedy is pleased with my acceptance to take breakfast with him on Friday, the 27th, at 8:30 a.m., and that the President accepts my invitation to have it in our Hotel apartment. Guests will be President and Sister Brown, Mr. Stewart Udall, Secretary of the Interior, Senator and Mrs. Moss, and President Kennedy’s secretary. The telegram read as follows:
‘President and Mrs. David O. McKay
Hotel Utah
Salt Lake City, Utah September 23, 1963
President Kennedy is pleased with your acceptance of his
invitation to take breakfast at 8:30 a.m. on Friday, September 27, and
accepts your kind invitation to meet in your apartment at Hotel Utah.
Besides you and Sister McKay and President Kennedy, President
and Sister Brown, Phyllis and I will be present.
/s/Frank E. Moss, USS.’
Security officers have been in the Hotel for two weeks, checking every nook and corner of the hotel.”
Thurs., 26 Sept. 1963:
“7:35 p.m.
Sister McKay and I left the Hotel for the Tabernacle. Large crowds had gathered at the west entrance of the Hotel to get a glimpse of President John F. Kennedy, who will speak in the Tabernacle this evening. President and Sister Hugh B. Brown accompanied us. Our son, Lawrence, drove the car.
7:40 p.m.
Meeting with President of the United States
Sister McKay and I were presented to President John F. Kennedy in the General Authorities Room of the Salt Lake Tabernacle. We had a very cordial conversation with him for the next few moments, and then it was time to enter the assembly room for the meeting.
8:00 p.m.
Sister McKay and I sat on the stand with other honored guests to hear President Kennedy give his address. The Tabernacle was crowded beyond capacity — many people left because they could not get even standing room. The Tabernacle Choir furnished the music. Their rendition of ‘The Battle Hymn of the Republic’ was thrilling. (see newspaper clippings regarding this meeting following. Also see copies of letters as follows: 1) Letter inviting President and Sister McKay to sit on stand to hear President Kennedy’s major address; 2) Letter from Frank E. Moss, U.S. Senator, asking for permission for the Tabernacle Choir to sing at the meeting at which President Kennedy will speak.)”
Fri., 27 Sept. 1963:
“6:30 a.m.
Breakfast for the President of the United States in the McKay Apartment.
Preparations began in the McKay household for the entertaining of the President of the United States. Chef Gerard of the Hotel Utah was in charge of the breakfast. Sister McKay was up and ready hours before the President arrived. Promptly at 8:30 a.m. President John F. Kennedy was ushered into our apartment. Following the arrival of the other guests, we went into the dining room for the breakfast. President Kennedy sat on my right; Stewart L. Udall, Secretary of Interior, sat on Sister McKay’s right; Senator Frank E. Moss was placed next to the President, and Sister Moss sat next to her husband. President and Sister Brown sat beside Secretary Udall; our daughter, Emma Rae, sat next to her mother, and I sat at the head of the table.
I asked the blessing on the food. The hotel waiter then served a most delicious breakfast. The full menu included mountain trout, scrambled eggs, lamb chops, link sausage, ham, crenshaw melon, orange juice, and milk. President Kennedy was the only one who had coffee.
The conversation at the table was very pleasant, and in the words of the President, ‘It was a refreshing hour’. (see newspaper clippings following)
Fri., 11 Oct. 1963:
General Dwight D. Eisenhower – Invitation to Attend Birthday party in His Honor.
Received a letter from Mr. Lewis L. Strauss of Washington, D.C. inviting me to attend a Birthday Dinner in honor of former President Dwight D. Eisenhower. An invitation is being sent to several friends who were among President Eisenhower’s guests at stag dinners at the White House. I attended one of these dinners on May 9, 1955, and shall always remember President Eisenhower’s graciousness to me at that time. (See Diary of May 9, 1955, for details of this event.)
I answered Mr. Strauss that if possible I would attend the party, and enclosed a check for the birthday remembrance.
Later, because of Sister McKay’s illness it was impossible for me to leave, so under date of October 8, 1963, I sent a letter to Mr. Strauss informing him of this fact. On October 11, 1963, I sent a telegram to General Eisenhower sending my regrets that I could not be present at his birthday celebration, and also extending my congratulations for his birthday. On October 19, 1963, I received a letter from General Eisenhower saying, ‘Thank you for thinking of making such a long trip; I am only sorry that you could not at the last minute make it, and sorrier too to learn that the reason was Mrs. McKay’s ill health…’ (see following copies of letters and telegrams concerning this event.)
Friday, October 11, 1963
DDE
Gettysburg
Pennsylvania
October 19, 1963
Dear Dr. McKay:
I can’t tell you how pleased and touched I was to know that originally you had planned to attend the birthday party that some of my friends gave for me in Hershey last Saturday. Thank you for thinking of making such a long trip. I am only sorry that you could not at the last minute make it, and sorrier too to learn that the reason was Mrs. McKay’s ill health. I do hope she is feeling better now — do give her my best.
At any rate I wanted to thank you for your share in the handsome present that I received that evening. Both the gift and the party were memorable.
With warm personal regard,
Sincerely,
/s/Dwight D. Eisenhower
Dr. David O. McKay
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
47 East South Temple Street
Salt Lake City, Utah”
Thurs., 17 Oct. 1963:
“7:30 a.m.
Ernest L. Wilkinson, and Advisability of His Running for Position of U.S. Senator.
Arrived at the office. Met by appointment President Ernest L. Wilkinson of the BYU. We discussed the advisability of his running for the U.S. Senate. I said that I think it would be better for him to make further investigation to see what his possibilities are in this respect; that if he gets the nomination, then he should accept with the understanding that he will keep his present position at the Brigham Young University if he does not win the election.
President Wilkins also discussed matters pertaining to the Deseret News. I asked my secretary to keep a reminder for me of the name of Earl Hawkes, General Manager of the Boston American newspaper, as one who will make a good editor for the Deseret News.”
Tues., 22 Oct. 1963:
“2:30 p.m.
Courtesy Visit from Governor and Mrs. Nelson A. Rockefeller
By appointment previously arranged, received a courtesy visit from Governor and Mrs. Nelson A. Rockefeller of New York. They were accompanied by a number of local representatives of the Republican Party, and national and local news reporters and photographers. President Brown and Tanner and President of the Utah State Senate Brother Reed Bullen, were also present.
Our discussions ranged from world trade to Governor Rockefeller’s interest in the Mormon people. I told Governor Rockefeller that I had been interested in him, especially since twice reading his book, ‘The Future of Federalism’. Then we discussed policies advocated in that book, and I indicated doubt that some of the goals set up in the book could be achieved in the foreseeable future, but added: ‘I congratulate you on your vision.’
Governor Rockefeller expressed admiration for Governor George Romney of Michigan, and I said that we are proud of him, but that it is too bad his name comes up now for the presidency; that it would be premature for him to seek the presidential nomination this time.
After a very pleasant interview, I presented the Governor and his wife with a pictorial history of the Church, with their names embossed thereon. The Governor, after looking through its pages, said: ‘This shall be put in the hallway of our home where everyone who comes in will see it’.
The photographers were busy taking pictures during the entire interview.
I was favorably impressed with Mr. Rockefeller, notwithstanding the mix-up in his marriage.
It is expected that Governor Rockefeller will announce his plans regarding the Republican presidential nomination race next month. (See newspaper clippings following.)”
Thurs., 21 Nov. 1963:
“At 8:30 a.m., I had my counselors come over to the apartment so that we could hold the usual First Presidency’s meeting. Among the matters considered were the following:
Brigham Young University – President Ernest L. Wilkinson’s Senatorial Ambitions
President Brown reported that he was informed by Brother Stapley that President Ernest L. Wilkinson notified the Executive Committee of the Brigham Young University Board of Trustees yesterday that he intends to seek the nomination for Senator from Utah. It was reported that all of the Brethren of the Committee were unanimous, with the exception of Brother Lee who was not present, that Brother Wilkinson should not seek this office. The Committee is asking whether we should interfere with his ambitions or if we should seek a new President of the BYU in case he does enter the campaign. I said that I think President Wilkinson should remain as President of the Brigham Young University while he is seeking the nomination, and if he gets the nomination then we can consider finding a successor. If he is not elected, then he should continue at the school.
Fri., 22 Nov. 1963:
“11:30 a.m.
News of the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy
Just as Dr. Hucko was massaging my injured leg and arm, news was flashed on the television that President John F. Kennedy was shot as he rode with Mrs. Kennedy in an open car in downtown Dallas, Texas, waving and smiling to a crowd of 250,000. He fell face downward in the back seat of his car. Mrs. Jacqueline Kennedy was not hurt; she turned and clutched his head and tried to lift it. The car sped toward the hospital with the dying President. He was shot at approximately 12:30 p.m. (CST) (11:30 our time),and died in the hospital at approximately 1:00 p.m. (CST) (Noon our time). Governor Connelly of Texas was also shot twice in the back, but was not mortally wounded.
All at our house are shocked and stunned at the news, as it is only a few weeks ago that it was our privilege to entertain the President in our apartment, and now to think that he has gone is unbelievable!
My secretary, Clare, called and said that as soon as the news was out, the telephone began ringing at the office. Local newspaper reporters, the Associated Press, Television Stations, and others called and asked for a statement from me.
I told Clare to have Henry Smith of the Deseret News come over to the apartment and by the time he arrived I would have a statement ready for him. Henry soon arrived, and I handed him some notes. While he was there, the news commentator of KSL was connected with me, and I read my statement to him, which was simultaneously flashed to their television and radio audiences. (see following typewritten copy of statement, and also newspaper clippings covering the whole event, also picture of President McKay having breakfast with President Kennedy.)
Friday, November 22, 1963
President David O. McKay of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints issued the following statement Friday after learning of President Kennedy’s death:
‘I am deeply grieved and shocked beyond expression at this tragedy.
In behalf of the Church in all the world, I express sincere sympathy to Mrs. Kennedy, their children, and all of the close relatives and friends.
‘The entire nation feels a sense of humiliation that such a tragedy could come to a President of the United States.
‘Only a few weeks ago it was our privilege to entertain the President, and now to think that he has gone we are stunned as well as shocked. It is terrible to think that such a tragedy could occur in this age of the world.
‘Our prayers go in sincere and earnest appeal to the Almighty that He will comfort the nation in this hour of tragic grief.’
David O. McKay”
Sat., 23 Nov. 1963:
“Recuperating at Home
President John F. Kennedy’s Funeral – Invitation from Chief of Protocol,
Washington, D.C.
President Hugh B. Brown telephoned to tell me that he had received a telephone call from the Chief of Protocol at the White House, Washington, D.C. (he being unable to reach me), who extended an invitation for me to attend President John F. Kennedy’s funeral, to be held Monday, November 25.
President Brown said that he informed him of my illness. I told President Brown that he had better prepare to fly back there and represent the Church at the funeral. Later, Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy sent a formal invitation to President Brown. (See Tuesday, November 26, 1963, for President Brown’s report of the Funeral.)”
Tues., 3 Dec. 1963:
“11:00 a.m.
I asked Clare to come over to the apartment. She brought letters and other matters to my attention. I handed her the proof of the original Christmas card, and told her to order 1,500, which will be sent to Stake and Mission authorities, General Authorities, and friends. I told Clare, who had suggested and arranged the first proof, that I am very pleased with it.
Brigham Young University – President Ernest L. Wilkinson and Nomination for United States Senate
Clare presented to me a letter from President Ernest L. Wilkinson dated November 27, 1963, asking for approval to announce his candidacy for the Republican nomination for the United States Senate.
I told her to call President Wilkinson and tell him that he may go ahead with his announcement; that he may choose his campaign manager, and that Brother Harvey L. Taylor will become the acting President during his absence at the BYU. (See following letter. Also see Diary of December 13, 1963, for letter from President Wilkinson regarding this matter.)
Tuesday, December 3, 1963
November 27, 1963
Dec. 3, 1963
Permission given for Pres. Wilkinson to go
ahead with his plans to run for Senate – that he
may choose his campaign manager – that
Brother Harvey Taylor will become the acting
president during his absence.
D.O.M.
President David O. McKay
47 East South Temple
Salt Lake City, Utah
Dear President McKay:
Pursuant to your permission and good wishes I am about to announce my candidacy for the Republican nomination for the United States Senate.
Before doing so, however, I want to make sure that this action still meets with your approval. You have supported me so fully as President of the Brigham Young University and as Chancellor of The Unified Church School System that if you as my President advised against it and urged me to continue in my present positions, gratitude and loyalty on my part would cause me to follow your advice.
In the event you have not changed your views may I have permission to announce my candidacy and terminate my two positions at my discretion sometime during the next 30 or 40 days? I do not believe it would be fair to the Church School System for me to stay on longer, for I do not under any circumstances want to use my present positions to assist in any political ambition. In this respect I learned that this last week a group of BYU students had organized to foster my candidacy. I immediately told them they could not do so. If I stay much longer, I am afraid events of that kind will occur without my knowledge, although I would be blamed therefor.
I am writing this pursuant to our understanding that in the event I am not elected to the Senate I will return to my two present positions. This arrangement contemplates an Acting President and Acting Chancellor, or some other arrangement, until the Republican Primaries next August, and if I get the nomination, until the election next November. Should you desire my suggestions in this respect I shall be pleased to give them to you.
I would have preferred to see you about this, but have not thought it was proper under the circumstances. Whatever your response, I must express my gratitude for your many kindnesses to me. Under your leadership I think we have made real progress in the Unified Church School System.
We pray constantly for your recovery, and good health for Sister McKay.
Faithfully your brother,
Ernest L. Wilkinson”
Tues., 10 Dec. 1963:
“10:00 a.m.
By appointment President Ernest L. Wilkinson called at the apartment and discussed with me the arrangements to be made at the Brigham Young University while he is away from that institution seeking nomination for the United States Senate.
I told President Wilkinson to make his suggestions regarding the men who will succeed him during the period he is away. It is understood if President Wilkinson is not elected, he will return to his present positions at the school. (See letter following from President Wilkinson, giving recommendations for the men to take over during his absence.)
Tuesday, December 10, 1963
December 14, 1963
President David O. McKay
47 East South Temple
Salt Lake City, Utah
Dear President McKay:
I appreciate very much your kindness in inviting me to your Hotel Utah office last Tuesday and the advice which you gave me. In view of your statement that you want me ‘to be United States Senator’ I have proceeded to make the following arrangements in accordance with your instructions:
1. I will announce at a time to be selected by me the termination of my services as Chancellor of the Unified Church School System and President of the Brigham Young University.
2. During the period I am running for office Harvey L. Taylor will be Acting Chancellor and Earl C. Crockett will be Acting President of Brigham Young University. William E. Berrett will continue as Administrator of Institutes and Seminaries. I enclose herewith a memorandum as to the demarcation of their respective duties.
3. I will, to the extent my time permits, continue to advise with these brethren and to coordinate their activities. The Executive Committee of the Board has asked for certain studies to be made and I have promised to have them made. I will either make a report thereon myself or have it done by others. In this respect you thought it would be proper for me to continue to present certain unfinished matters to the Executive Committees and the Board of Education or the Board of Trustees, even after I announce a termination of my services. This function could not possibly be construed to be the use of my school positions for political purposes, whereas a continuation of my present positions in public could.
4. Should I be successful in being elected a United States Senator the First Presidency will proceed to appoint my permanent successor. Should I not be elected, I will return to my present positions.
Again may I express my deep appreciation for the kind and constant support you have given me over the nearly 13 years I have served as President of Brigham Young University and the 10 years as Chancellor. I pray that the blessings of the Lord will continue with you and Sister McKay.
Faithfully yours,
Ernest L. Wilkinson
ELW:jh
Enclosure
Tuesday, December 10, 1963
December 14, 1963
Harvey L. Taylor
Earl C. Crockett
William E. Berrett
Clyde B. Sandgren
Re: Termination of My Services at BYU
When and if I announce termination of my services as Chancellor of the Church School System and President of Brigham Young University, President McKay has asked that the following individuals assume the following duties.
1. Harvey L. Taylor will become acting Chancellor of the Unified Church School System subject to the following limitations.
2. Earl C. Crockett will become acting President of the Brigham Young University.
3. William E. Berrett will continue as Administrator of Institutes and Seminaries.
4. To the extent my time permits, I will continue to advise with the above and to coordinate their activities.
5. For the purpose of presenting matters to the Board of Education and the Board of Trustees and the Executive Committee of each of these boards, it is suggested that the following matters be presented by the following persons:
(a) Matters pertaining to Ricks College, the junior colleges, institutes and seminaries, Juarez Academy, and the Church schools in Mexico, and other general matters pertaining to the Unified Church School System shall be presented by Brother Harvey L. Taylor. He should not hesitate to use the services of Brother Berrett for this purpose as much as he desires.
(b) Matters pertaining to the Brigham Young University shall be presented by Brother Crockett.
(c) I am sure that Brother Sandgren will be a great help to both Brothers Taylor and Crockett and his advice and services should be availed of by them.
6. Because the Administrative Council legislates for all segments of the Church School System, I suggest that on all matters of the Church School System outside of the Brigham Young University that Brother Taylor preside, and that on all matters pertaining to Brigham Young University that Brother Crockett preside.
The above, as you will note, contemplates more of a separation of functions between the Chancellor and the President than has been true when I have filled both positions, but President McKay hopes that the two of you will be able to be in harmony as to your ultimate decisions.
Ernest L. Wilkinson
ELW;jh”
Tues., 17 Dec. 1963:
“Brigham Young University – President and Church Chancellor
President Tanner reported that the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees of the BYU had called on the First Presidency regarding the administration of the University in the absence of President Ernest L. Wilkinson. President Wilkinson now holds the dual position as President of the BYU and Chancellor of the Church Unified School System. The Committee recommends that Brother Harvey L. Taylor be made the Acting Chancellor of Church education and Brother Earl Crockett the Acting Presiding of the BYU. I mentioned that President Wilkinson had presented this same proposition to me. The Brethren were agreed that this would be a very satisfactory arrangement.”
Fri., 3 Jan. 1964:
“10:30 to 12:00 Noon
Conference with my secretary, Clare. She brought many letters for me to sign — others handed to me were letters of appreciation for Christmas remembrances, and congratulatory letters and telegrams for our sixty-third wedding anniversary. I dictated notes and letters in answer to a number of these.
Brigham Young University – Dr. John Bernhard for Campaign Manager for President Ernest L. Wilkinson
One letter Clare presented to me was from President Ernest L. Wilkinson of the Brigham Young University, who asked if he could approach Dr. John Bernhard, Dean of Humanities and Social Sciences at the BYU to become his campaign manager for his candidacy for the Republican nomination of United States Senator. This will necessitate Dr. Bernhard’s taking a Sabbatical Leave, which he has practically earned, or a leave without pay. By doing this, he would be away from the Campus, so there could be no valid criticism of his political activity. President Joseph Fielding Smith, Chairman of the Brigham Young University Executive Committee, has no objection to Dr. Bernhard’s accepting this leave of absence.
I instructed Clare to tell President Wilkinson that he may ask Dr. Bernhard to accept the responsibility to direct President Wilkinson’s campaign, and that he may take his Sabbatical Leave in order to do so.
Thurs., 9 Jan. 1963:
12:15 p.m.
Returned to the apartment, where I rested most of the afternoon.
Brigham Young University – Announcement of Ernest L. Wilkinson’s Resignation as President (see newspaper clippings following.)”
Sat., 25 Jan. 1964:
Telephone Call from the President of the United States
At about 1:30 p.m. today, I received a telephone call from Lyndon B. Johnson, President of the United States. He called from the White House. He said: ‘I need some strength from you, President McKay. Could you come to Washington for an hour’s consultation with me alone sometime next week – at your convenience? I’ll meet your time, President McKay’.
I told President Johnson that I had been ill, and that if my doctors will give me permission, and I feel stronger, I shall be honored to meet with him. I said that I shall call him the first of the week. President Johnson answered, ‘That will be fine, and you bring whomever you wish with you.’
Later, my secretary, Clare, called to see if the call from President Johnson had reached me. She said that the call had come to her at home and that she had given President Johnson’s secretary my private number in the Hotel. I told Clare that I feel sure I shall be well enough to go Wednesday or Thursday. (See Diary of Friday, January 31, 1964, for report of visit.)”
Mon., 27 Jan. 1964:
“Telephone Call to The White House Regarding Visit with President Johnson.
I asked my son, Lawrence, to call the White House and let President Johnson know that I am planning to leave for Washington, D.C. Thursday morning, and that President Nathan Eldon Tanner and my son Lawrence will accompany me. Lawrence reported that President Johnson’s secretary, who talked to him, said that President Johnson is arranging for a luncheon for President McKay’s party with him alone in The White House, Friday at 1:00 p.m.”
Wed., 29 Jan. 1964:
“Convalescing at Home
8:30 a.m.
Held a meeting with my counselors in my office in the apartment. Among the matters considered were the following:
President Lyndon B. Johnson – Visit With — President Tanner asked to Accompany President McKay to The White House
I reported to my counselors that last Saturday I had received a telephone call from President Lyndon B. Johnson, who invited me to come to the White House for consultation with him. I said that I have decided to leave tomorrow morning at 10 o’clock, and that I should like President Tanner to accompany me, along with my son, David Lawrence.
Thurs., 30 Jan. 1964:
“Trip to Washington, D.C.
At 10:00 a.m., in company with President Tanner and my son Lawrence, boarded the United Airlines Jet Plane for Washington, D.C. Much to my surprise, a number of reporters and photographers were there to take pictures and to ask questions.
Our daughter, Emma Rae, stayed with Sister McKay, who is too ill to accompany us.
After an uneventful, though pleasant trip, our plane landed at Friendship Field, Baltimore, Maryland, this evening. We were met at the airport by my granddaughter, Joyce (Mrs. Robert F. Bennett), who held in her arms little Julie, a new great-granddaughter.
We were overnight guests of J. Willard Marriott.
(see newspaper clippings Friday, January 31, 1964.)”
Fri., 31 Jan. 1964:
“Visit With President of the United States
It was cold and blustery as we arrived at The White House at about 1:00 p.m. We were received at the northwest gate of The White House grounds, and were admitted after showing identification. We were taken into the annex offices, and from there into the Cabinet Room.
Soon thereafter President Johnson came into the office and said: ‘Hello young men’, and then he came over to where I was sitting and shook hands with me, then with President Tanner, and Lawrence.
After some introductions of two secretaries (Mormon girls) and the taking of pictures of the group, we were left alone. President Johnson then explained to me that he had called me on an impulse, and that he wanted my advice. He mentioned his visits with me at Church headquarters in Salt Lake City. He said that he would have come out to Salt Lake City to visit with me if he could have done so, and appreciated my coming to Washington.
The two-hour visit with President Johnson and the tour of The White House, personally conducted by President Johnson, was a memorable occasion. After the tour, President Johnson took us into the Cabinet Room where he introduced us to Defense Secretary Robert S. McNamara, and Sargent Shriver, head of the Peace Corps.
At my request, my son Lawrence and President Tanner have written a more detailed report of our visit to The White House. (See following manuscripts by David Lawrence McKay and President Tanner; copy of letter to President Johnson by President McKay; copy of letter from Elder Richard L. Evans; also copy of letter from Mrs. Esther Peterson, Special Assistant to the President for Consumer Affairs, to Sister Clare Middlemiss, Secretary to President McKay, and Sister Middlemiss’ answer thereto.) (see also newspaper clippings following.)
After our visit to The White House, I conferred with Church officers and other Utahns in Washington, D.C.
We boarded the five o’clock jetliner, and because of delays in Chicago, did not arrive in Salt Lake City until 11:45 p.m., which meant that we had gone 21 hours without real rest or sleep!
The trip was strenuous, but very successful. It was really an historic event in the history of the Church!
Friday, January 31, 1964
MEMORANDUM OF VISIT OF PRESIDENT DAVID O. MCKAY WITH LYNDON B. JOHNSON, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, AT THE WHITE HOUSE, FRIDAY, JANUARY 31, 1964, AT 1:00 P.M.
By David Lawrence McKay
On Saturday, January 25, 1964, at about 1:30 p.m., President McKay received a long distance telephone call in his Hotel Utah apartment from the President of the United States, Lyndon B. Johnson, who said, ‘President McKay, you won’t remember me, but I visited you twice in Salt Lake City.’ President McKay answered that he remembered him very well. Then President Johnson said: ‘President McKay, I need some strength and advice from you. Could you come to Washington for an hour’s consultation with me — any time next week at your convenience; I shall meet your time, President McKay.’
During the fifteen-minute conversation, President McKay told President Johnson that he had been ill, but that he felt he would be well enough next week to make the trip, and that he would be honored to meet with him. President McKay then set the time for the meeting with President Johnson for Friday, January 31, 1964, at 1:30 p.m. President Johnson said that that would be fine, and for President McKay to confirm this appointment with his secretary, and also to let her know who would come with him.
On Monday, January 27, 1964, David Lawrence McKay, at the request of his father, called The White House and told President Johnson’s secretary that President McKay would leave Thursday morning, January 30, and that he would bring with him President Nathan Eldon Tanner and his son, David Lawrence McKay. David Lawrence was informed that President Johnson had arranged for a luncheon on Friday, and the time had been set for 1:00 p.m.
At one o’clock, Friday, January 31, President David O. McKay, President Nathan Eldon Tanner, and David Lawrence McKay were received at the northwest gate of The White House grounds and were admitted after showing identification. They were ushered into the annex offices and from there into the cabinet room. President Tanner was told that he was sitting in the chair of the Secretary of the Interior. He commented that his was an equivalent office of the one that he had held in the Alberta government. The President’s personal secretary, a Miss Roberts, came in and introduced Miss Connie Gerrard who said that she is a member of the Church from Evanston, Wyoming, employed as a secretary at The White House. She had seen that President McKay was scheduled for luncheon on that day and had telephoned for permission to shake hands with him. After she left, President Johnson came into the office. He said, ‘Hello, young men’ and shook hands with President McKay, President Tanner and David Lawrence McKay. He ushered them into his office. Several pictures were taken, including pictures of Miss Gerrard and Miss Nancy Lou Larsen of Salt Lake City, both members of the Church.
After they left, President Johnson explained to President McKay that he had called him on an impulse, that he wanted his advice. He stated that President McKay had received him twice in Salt Lake City and each time he had come away inspired. He would have come out to Salt Lake City to visit President McKay if he could have done so, and appreciated his coming to Washington. In answer to a comment from one of the visitors that he was surprised that President Johnson should know enough about his secretaries to know their religion, he stated that both of these secretaries came early and worked late; they were devoted and industrious and had high ideals; in fact, they acted like members of the Church. He thought highly of members of the Church. He said he had never met a ‘mean’ Mormon.
President Johnson then led President McKay and his party to the elevator to the second floor and to a circular room which he described as the former bedroom of Margaret Truman, and which Mrs. Kennedy had remodeled into a private dining room. Before that remodeling it had been necessary for The White House family always to take their meal downstairs in the formal dining room. The room was decorated with a painting of Valley Forge which covered doorways as well as the walls. The oval table was set for four without tablecloth, with place mats. President Johnson sat at the head with President McKay at his right, President Tanner at his left, and David Lawrence McKay at the foot. President Johnson bowed his head, and he offered the blessing of thanks for the food, and for this opportunity of their being together. Waiters served soup, which the president described as ‘flavored water’, but which was delicious vegetable soup. The next course consisted of crab thermidor over rice, with a tomato aspic salad. The dessert was a banana pudding, which President Johnson called ‘home-made.’
The President told President McKay that events were crowding in on him: Cyprus, Viet Nam, the shooting of Americans over Berlin, Panama. He felt he needed help. When he was a boy he could rest his head on his mother’s shoulder; now he needed another shoulder to rest on. He felt that we need to strengthen the moral and spiritual fibres of the nation. He wanted advice from President McKay as to how this can be done. President McKay replied that he had read President Johnson’s creed, that he was first of all a free man, second an American, third a President, and fourth a Democrat, in that order; that he knew the President was a man of honor. The President said: ‘Let your conscience be your guide; be true to yourself and your philosophy. Let the people know that you are sincere, and the people will follow you.’ President Johnson seemed impressed and pleased with this advice.
President Johnson stated that his first contact with a prominent member of the Church was with Reed Smoot, for whom he had a high regard. He became acquainted with Reed Smoot through Truman Young who was the President’s roommate about 1929. He went with Truman to hear Senator Smoot’s addresses to the Senate and noticed with what interest and deference the other Senators listened to Senator Smoot. He spoke of Truman Young and of his work in the maritime offices in San Francisco at the present time.
The President was proud of the Tabernacle Choir and hoped that it would have an occasion to sing for him in Washington.
President McKay told of his experience at luncheon with President Eisenhower. Being ignorant of White House protocol he said he thought he had the responsibility, after being with the President and others for two hours, to terminate the meeting. So, he suggested that they had been imposing long enough on the President. President Eisenhower said, ‘Now, President McKay, this is my party. I will tell you when we will dismiss.’ He talked to them for another half hour and then said, ‘Now, President McKay, we will arise.’
The President asked us whether we knew Kay Randall, whom he as considering for the position of a member of the F.D.I.C. He had been recommended by Senator Bennett and supported by Senator Dirksen. He would not do anything without Senator Dirksen’s approval. A group of Eastern bankers were against him, but he was in favor of appointing someone to represent the small banks and communities. He asked whether Randall is honest, David Lawrence McKay assured him that he is.
The President was interrupted several times by telephone calls. He had a telephone at his place at the table hanging on the table leg. He went outside stating that he was going to get Mrs. Johnson. Mrs. Johnson came in. She was beautiful and charming and shook hands with the three visitors. President McKay told her that Mrs. McKay had been called Ladybird while she was in Hawaii, so there are two ladybirds in the United States. President Johnson returned and Mrs. Johnson told him that there would be a tour at The White House of students who were on scholarship because of one of the newspaper syndicates; that she would handle them and it would not be necessary for him to speak to them. He asked what syndicate and she said, ‘Hearst’. He said he would try to speak to them.
The President said that he had requested the Utah Senators to come and have their pictures taken and he was also trying to round up the Utah Congressmen. He said he thought very highly of Senator Bennett who was a wizard in his work on the Finance Committee. He also thought that Ted Moss was a good Senator. He did not have much color, but then some Senators have too much color.
The two Senators arrived and were served dessert. As they were finishing, Congressmen Sherman Lloyd and Lawrence Burton arrived with Esther Peterson, and Congressman Ralph Harding of Idaho. The President kissed Mrs. Peterson on the cheek; and when President McKay expressed marked surprise, Mrs. Peterson said, ‘President McKay, you have already kissed me; you kissed me when I was a little girl. Do you remember picking me up when my arm was broken and carrying me into your living room.’ So President McKay gave her a kiss on the cheek. Mrs. Peterson was formerly Esther Eggertsen, a neighbor and tenant of President McKay.
Representative Lloyd told the President that he approved what he has done in economy measures, but his wife disapproved of the President’s darkening of The White House. The President retorted that his mother had been very careful with money. She had always insisted on going around the house turning out the lights, and he got the habit from her. He noticed that she was the one in the family who always had money under her pillow. He said he had inquired as to what the electric light bill was at The White House and found that it was $4,800.00 per month. He had reduced this to $3,600.00 the first month and would reduce it further to $2,600.00. He saw no need for keeping lights burning all night in an empty office, lights burning in halls which were not used and in all closets. He had insisted that the automatic switches be replace by switches that can be pulled manually, and he insisted that they be pulled. He said that while $4,800.00 is nothing compared to fifteen billion dollars; still, when people go around turning off the lights, they become economy conscious and are more likely to stress economy in other matters.
President Johnson said that when he became President there were thirty-six cadillacs there. He cut this down to six and gave the drivers of the others cheaper cars. This was not a great saving, but it would make the drivers cost conscious.
Then he went into one of the larger fields. Secretary McNamara had shown him that there had been an increase in the national budget of five billion dollars annually. Mr. McNamara showed him how that could be stopped and how there could be a saving in the defense effort. The President showed this to each member of his cabinet. In a few days after that each one came back to him and stated that it would not be necessary to raise his budget as he had originally contemplated.
President Johnson then said, laughingly, ‘Now, I think we had better break up before President McKay dismisses us. I will take you around and show you the rooms on this floor.’ He took President McKay’s arm and showed the group first the room where President Kennedy and President Lincoln slept. In this room, Mrs. Johnson was seated at the table, writing. Further down the hall, he showed the group the room in which Lincoln’s bed and other furniture are now placed. Further on was the room in which statesmen are entertained and sleep while they are staying at The White House. He mentioned that there had been no one stay in that room since he had become President. He said he had a pair of pajamas and would be glad to lend them to President McKay if he wished to stay there. Across the hall was the room in which Queen Elizabeth had slept. The bed was a canopy bed.
President Johnson then guided the group down to the first floor and to the swimming pool, which had been donated for President Roosevelt by children’s dimes without expense to the Government. It had since been redecorated by Ambassador Kennedy. One side of the building was covered with a mirror so that the pool looks twice as large as it actually is. The President stated that when he was not behind in his schedule, as today, he would take fifteen minutes before luncheon and fifteen minutes before dinner and swim up and down the pool six times. The water was 90o.
The President then escorted the group out of The White House along an arcade from which he pointed out the rose garden which Mrs. Kennedy had planted. They then went back into the offices of the annex where he introduced them to Secretary McNamara, who had ben waiting forty-five minutes. The President shook hands with all and said goodbye.
President McKay and his party then went through a battery of reporters who wanted to know what the conversation had been about. President McKay told them that they must get all that information from President Johnson. President McKay did deny that any reference was made to Governor Romney and denied that a Temple was about to be built in Washington.
President McKay, President Tanner, and David Lawrence McKay caught the five o’clock plane and, because of delays in Chicago, arrived in Salt Lake City at 11:45 p.m., which meant that President McKay had gone twenty-one hours without real rest or sleep.
Friday, January 31, 1964
Visit of President David O. McKay with Lyndon B. Johnson, President of the United States in The White House, Washington, D.C., Friday, January 31, 1964, as reported by President Nathan Eldon Tanner at the Council Meeting of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve, held in the Salt Lake Temple, February 6, 1964.
President Tanner stated to the Council that this report is made at the request of President McKay, who was present at the meeting in the Temple.
He said that President Lyndon B. Johnson personally invited President McKay to come to Washington, and that President McKay did him the honor of saying that if he wanted him to come, he would do so.
President McKay, President Tanner and Brother David Lawrence McKay left here Thursday morning, January 30, and arrived in Washington Thursday evening. On Friday they went over to The White House to see the President at his invitation. When they arrived there they were taken into the Cabinet room where they waited for half an hour for President Johnson. When the time came for the President to see them, President Johnson paid President McKay the courtesy of coming out himself and escorting the party into his office, where they talked together for some time. President Tanner said he considered it a very warm, courteous action on the President’s part when he invited two girls, one from Salt Lake City and one from Evanston, Wyoming, both members of the Church, to come in and meet him and President McKay together and have their pictures taken with them.
After a short visit together in the office, President Johnson escorted the party to a private dining room, which was the room that President Truman’s wife had used as a bedroom and has since been redone. President McKay, President Tanner and Brother David Lawrence McKay had lunch with President Johnson. President Johnson offered the blessing on the food himself.
Before they went in to have their lunch, President Johnson had said to the party that he had some problems. He said that sometimes he felt as he did when he was a little boy when he had more problems than he could handle and would go to his mother and put his head on her breast and get a little sympathy. He mentioned that we have the Panama problem, the matter of the plane that was shot down over East Germany, Viet Nam, etc., and he said he felt the same way now that he did when he was a boy.
After they went into the dining room, President Johnson turned to President McKay and said, ‘I feel that the spiritual and moral fiber of this country needs strengthening, and we need it badly. I would like to ask you, President McKay if you can tell me how we can get it.’ He said, ‘I have been out to see you on two or three occasions before and each time I left you I came away inspired and I feel I would like to have your advice on this.’
President Tanner said that President McKay answered as though he might have been asked this question a week before and had time to prepare an answer. He said right off, ‘Mr. President, I have read where you have said you were, first, a free man, second, that you are an American citizen, third, that you are President of the United States, and fourth, a Democrat. I like that. Now you have asked this question. I think you are an honorable man. I think you mean what you are saying, and this condition is something that you want to meet. I would say to you: Let your conscience be your guide, and go forward and let the people see that you are sincere, that this is the problem that you have before you, and one that should be met, and lead out in it and let the people follow.’
President Tanner said that President Johnson looked over at him and nodded his head, and nodded his head again. President Tanner then turned to President Johnson and said, ‘If the President had talked to you for an hour he couldn’t have said any more.’ President Johnson said, ‘You are right.’ President Tanner said that answered his question as far as he was concerned, he thought, very satisfactorily.
And then President Johnson was kind enough to bring in the Senators and Congressmen representing Utah, and Sister Esther Peterson, he brought them in together and each time he arranged to have a picture taken of them with President McKay and himself.
Immediately after lunch, and before any of these others were invited in, he invited Mrs. Johnson, who is a very capable and charming woman and who is very gracious, to come in and sit down and visit with them, and again he had a picture taken with her of President McKay, President Johnson and all of the party.
After talking with them for some time, he escorted the party through The White House, showing them certain rooms, where both President Lincoln and President Kennedy had slept, and Mrs. Kennedy now has a plaque there saying this is the room where these two presidents who were assassinated slept.
President Tanner said there is a room where Lincoln’s bed and furniture are kept by themselves, then across the hall is a room where Queen Elizabeth slept, and that is used for VIPs. President Johnson said to President McKay that he looked a little weary, and that he would get him a pair of pajamas if he would like to rest in President Lincoln’s bed. He said, ‘This is your opportunity.’
President Tanner said that President Johnson was very courteous to President McKay, and that President McKay arose to the occasion. He said he is sure that the Lord blessed President McKay, that he walked with a firmer step and spoke with a firmer voice and was able to stand the trip, he thought, wonderfully well, in spite of the fact that they were on the runway in Chicago for about two hours. They arrived at the Salt Lake Airport about twenty minutes to twelve o’clock at night, whereas they should have arrived at ten o’clock.
President Tanner said he appreciated very much the honor of being able to accompany President McKay on this trip.
Again referring to the trip, President Tanner said that while they were there, there was some talk in the newspapers about the lights in The White House, that the lights there should be on full blast.
President Johnson said that they had plenty of lights for the people to see The White House, that heretofore they had had lights in the closets burning day and night, that the closets are supposed to be such that when you close the doors the lights go off, but the lights were on all day long, and that the office lights are on all day long.
He mentioned that he had been raised where they had kerosene lamps, and that when they had electricity his mother would go around turning off the lights if the family failed to do so. He said that he had decided that he wanted to make everybody cost-conscious, so he asked for the bill for electricity in The White House and it was $4,600 a month. He then started this program and tried to enforce it. He said that they had cut it down to $3,600 the first month, and they were going to cut it down to $2,600.
He also mentioned that they had had 35 Cadillac cars that the men were driving, and he cut that down to six, and everybody is now riding in a smaller car. He said that when they came to something really worthwhile he called in the man in charge of Defense, namely, Mr. McNamara, who is a wizard on economics. He said they sat down and discussed this thing for some time and when they came into the Cabinet meeting Mr. McNamara said, ‘We can cut this out and that out.’ He said they have been increasing defense costs alone five billion a year, and McNamara said they did not need to have this increase. The Cabinet members were asked to curtail and they have all done so. He said that is what he thought they would have to do in the nation. He thought they might start with the lights and cars and go right on through.
Friday, January 31, 1963
February 21, 1964
My dear Mr. President:
Shortyl after my return home from that much-appreciated and to me that never-to-be-forgotten visit to The White House on Friday, January 31, 1964, I received the two excellent colored photographs personally autographed by you. I have had them framed, and now they will be a perpetual evidence of an honor bestowed upon me by the President of the greatest nation on earth, whose hopes and desires, as expressed on that precious occasion, I pray a kind Heaven will make possible to a full degree.
Thank you for this very thoughtful remembrance, and may an all-wise Father in Heaven bless you with the health and wisdom you need to discharge the great responsibilities that are yours.
With kindest personal regards and prayerful wishes for continued success, I remain
Sincerely yours,
David O. McKay
President Lyndon B. Johnson
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Friday, January 31, 1964
April 24, 1964
(Original in President Johnson scrapbook)
Miss Clare Middlemiss
Secretary to President David O. McKay
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints
47 East South Temple
Salt Lake City, Utah
Dear Miss Middlemiss:
Mr. Engeman has asked that I give you an account of President McKay’s luncheon visit with President Johnson.
I was in the Labor Department cafeteria when I got a call from the White House saying, ‘Please come right over and proceed immedaitely to the President’s dinng room.’ I did. I was ushered into the room to be greeted by the President affectionately with a kiss, stating, ‘President McKay, I want to show you what I think of this woman.’ Whereupon, to my great pleasure and amazement, President McKay stood up and said, ‘And I want you to know that I feel that way also,’ and he did the same.
I had not seen President McKay for a long time and, of course, my joy was unbounded and pure ecstasy. President McKay remembered my mother and father and the fact that we had lived as neighbors in Ogden. I recalled that I had broken my arm at his home, and he said, ‘Yes, and I picked you up and comforted you,’ which he did. I must have been barely five years old at that time.
We had a splendid discussion with Senators Bennett and Moss, Congressmen Lloyd and Burton, and President Nathan Tanner. After getting up from the table, the President asked President McKay if he would like to see the place where Lincoln slept and the rest of the private quarters. President McKay took the arm of the President and proceeded slowly through the private quarters, expressing great interest, with clarity, as we moved through the rooms. He was highly amused as we left each room when the President called, ‘Esther, turn out the lights.’ We took the private elevator to the swimming pool and then back to the Cabinet Room where we said goodbye.
My personal regards.
Sincerely,
(Mrs.) Esther Peterson
Special Assistant to the President
for Consumer Affairs
Friday, January 31, 1964
May 1, 1964
Mrs. Esther Peterson
Special Assistant to the President
for Consumer Affairs
Executive Office of the President
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Dear Sister Peterson:
It was indeed kind of you to take the time to send your letter of April 24, 1964, giving an account of President McKay’s visit with President Johnson. I am especially pleased to have this as it can now be included in the official report of this visit which is recorded in the President’s diary. Your report will give an added personal touch to this event.
Thank you!
Upon his return from his visit to The White House, President McKay told me of his great pleasure in meeting you, and then he related the incident of your childhood injury and how he had picked you up and comforted you. I am sure that the President will be pleased to read your letter. He is in Huntsville at the present time recuperating under doctor’s orders.
It as almost a miracle to us here that President McKay was able to make the trip to Washington. Up until the time President Johnson telephoned to him, he had not been able to leave his apartment. However, a few days later, when the time came to leave, there was a great improvement in his health, and he made the trip without any ill effects and came home rejuvenated and thankful that he had had the opportunity and honor to meet with the President of the United States.
In case you have not received the Church Section which contains the outstanding talk President McKay gave at the opening session of the 134th Annual Conference of the Church, I am enclosing a copy herewith. The subject matter of this talk deals so much with the very matters brought up by President Johnson in his conversation with President McKay, that I thought you may be interested in reading it.
With admiration of you and your accomplishments, I remain
Sincerely yours,
Clare Middlemiss
Secretary to:
President David O. McKay
Enclosure”
Sat., 1 Feb. 1964
“At about 11:30 o’clock this morning, I called my secretary, Clare, at her home. I said that I had been trying to get President Tanner, but could not reach him, and asked her to locate him and have him call me here at home.
I reported to Clare that our trip to Washington, D.C. to have a consultation with President Lyndon Johnson was an historical occasion. I said that when we reached the north door of The White House, we were ushered in by the servants there, and the government staff members asked for identification, and then we were taken into President Johnson’s quarters where he received us very cordially.
As President Johnson entered the room, he said to me, ‘President McKay, I feel just like a young boy who would like to put his head on his mother’s breast and seek comfort and encouragement from her. I need advice and strength!’ During the course of our conversation, he said, ‘Tell me, what can I do to make the people of this country more conscious of spiritual integrity?’
I then told Clare that I would ask President Nathan Eldon Tanner, who accompanied me to The White House, to write up an account of the visit in detail so that we would have it for my diary.”
Tues., 4 Feb. 1964:
Brigham Young University – Ernest L. Wilkinson’s Position During His Political Activities
I reported that I had spoken to President Ernest L. Wilkinson over the telephone suggesting that he have nothing whatever to do with the Brigham Young University while he is seeking the nomination for U.S. Senator from Utah. In this connection President Brown mentioned that President Wilkinson is still occupying the president’s office, that the acting president, Brother Crockett, needs the office to carry on his work, and that Brother Wilkinson could very well use the president’s home as his office if he desired. It was also mentioned that with my permission Presidents Brown and Tanner had written a letter to President Wilkinson quoting that section of the resolution of the Executive Committee and the Board of Trustees that he should have nothing whatever to do with the BYU during his campaign.”
Thurs., 6 Feb. 1964:
Johnson, President Lyndon B. – Report of Conference in The White House
President Tanner, at my request, gave an excellent report of our conference with President Lyndon B. Johnson at The White House. (For report see January 31, 1964.)
Following President Tanner’s report, I spoke to the Brethren telling them how happy I am to be with them this morning. I told them that my right side had been somewhat affected, and that I deplore the slowness of my recovery, but said that the doctors think I have made a remarkable recovery. I told the doctors that I did not see anything remarkable about it, although my folks think I am getting along very well.
I said that I have the use of all my limbs, but I do not get much strength in my right hand, and the right leg will not obey me as a limb should. I said that I have no pain, and that I should be satisfied at the recovery I have made.
I said that I do not like to have to hesitate in talking; however, I am very glad that I can use my right hand when eating; that I cannot button my shirt, and that it takes me an hour to do so if I try to do it alone. I said that it is strange how wonderful habit is; that I try time and time again to use my left hand, and find that it is difficult to do so.
Johnson, President Lyndon B. – Visit to
I then said that the visit to The White House was one of the most distinguished visits that anyone could possibly make, and that President Johnson himself led the way through The White House.”
Thurs., 5 Mar. 1964:
10:00 to 2:20 p.m.
Was engaged in the meeting of the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve. Very Important Meeting. Some of the matters discussed were:
Political Differences – Unfortunate Statement in letters to Congressman Ralph R. Harding of Idaho about Elder Ezra Taft Benson
I said that before partaking of the Sacrament this morning, I should like to refer to an unfortunate incident which has occurred since the Council last met in this capacity. I mentioned that a man by the name of Harding in Idaho, who is a congressman, has created quite a stir, and has been misinterpreted as far as lack of unity among the General Authorities is concerned by the Nation. I said that I had received a lot of letters relative to this matter. I said that this matter affects one of the members of the Council, and indirectly all members.
I then read to the Council one of the letters I have received regarding the situation. In this letter the writer referred to a letter written by President Joseph Fielding Smith and also one by my son, Robert, having reference to and criticizing Elder Ezra Taft Benson’s attitude toward the John Birch Society. The writer stated that this indicates a lack of harmony among the leaders of the Church, and that this dissension is creating confusion among members and friends of the Church. I said that I have other similar letters from faithful members of the Church.
I said that I should like to know today that there is no dissension among the members of this Council, and that we partake of the Sacrament in full fellowship and full support of one another. I mentioned that since President Smith’s name is associated with Brother Benson, particularly in the matter of the John Birch Society, that I think it would be well for President Smith on this occasion to explain his association with the controversy.
President Smith said he was glad to do so, that he had received similar communications to the one read by me and that he had written to Brother Benson about the matter. He said that he had had no intention of saying anything detrimental to Brother Benson; that he did say that when Brother Benson comes home, he hoped he would not get into politics and would keep his blood pure. President Smith said that was not intended as an attack on Brother Benson, but he was aware of the fact that in politics a lot of things are done that are somewhat shady. He said he was speaking of conditions that exist in the political world, and intended no reflection upon Brother Benson.
President Smith said he had communicated with Brother Benson, and Brother Benson had with him, and that he had written letters to these people who had written them that he and Brother Benson are on the best of terms and fellowship with each other, and that he would not do anything in the world to hurt him, but he did say he hoped Brother Benson would keep himself out of politics.
President Smith said he wished that he had not written this private letter to Congressman Harding, that it was never intended to be circulated, and he was sorry he said it the way he did because it was misunderstood, that he had no intention whatever to cast any reflection on Brother Benson’s character, and he had done the best he could to straighten out the matter.
I told the Brethren that I have spoken to my son, Robert, and that he had said that he had no intention whatever of bringing me into it.
President Smith said that he had written to Brother Benson and told him that as far as he was concerned they were in full fellowship with each other, and that he had never intended to say a thing against his character. I asked President Smith if Brother Benson had accepted his statement. President Smith said yes, that he had heard from him.
I then said that Elder Benson had permission from the President of the Church to give the lecture that he gave in the auditorium in Hollywood. I mentioned that some people had said that that was one activity wherein Brother Benson went contrary to the counsel of the Presidency and General Authorities. I said that Elder Benson had full permission to give that lecture and he gave a good talk, but that young Benson has associated the remarks I have made against the Communists in his talking about the John Birch Society. I said that the stand of the Church regarding Communism has nothing whatever to do with the Birch Society, which is a private organization, and the Church in no way sustains it.
I further said that Brother Benson had said publicly that he was in favor of the John Birch Society, and that I had told Brother Benson that he could not, as one of the Twelve, join that Society. This was before Brother Benson was called to be President of the European Mission, and his call as President of that mission had nothing whatever to do with the John Birch Society. I said that I had told him back in November last that he could not join the Society as one of the Twelve.
I further said that some people have written in saying that a person cannot be a member of the Church and join the John Birch Society. That, I commented, is the wrong interpretation. Two things I said we should know: First, that a person’s standing in the Church is not affected by membership in that or any other private organization. People are free to join what they wish. Second, that Brother Benson’s call to preside over the European Mission had no relationship whatever to his desire to join that Society.
I stated that so far as this Council is concerned, we have no connection whatever with the John Birch Society, no matter how good it may be and how noble its purposes; that Brother Benson received his call to go to Europe without any thought of associating his call to the European Mission Presidency with his views regarding the John Birch Society, and that so far as we are concerned this morning as the Council of the First Presidency and the Twelve, we have nothing whatever to do with it, and Brother Benson’s call over there had nothing to do with it.
I then said: ‘We shall partake of the sacrament this morning in the spirit of the opening prayer; that we be one in all things pertaining to this Church.’ (See Diary of February 21, 1964, regarding the Benson-Harding Controversy.)”
Fri., 6 Mar. 1964:
“8:00 a.m.
Met by appointment at his request City School Superintendent Lynn S. Bennion. He reported that the schools have to have more money and that he favors taking contributions from the Government. I said that I oppose taking anything from the Government; that they only send back to us what we have sent to them.
I told Brother Bennion to be careful about letting the Government get control of our schools. He said that he will keep under control the management of the financial affairs, as well as the scholastic affairs of the schools. I said that that will be hard to do after they send the money to them.
Thurs., 26 Mar. 1964:
“10:00 a.m.
Meeting of the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve in the Salt Lake Temple.
Thursday, March 26, 1964
FIRST PRESIDENCY URGES PUBLIC INTEREST IN POLITICS
The First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Friday urged stake presidents and bishops to avoid scheduling meetings which would conflict with voting district mass meetings on April 27.
President David O. McKay and his counselors, President Hugh B. Brown and President N. Eldon Tanner, also encouraged voters ‘to recognize their patriotic duty in matters of this kind.’
In Response
The action of the Church leaders was in response to letters from political leaders noting that April 27 was the date set for both Republican and Democratic mass meetings and asking if there would be any conflict with Church meetings.
The First Presidency replied that they knew of no meetings which had been arranged or which might be arranged which would be in conflict with the political meetings.
Sends Letter
In a letter to the Deseret News, the First Presidency declared:
‘We would appreciate it if you would give proper publicity to these mass meetings in your columns at the appropriate time, encouraging the voting public to recognize their patriotic duty in matters of this kind, and expressing the desire of the First Presidency that presidents of stakes and bishops of wards avoid arranging meetings that would interfere with these political mass meetings.’
Wed., 10 June 1964:
“Minutes of the Meeting of the First Presidency
Held Wednesday, June 10, 1964, at 9:30 A.M.
Release of Nelson Blake for Political Purposes
President Brown mentioned that Elder Stapley had brought to him a request from President Gibson of the Lake Mead Stake that Nelson Blake, a Republican, now serving in Texas with the Building Committee, formerly president of the Nevada Stake, is needed at home to enter the political race for appointment to the State Legislature, that the Democratic candidate, while a member of the Church, is not a good man for this position. President Gibson is hoping that Brother Blake can be released from his Building Committee work. It was decided to confer with Brother Mendenhall in regard to this matter.
Thurs., 2 July 1964:
“4:00 p.m.
My secretary, Clare, at my request, brought over to the apartment a telegram just received from President Lyndon B. Johnson, inviting me to serve on the National Citizens Committee for Community Relations, having to do with the Civil Rights Bill, and a voluntary effort to preserve order and achieve the goal of equal treatment and opportunity for all Americans.’
After giving deep thought to this matter, I decided there is nothing else for me to do but to accept the President of the United States’ invitation. The Civil Rights Bill is now passed and it is the law of the land. Some of it is wrong — the Negro will now have to prove himself.
I, therefore, sent a telegram to President Johnson accepting his invitation to serve on this national committee. (See following for copy of telegrams referred to, also see following newspaper clippings regarding passage of the Civil Rights Bill on this day.)
Note by CM
Since the Negro questions have been a matter of national concern, President McKay has received a number of letters from persons inquiring why the Church refrains from bestowing the Priesthood on the Negro.
Sometime ago President McKay prepared an answer to this question. As a matter of record, I am including a copy of that letter.
Thursday, July 2, 1964
WESTERN UNION
130A PDT JUL 2 G4 LC022
NSA001 NS VWY126 WVZ14 WVZ14 GOVT NL PD THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON DC 1
DR DAVID O MCKAY, PRESIDENT
CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER DAY SAINTS SALT LAKE CITY UTAH
Enactment of the Civil Rights Bill will challenge all Americans to join in an affirmative voluntary effort to preserve order and to achieve the goal of equal treatment and opportunity for all Americans. To encourage and assist this voluntary citizens’ effort, a community relations service will be established by the bill under Secretary of Commerce Luther Hodges and a Director soon to be named. The service will assist communities in preventing or resolving civil disputes and tensions through reason, persuasion, _______________________________.
When the bill is signed, I intend to appoint a nation-wide committee of distinguished citizens from all walks of life who will augment the work of the community relations service. I want as its members leading Americans who will lend their influence, their skill, and their time to the crucial task of fostering voluntary observance of the provisions of the bill.
I deeply hope you will advise me by return telegram that you will serve on the National Citizens Committee for Community Relations, which will be established and publicly announced only after final passage of the bill.
It is contemplated that after the organization of the Community Relations Service there will be a meeting of this ___________________________________________ national program will be fully spelled out and your own role will be more clearly defined.
I urge you as a private citizen to use your leadership in the meantime to promote a spirit of acceptance and observance in your own community and business area.
Lyndon B. Johnson
(Original in President Johnson Scrapbook)
Thursday, July 2, 1964
WESTERN UNION
President Lyndon B. Johnson
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. President:
Your telegram of July first just received. While walking by your side in the White House on January 31, I decided when national difficulties crossed your path that I would attempt to lighten your load whenever possible. The Civil Rights Bill is the beginning of troubles that will require the truest and best statesmanship of the President of the United States. I accept your invitation to serve on the National Citizens’ Committee.
David O. McKay, President
(The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints)
Mon., 6 July 1964:
“Remained at home today. Sister McKay is better.
Telephoned to my secretary, Clare. I had not been in touch with the office since last Thursday.
She reported that a letter had come from Mr. Luther Hodges, Secretary of Commerce, Washington, D.C., soliciting my cooperation in assisting community leaders in resolving racial tensions and assuring harmonious observance of the new Civil Rights Law.
I asked Clare to acknowledge the letter and to tell Mr. Hodges that I have accepted President Johnson’s invitation to serve on the Civil Rights Citizens Community Relations Committee.”
Tues., 14 July 1964:
“11:30 a.m.
Received a telephone call from President Ernest L. Wilkinson, who is attending the Republican Convention in San Francisco. He said that he had learned that Sherman Lloyd who is running against him for the Senate, is claiming that he has my backing and that the Church is not supporting him (Wilkinson), and that he has a letter to that effect. Lloyd had allegedly told Leland B. Flint this. President Wilkinson then said that he has meticulously avoided bringing the Church into his campaign.
I told President Wilkinson that I have not seen Lloyd; that I have not written to him, nor am I backing him; that his claims are entirely false.”
Wed., 15 July 1964:
“Minutes of the Meeting of the First Presidency
Held Wednesday, July 15, 1964, at President McKay’s Home in Huntsville, Utah at 8 a.m.
Present: Presidents David O. McKay and N. Eldon Tanner. President Hugh B. Brown in Europe.
Pro-Utah Director
President Tanner mentioned that John M. Wallace had written asking that President Tanner accept the appointment as a member of the board of directors of Pro-Utah. President Tanner questioned the advisability of his accepting this position and thought that perhaps some other one of the General Authorities might represent the Church satisfactorily on this board and mentioned two or three names.
President McKay thought that Bishop Vandenberg would be the right man and asked President Tanner to so advise Mr. Wallace.
Tues., 4 Aug. 1964:
“National Citizens Committee for Community Relations
Clare handed me a telegram which had come from Mr. Luther H. Hodges, Secretary of Commerce, regarding a meeting to be held in Washington, D.C. Monday, August. I previously accepted President Johnson’s invitation to serve on this Committee. (See diary of July 6, 1964.)
I dictated a telegram to Clare stating that because of illness my doctors advise against my attending this meeting to be held in The White House. (See copies of telegrams following.)
Note by CM
A later telegram was received stating that the meeting had been changed from Monday, August 17, to Tuesday, August 18. However, on this day President McKay was confined to the hospital. (See copies of telegrams following.)”
Tues., 11 Aug. 1964:
“In LDS Hospital
3:00 p.m.
Note by CM
Secretary Clare called Lou Jean (President McKay’s daughter) to see how President McKay is. No phone calls are allowed to President McKay.
Lou Jean said, ‘Father is much improved! He wants to come home, but we are coaxing him to stay the rest of this week. I have been really worried about him, but today he is more like his old self. However, we do not feel that he is up to meeting Mr. and Mrs. Leonard LeSourd or Mrs. Lyndon B. Johnson, unless Mrs. Johnson meets him at the hospital.’
Flaming Gorge Dam Dedication – Invitation to Dedicate August 17.
President McKay received a telegram from Stewart L. Udall, Secretary of the Interior, inviting him to deliver the dedicatory prayer on August 17. The First Lady, Mrs. Lyndon B. Johnson, to be speaker on that occasion.
Clare called Lawrence McKay who delivered the message to President McKay and President McKay sent word back that President Hugh B. Brown is to represent him at the dedication.”
Wed., 12 Aug. 1964:
“Released from LDS Hospital
Note by Secretary Clare Middlemiss
10:00 a.m.
Lawrence came in the office and reported that his father is coming home from the Hospital this afternoon. The doctors have given permission for this with the understanding that no one see him, not even his Counselors until Monday. Lawrence said further, ‘We nearly lost him; he had a temperature of 103 degrees when he went into the hospital; in fact he was delirious, and he had difficulty in walking. The doctors are certain now that he had been infected with a virus.’
I said that President McKay probably caught the virus from one of the employees who was in his office the day before he left for Oakland. He had a bad cold, and had a coughing spell while he was in President McKay’s office, and President McKay poured a glass of water for him. The next day President McKay was in Oakland and got chilled when they wheeled him in a wheelchair around the Temple in the night air, at which time he felt a cold coming on.
Lawrence said further that the only person President McKay can see is the First Lady, Mrs. Lyndon B. Johnson, who will be here next Saturday.
I said that Milton Weilenmann of the Democratic Party had been in touch with me this morning about Mrs. Johnson’s appointment, and said that Mrs. Johnson is still desirous of meeting President McKay for a few moments wherever he is — in the hospital or at his apartment, Saturday at 10:15 a.m.
Lawrence said ‘Only Mrs. Johnson and one other may come, as father is not up to a crowd – photographers, reporters, etc. (See newspaper clippings regarding release from Hospital following.)”
Sat., 15 Aug. 1964:
“9:00 a.m.
Called Clare at her home and asked her what date I visited with President Lyndon B. Johnson in The White House, and she answered that it was on January 31. Clare said that events associated with the visit are recorded in my diary of that date, so I asked her if she would be kind enough to get the diary and bring it over to the apartment so that I could refresh my mind on the details of that visit.
9:25 a.m.
Clare was at the apartment with the diary. I spent the next twenty-five minutes reading the report of my visit to The White House.
10:10 a.m.
Visit of Lady Bird Johnson (Wife of U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson)
Sister McKay and I welcomed at our suite in the Hotel Mrs. Lyndon B. Johnson. She was accompanied only by Senator Frank E. Moss. No photographers or press reporters were allowed in the apartment. This was previously arranged according to doctors’ orders as I was released from the hospital just two days ago. I later learned that all those accompanying Mrs. Johnson were waiting at the end of the hallway, and that when the photographers learned that they could not enter the apartment, they asked to have a picture of Mrs. Johnson with my secretary Clare, showing Mrs. Johnson autographing the diary of January 31, 1964, when I visited President Johnson. As this picture was being taken, Mrs. Johnson autographed the diary, signing her name ‘Lady Bird Johnson’.
Upon learning that Mrs. Moss was out in the hallway, I asked that she be invited in. Our daughter Lou Jean (Mrs. Russell H. Blood) was also present during the interview.
Mrs. Johnson was very gracious. She conveyed the greetings and best wishes of President Johnson, and inquired about my health. We then talked about the visit I made to The White House last January. I told her how much I appreciated and enjoyed my visit, and that I was very pleased to meet her again.
Mrs. Johnson presented to me a photostat copy of a letter signed by Brigham Young, President of the Church, and Willard Richards, Clerk, written to President James K. Polk of the United States dated ‘Down on the West Bank of the Missouri River near Council Bluffs, Omaha, August 9, 1846.’ The letter explains the position of the members after the 500 men left to march in the ‘Mormon’ Battalion, and also their feelings toward the Government placing Governor Boggs in charge of the western country. (See copy of letter following.)
The First Lady also presented to me a book which bears the following inscription on the flyleaf: ‘This is the property of Wilford Woodruff, Great Salt Lake City, March 1, 1865.’ ‘The property of Wilford Woodruff, writings from the Western Standard published in San Francisco, California, published by Elder George Quayle Cannon, 1864.’ At my suggestion Mrs. Johnson placed her signature in this book, and she wrote therein: ‘For President McKay, with the admiration and respect of Lady Bird Johnson, August 15, 1964.’
Mrs. Johnson also presented me with a book written by President Johnson entitled, ‘A Time For Action’, on the flyleaf of which President Johnson had inscribed the following: ‘With great appreciation for the unique role that those of your religion have played in the development of our country.’ (Signed Lyndon B. Johnson)
Another memento presented to me by Mrs. Johnson was a colored photograph of President Johnson speaking to the members of the Tabernacle Choir in the White House on July 23, 1964, when they gave a concert for him. The inscription on this picture is as follows: ‘To Mr. and Mrs. David McKay, with grateful appreciation for the inspiring songs with which your great Choir filled The White House — an occasion we will long remember. (signed) Lyndon B. Johnson’
I asked Mrs. Johnson to convey my thanks and appreciation to President Johnson for these significant mementoes and to extend to him my heartfelt greetings and best wishes.
After a very cordial visit, Mrs. Johnson arose, and said she must leave for her scheduled appointments, and Sister McKay and I wished her well on her sight-seeing trip around Salt Lake City and throughout Utah and Arizona. We accompanied her to the door and thanked her for her gracious visit. (See newspaper clippings following.)”
Tues., 18 Aug. 1964:
“8:30 to 10:30 a.m.
Although not feeling very well, I met with my counselors at the regular hour this morning.
Mrs. Lyndon B. Johnson’s Visit
I reported to the Brethren the visit to our apartment on Saturday morning (August 14) and mentioned the presentations made to me by Mrs. Johnson.
President Johnson’s Tribute to President McKay
President Brown said that he had visited President Johnson at The White House with the Tabernacle Choir; that, as a matter of fact, he called on President Johnson a short time in advance of the Choir’s visit, and that President Johnson said to him, ‘Take my love and blessing to President McKay. He is a great American and I love him.’
President Brown further said that President Johnson was very gracious on this occasion and that Lady Bird Johnson remained with the Choir during the presentation of their numbers, and that she stood at the door and shook hands with every member of the Choir when they left.
Ezra Taft Benson in Politics
President Brown reported that President Mark E. Petersen of the West European Mission had submitted to him a memorandum stating that he wished there was some way to keep Brother Benson out of politics; that Europe hates Goldwater, and Brother Benson recently gave an interview to the Danish newspapers, and his statement in one of these papers bears this headline: ‘Mormon Apostle said America needs Goldwater’.
Brother Petersen said that this sort of publicity hurts us in Europe, and asks if there is any way to stop it.
I said that this ought not to be done, but asked that a communication be sent to Brother Benson calling attention to the report, and asking as to the accuracy of it.
Political Involvement
President Brown suggested the giving of a word of caution to the Brethren of the General Authorities regarding keeping out of politics. He mentioned a letter that had come to him from a Dutch Saint which was signed by former presidents of the Netherlands Mission and by LeGrand Richards urging the Dutch Saints to vote for Goldwater. President Brown said he phoned Brother Richards about it, and that Brother Richards said, ‘Well, it is too late to do anything now. We have sent it out, and you know and I know that we ought to have Goldwater and we ought to get him in.’ I said that it is not right for the Brethren to become involved in politics, and that I would like to talk to Brother Richards about it. President Brown will hand the letter to me.
Thurs., 17 Sept. 1964:
Surprise Visit of President Lyndon B. Johnson
9:45 a.m.
Received a telephone call from my secretary, Clare, who said that she had received a telephone call from an Assistant to the President of the United States who was on board the presidential plane enroute for Sacramento, California. He said that President Johnson would like to make an unscheduled stop at Salt Lake City and call on me if it would not be an inconvenience to me; that their plans as of the moment were to be in Salt Lake around 5:30 p.m. Clare said that she expected another call from the plane when they reach Sacramento.
I told Clare to tell the assistant that I should be very pleased to meet the President.
10:00 to 11:00 a.m.
Clare came over to the office. She took up Conference matters, and presented answers to several letters for my approval. She said that after several conversations with the assistant on the presidential plane, there will be a delay in the arrival in Salt Lake; that it now looks as though the President will arrive about 6:00 p.m.
12:30 p.m.
Had lunch with Sister McKay. The folks tried to get me to rest before the meeting with President Johnson, but I was in no mood for rest.
6:30 to 6:50 p.m.
Sister McKay and I were honored with a visit of the President of the United States. (See account of visit and newspaper clippings regarding President Johnson’s visit following, also copy of letter received from President Johnson following visit.)
Later, a copy of the report of President Johnson’s visit written up by my secretary, Clare Middlemiss, was sent to President Johnson. He replied stating, ‘There are no changes and no additions that I can suggest for the transcription of our September 17 interview. It’s a beautiful word picture of that occasion and, assuming I may keep this copy for my own records, I thank you for it.’
Thursday, September 17, 1964
THE WHITE HOUSE
Washington
September 23, 1964
Dear President McKay:
Over the weekend, when I returned from the Western trip, I found your fine letter of September 17. After reading it, I was all the more glad and grateful to have had the opportunity to visit with you personally.
Strong friendships seldom depend upon frequency of visits for their strength and meaning. While we have had too few occasions to be with you, both Lady Bird and I draw deep strength and inspiration from our bonds with you. I felt that strength especially last week as we flew back to Washington after meeting with you.
Our public debates about the Presidency this year seem to me to be stressing so falsely — and, perhaps, so foolishly — the ‘power’ of our American Presidency in terms of force and the destruction of human life. Unfortunately, the world has not yet advanced to the point where those who are free can turn their concerns away from strength and security. But I yearn sometimes to communicate to our people — more effectively than I am gifted to do — how great is the power of our free society to do works that are good and constructive in our own land and around the world.
Thinking this, as I so often do, it renews my strength and determination to meet, as I did with you, with a good man who has shown with his life the power of goodness as an influence in our times. My best wishes and my personal prayers are with you always.
Sincerely,
/s/Lyndon B. Johnson
President David O. McKay
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
Salt Lake City, Utah
Thursday, September 17, 1964
Visit of the Honorable Lyndon B. Johnson, President of the United States, with President David O. McKay of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, in President McKay’s Hotel Utah Suite, Salt Lake City, Utah, Thursday, September 17, 1964, at 6:30 p.m.
_____________________–
9:45 a.m.
A telephone call came to Clare Middlemiss, President McKay’s secretary, from President Lyndon B. Johnson’s assistant who was aboard the presidential plane as it was leaving Seattle for Sacramento, California. The assistant said that President Johnson would like to make an unscheduled stop at Salt Lake City and call on President McKay if it would not be an inconvenience to him; that their plans as of the moment were to be in Salt Lake around 5:30 p.m. Miss Middlemiss informed the assistant that she was certain President McKay would be delighted to see President Johnson, and that she would get word to him as soon as possible. The assistant asked concerning President McKay’s health and he was informed that he is now at his suite in the Hotel Utah convalescing from his recent illness, but was well enough to see President Johnson. After two or three calls from the presidential plane, word was received that the President would arrive in Salt Lake City at 6:10 p.m., and President McKay was accordingly notified.
6:10 p.m.
The presidential plane landed at the Salt Lake Airport, and although it was a ‘surprise visit’, one-thousand persons were on hand at the Airport to greet President Johnson, and an estimated twenty-thousand Utahns had gathered along the route from the Municipal Airport to the Hotel Utah.
6:30 p.m.
As President Johnson entered the McKay suite at the Hotel Utah, he and President McKay affectionately greeted each other. Then President Johnson turned to Mrs. McKay and gave her a kiss.
Accompanying President Johnson were: Stewart L. Udall, Secretary of the Interior; Utah Senator Frank E. Moss; and Nathan Eldon Tanner, Counselor to President McKay, who had gone to the airport to welcome President Johnson. Dr. Edward R. McKay and Mrs. Emma Rae McKay Ashton were also present during the interview.
After President McKay had greeted Mr. Udall and Senator Moss and the party were comfortably seated, President Johnson very jovially said: ‘We had a difficult time getting in here with all that crowd down there in the Lobby. I came to see you, but you have a lot of friends down there.’ President McKay answered, ‘They are all your friends!’
Then President McKay said (holding in his hand the letter written by Brigham Young to the President of the United States, James K. Polk, in 1846, which Mrs. Johnson had presented to him on August 15, 1964): ‘I want to thank you for this valuable possession which ‘Lady Bird’ presented to me.’
President Johnson said: ‘Thank you. I brought one to you — you may not want to read it, but you can look at it — it is ‘The Professional’ by William S. White, a Pulitzer prize winner. I also brought you a couple of my speeches delivered on this trip — one on Atomic Energy delivered up in Seattle, and one on Conservation delivered in Portland.’ (these manuscripts were personally autographed by President Johnson.)
Secretary Udall said, ‘That’s a good talk on conservation.’
President Johnson then paid tribute to the work Secretary Udall is doing, saying, ‘He is doing a good ‘Mormon’ job.’
President Johnson also said: ‘I wanted to bring you something else. The Mint makes a likeness of each President when he comes in. They have made one of me. I had about fifty extra made up for my friends — I don’t have too many friends. The seal of the United
States is on it and a statement from my first speech to the Congress — ‘We will serve all the Nation’ — and there is supposed to be a likeness of me on it.’
President McKay expressed deep appreciation for this memento, and for the book and speeches.
After presenting these, President Johnson said: ‘President McKay, I am happy to see you looking so well.’
President McKay said, ‘I haven’t an ache or a pain’, and jokingly added, ‘I am just plain sick!’
The President’s son, Dr. Edward R. McKay, exclaimed, ‘That’s the first time I have heard you admit that, Father.’
At this point, Mrs. McKay was trying to open the box which contained the medallion, and President Johnson, seeing that she was having difficulty, boyishly pulled out his pocket knife and opened it for her.
Continuing the conversation, President Johnson said, ‘President McKay, you are going to have to get where you can travel so you can bring Mrs. McKay back with you to Washington and stay at The White House for a few days.’
President McKay answered, ‘I hold my visit back there in January as one of the most interesting events of my life — the hour I spent with you at that luncheon, and your personally escorting me through The White House — I shall never forget it.’
President Johnson said again, ‘It was a great event to me — one of the most eventful days of my life. I treasure it beyond expression.’
President Johnson answered: ‘It meant a lot to me. At that time I needed folks like you around me.’
President McKay, referring to the conversation President Johnson and he had had at that time, said, ‘I meant just what I said to you at that time — Be true to yourself.’
At this point, President McKay picked up an envelope addressed to President Johnson, and said, ‘Here is a letter which I dictated to you just yesterday thanking you for the special mementoes you sent to me, presented by Mrs. Johnson. I just signed it this morning.’ (President Johnson took the letter and read it.)
President McKay then picked up President Johnson’s book ‘A Time For Action’, presented to him by Mrs. Johnson, and read: ‘You said here that you are First, a free man, an American, a public servant, and a Democrat, in that order.’
President Johnson finished the quotation by saying, ‘I am also a liberal, a conservative, a Texan, a taxpayer, a rancher, a businessman, a consumer, a parent, a voter, and not as young as I used to be or as old as I expect to be.’
Senator Moss said: ‘President McKay, that description fits you, too.’
President McKay then remarked: ‘I have admired President Johnson ever since I read that, and I did not like it when reflections were cast upon the character of the President here.’
President Johnson said, ‘We want to keep this campaign free from personalities.’
And President McKay said, ‘the President has done it under circumstances that have made a Republican think very highly of a Democrat. We haven’t had a man put forth higher ideals than has President Johnson.’
Senator Moss remarked, ‘We are going to have President Johnson visit here again in October.’
President Johnson said, ‘Lady Bird’ just fell in love with the West when she was out here; she would like to come out and settle it.’
Senator Moss added, ‘And the West fell in love with ‘Lady Bird.’
President McKay’s daughter, Emma Rae, remarked, ‘She gave a beautiful talk up at the University of Utah!’
President Johnson, turning to Nathan Eldon Tanner, said, ‘It was nice for President Tanner to come and meet me. He had to listen to all that squealing and noise’, to which Brother Tanner replied, ‘After the compliments paid to you by President McKay, I feel I have nothing more to say.’
Mrs. McKay spoke up and said, ‘President Tanner is a very, very excellent Counselor!’
President Tanner replied, ‘As I have said many times, it is a great privilege and blessing to be associated with President McKay.
President McKay then remarked, ‘President Johnson, this is a great honor, and I wish you continued success.’
President Johnson said, ‘I am just a little bit selfish in wanting to call on you. I had hoped it would not take too much of your time and energy. I feel better for having seen you,’ and President McKay replied, ‘And I do for having seen you.’
President Johnson said that inasmuch as they were flying right over Salt Lake City, he said to his assistant, ‘Why don’t you call President McKay’s secretary, and tell her I want to drop in to see President McKay, if he is in condition to see me; that I just want to say hello and meet him again; that I shall not take much of his time.’
To this, President McKay answered, ‘This is a red-letter day in my life.’ He then added, ‘President Johnson, you look well.’ And President Johnson said, ‘I feel good. The good Lord has blessed me with good health — more than I deserve to have. We have had a delightful trip. Of course, we have had to see a lot of people. We were in Canada and met with the Prime Minister regarding the Columbia River Project, then we came on to Seattle. I didn’t make any political speeches — I talked on Atomic Energy and the world we are living in. Then this morning we met with a group of men and worked out an inter-tie of private power and public power to join and work together. It is one of the greatest achievements of this sort in my life time. Secretary Udall worked it all out. It was like the Prophet Isaiah said, ‘Come now, let us all reason together.’ We celebrated that this morning — all in one room — just like the lion and the lamb; it was a great inspiration!
‘Then in Seattle and in Sacramento we announced two very important weapon systems. We are now able to intercept and destroy bomb-carrying satellites orbiting the earth and knock them out before they get to us, and we also have a new radar able to see over the horizon and provide warning of any hostile missiles, and can attack within seconds after they are launched.’
President Johnson then stood up, and President McKay remarked again that he was very happy to see him looking so well and refreshed.
President Johnson said, ‘I feel wonderful. I must leave now; I have a bunch of Senators waiting for me down at the plane. I am glad you look so well; I am proud of you. Please continue to make a restoration to full health. I do not want to overtax you now. I couldn’t cross over without coming to see you.’
President Johnson then said that Senator Howard Cannon asked to be remembered, and President McKay asked President Johnson to take his greetings to him. President Johnson then said to President McKay: ‘Thank you, and the Lord bless you!’
President Johnson and President McKay gave each other a brotherly good-bye kiss, and then President Johnson kissed Mrs. McKay good-bye.
President Johnson had very considerately asked that no reporters or photographers accompany him into President McKay’s suite, but at the request of President McKay’s son, one of the presidential photographers took one or two pictures of President Johnson and President and Mrs. McKay.
President Johnson then left the apartment. He stopped in one of the rooms a few doors down the hall for consultation with secret service men, and President McKay, accompanied by Mrs. McKay, walked out into the hall so that he could once more say good-bye and thank President Johnson for the honor he had bestowed upon them.
As President Johnson came out of the room, he waved and invited President and Mrs. McKay to attend the Inauguration and to spend two or three days at The White House.
President McKay said, ‘Thank you. That is a date. I wish you well.’
At the door of his apartment President McKay also shook hands with Calvin L. Rampton, Democratic candidate for Governor of Utah, and Major General Maurice L. Watts, Utah Adjutant General, who welcomed President Johnson in the absence of Governor George D. Clyde, who was out of the State.
On Saturday, following President Johnson’s visit, Mr. George Reedy, Press Secretary at The White House, called President McKay’s secretary, Clare Middlemiss, at her home, and said that the Associated Press, United Press, etc. are asking for a print of the picture which was taken of President Johnson and President and Mrs. McKay. He said the picture is very good, but before releasing it President Johnson wanted to know if it would be all right with President McKay. The secretary by telephone received permission from President McKay to have the picture released, and Mr. Reedy was so informed by telephone.
(Minutes by Clare Middlemiss, Secretary – Copy sent to President Johnson. See his letter concerning this following)
Thursday, September 17, 1964
September 23, 1964
My dear President Johnson:
I am enclosing herewith a transcription of the interview you and I had when you called at our suite in the Hotel Utah on September 17.
I am sending it to you for your approval before I have my secretary make a final entry in my diary. Please feel free to make any changes or additions you may wish.
It was indeed a pleasure and an honor to have you call on Mrs. McKay and me.
With kindest personal regards, I remain
Sincerely yours,
David O. McKay
Honorable Lyndon B. Johnson
President of the United States
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Thursday, September 17, 1964
September 29, 1964
Dear President McKay:
There are no changes and no additions that I can suggest for the transcription of our September 17 interview. It’s a beautiful word picture of that occasion and, assuming I may keep this copy for my own records, I thank you for it. And, again, my thanks for the visit — it was a most enjoyable occasion.
I hope this note finds you feeling well.
With warmest personal regards always to you and Mrs. McKay in which Mrs. Johnson joins, I am
Sincerely,
Lyndon B. Johnson
Mr. David O. McKay
President
The Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-day Saints
47 East South Temple Street
Salt Lake City, Utah”
Mon., 21 Sept. 1964:
“9:00 a.m.
Mrs. Joseph L. Wirthlin of the Republican Party called Clare Middlemiss, Secretary, and asked her to find out from President McKay if he will visit with Mr. William E. Miller, Vice-Presidential candidate from New York, on Wednesday at noon.
Later, the secretary presented this to President McKay and he said, ‘Yes, I shall be pleased to receive a visit from Mr. Miller as I have other Vice-Presidential candidates.’
Clare then called Mrs. Wirthlin and told her that President McKay would be pleased to see Mr. Miller next Wednesday at noon. Mrs. Wirthlin said that Mr. Miller will come from Ogden, and then at 2:00 p.m. he will speak to the student body at the Brigham Young University.
Wed., 23 Sept. 1964:
“12:30 p.m.
Visit of Mr. William E. Miller, Republican Vice-Presidential Candidate
Sister McKay and I were pleased to receive in our suite at the Hotel Utah Mr. William E. Miller, Republican Vice-Presidential Candidate.
Dr. Ernest L. Wilkinson, Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate, introduced Mr. Miller to us. Governor George D. Clyde, Mr. Mitch Melich, candidate for Utah’s Governor, Mrs. Melich, State Republican Chairman, Mr. Giles, and Mrs. Joseph L. Wirthlin, were present, as well as several reporters and photographers.
Sister McKay and I enjoyed our visit with Mr. Miller and the others very much. We laughingly joined in the political banter, but I made no statements of my political views, excepting wishing Mr. Miller success. I will admit, however, that Sister McKay was a little more free in expressing her political preferences. (See following notes on visit by George Scott, Deseret News reporter, and newspaper clippings concerning the visit of Mr. Miller.)
Wednesday, September 23, 1964
Report of Visit of Representative William E. Miller, Republican Vice-Presidential Candidate, to President David O. McKay in his Suite at the Hotel Utah, Wednesday, September 23, 1964 at 12:30 p.m.
(By George Scott, reporter for Deseret News)
Representative William E. Miller, Republican candidate for Vice-President, was warmly received by President David O. McKay of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and Mrs. McKay, when he and other Republican candidates entered the McKay’s eighth-floor Suite in the Hotel Utah.
Ernest L. Wilkinson, Utah senatorial candidate, introduced the President and Mrs. McKay to Representative Miller, explaining that he would soon be taking Representative Miller to the BYU to address 17,000 students.
‘It is a pleasure to see you here,’ said President McKay.
‘Sorry we are late but don’t hold that against us,’ said Representative Miller.
The Vice-Presidential candidate showed concern about President McKay standing so long after his recent illness.
Mrs. McKay suggested they all sit on the couch and President McKay agreed.
Representative Miller smiled and took his seat, saying, ‘she’s the boss’ to which President McKay replied, ‘I’m glad you said that.’
Governor Clyde made a late arrival and was introduced around, joining others on the couch.
Dr. Wilkinson told President McKay:
‘I would like to tell the students you’re going to vote the Republican ticket. How about it?’
President McKay laughed but made no reply.
Joining in the fun, candidate Miller said, ‘When Mr. Johnson was out here you told him you ‘wished him well’.
‘Can you say, we hope you’ll win?’
President McKay smiled as Mrs. McKay laughingly declared, ‘We’ll sure do that.’
President McKay admitted his wife was a ‘real Republican’.
Dr. Wilkinson asked President McKay if he had any message for them to carry to the BYU and President McKay came back with the requested ‘message’:
‘Don’t mix religion with politics.’
In parting after their fifteen minute visit, President McKay took Representative Miller’s hand and wished him success, stating that it has been ‘great to see you’.
Representative Miller commented that it had been a most pleasant opportunity to visit President McKay, saying:
‘I think I can safely say, we are highly encouraged to receive President McKay’s best wishes.'”
Tues., 29 Sept. 1964:
“Note by Clare Middlemiss, Secretary
7:45 a.m.
Mr. Fred Finlayson, Chairman of the Utah Citizens Committee for Barry M. Goldwater, telephoned to say that Senator Goldwater will arrive in Salt Lake City, Saturday, October 10, at 3:00 p.m. He is scheduled to speak in the Tabernacle at 7:30 that evening. He has expressed a desire to meet with President McKay, and would like to see him about 5:30 p.m.
The secretary later relayed this information to President McKay, and he said that he would be pleased to meet Senator Goldwater.
Wed., 30 Sept. 1964:
“Politics, Statement on
President Brown said that politicians are asking whether the Church would be willing to make a statement this year to the effect that the Church is not in politics and that it takes no side with either party. The question was raised as to whether this might be mentioned in the Priesthood Meeting Saturday night. I said that we must be very careful as to what we say in order not to intensify political feelings because this is going to be a heated campaign.”
Sat., 10 Oct. 1964:
“5:30 p.m.
According to appointment previously arranged, received a courtesy call from Senator Barry M. Goldwater of Arizona, Republican Presidential Candidate.
Sister McKay and I had a very cordial and interesting visit with Senator Goldwater. (See following report of visit written up by Clare Middlemiss, President McKay’s secretary; see newspaper clippings following.)
Saturday, October 10, 1964
Visit of Senator Barry M. Goldwater, Republican Presidential Candidate, to President and Mrs. David O. McKay in their suite at the Hotel Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, Saturday, October 10, 1964 at 5:30 p.m.
In accordance with an appointment previously arranged by Elder Delbert L. Stapley, a personal friend of Senator Goldwater, and members of the local Republican Party, Senator Goldwater arrived at the McKay suite in the Hotel Utah promptly at 5:30 p.m. He was accompanied by his assistant Charles Justice, Elders Ezra Taft Benson, Delbert L. Stapley, Dr. Ernest L. Wilkinson, Senatorial candidate, Mr. Fred Finlinson, and Bishop Andrews of the Citizens for Goldwater Committee. Elder Robert Wright, local attorney, and president McKay’s secretary, Clare Middlemiss, and Theresia Mayr, Clare’s assistant, were also present.
President and Sister McKay, who were sitting in the living room stood up as Senator Goldwater entered the room. Senator Goldwater went directly over to them and warmly greeted them, saying, ‘It is certainly nice of you to see me.’ President McKay answered, ‘I am honored and glad that you included this visit to us on your trip to Utah. Senator Goldwater said, ‘I couldn’t miss Salt Lake City. You know, my daughter and son-in-law graduated from the University of Utah, and two of their children were born here in Salt Lake City. They now have four children.’
Ernest Wilkinson said, ‘Senator Goldwater’s son was a medical student at the University of Utah’, and Senator Goldwater added, ‘My son is now in medical research, and at present is working on a theory as to why Negroes have fewer coronaries and less arthritis than do the White people. He believes the color of the skin has something to do with it — the sun doesn’t go through the dark skin, and there is some connection there. It is just a theory, and he has not proved anything yet.’ Someone then asked the question, ‘Do you think we shall have to stop taking sun baths?’, and President McKay said laughingly, ‘My skin isn’t colored, and I have never had arthritis, or any other ailments, until just lately.’ Sister McKay said, ‘No, you certainly have not!’
Senator Goldwater then said, ‘President McKay, during my travels throughout the Country the past two or three years, I have sensed that the American people are worried. At first I did not know just what it was. Now I know — they are worried about the immorality, and the high rate of crime which is increasing five times faster than our population, and it is not coming from the wrong side of the tracks — it is coming from people who should never be in trouble. I have sensed it especially since the Bobbie Baker Case, but nothing has been done about it, and the American people wonder why these things go on in Washington. Graft must be stopped. I am not finding it among the people whom you would normally expect to find it; that is, among the lower levels of income, but among those who should know better, and who have no reason to get into trouble.’
President McKay said, ‘It is entirely wrong, and this subject of immorality and dishonesty among the young, and people in high places is an appropriate subject to discuss. It is a very unfortunate condition.’
Senator Goldwater said, ‘When people can look up and see morality in leaders, they follow them, but when they see leaders in government or in organizations engage in immorality, they say, ‘If they can do it, I can do it.’ Then the children get into it. They hear the father say that he cheated the government out of $200 in income taxes, and the children say, ‘Well, if my father did it, it is all right for me to do it.’
Ernest L. Wilkinson then said that Goldwater has been writing three columns for newspapers and magazines, but unfortunately they have not been carried in the Deseret News — however, they have been sent to him, and he has read everyone of them. He said that Goldwater has been teaching and writing for years on morality and high principles.
President McKay said, ‘I am thoroughly in favor of what Senator Goldwater says, his stand for morality, and a higher plane in politics and government are commendable.’
Ernest L. Wilkinson then said, ‘A more spiritual man than Goldwater never entered politics; his articles are just filled with spiritual truths, and are akin to our beliefs.
President McKay then said, ‘He has impressed me as a good man, and one who is favorable to the Mormons,’ and Brother Wilkinson said, ‘He is almost one of us.’
Elder Benson then spoke up and said, ‘I campaigned for Senator Goldwater in 1958 — went to Safford and Mesa, and a lot of people were for him. I wish every man had the high ideals and high standards, and courage that he has.’
Elder Stapley, who has been acquainted with Barry Goldwater all his life, said, ‘He has always been forthright,’ and President McKay said, ‘From what I have heard about him, he is very good.’ Brother Wilkinson said, ‘We not only know where he stands; but we know he stands right.’
Senator Goldwater then said, ‘My conscience is clear; you do not have to worry when it is.’ He then talked about Senator Ken Keating, saying that when he first came from the House, he was a Conservative, but just to get re-elected, he is now becoming a Liberal.
He said that President Johnson cannot stand to have a Kennedy, but Keating can stand up to Robert Kennedy. President McKay asked if Goldwater thinks ‘Bobby’ Kennedy has a chance, and Senator Goldwater said, ‘Yes, he has a popular name; a well-liked name. No one disliked John Kennedy. We fought like cats and dogs, but you liked him, and I think Bobby’s name will get him a lot of votes.’
For the next few moments present politics in New York and other Eastern cities were discussed, and how they are controlled by local bosses, as well as by the Federal Government, and that the next thing they will be controlling the U.S. Senate.
President McKay remarked: ‘We are on the downgrade to more and more Federal Government control.’
Ernest Wilkinson stated that if things go on as they are, in ten years the Federal Government will ultimately have control of the Senate and the United States, and that it is why they can override the Supreme Court.
Senator Goldwater emphatically stated, ‘We do not want centralized Government; we want the Constitution that we now have.’
President McKay said, ‘We will be taken from within.’
Senator Goldwater then said, ‘The decision of the Supreme Court on prayer in the school was not proper or legal; we are disturbed about it, and about the resistance to the proposed constitutional amendment to get prayer back into the school room.’
Ernest Wilkinson then said, ‘President McKay has spoken out against this,’ and Brother Benson said, ‘I remember President McKay’s exact words — ‘that the decision of the Supreme Court is leading this Nation down the road to Atheism.’ President McKay said, ‘And it is, too. There is no doubt about it.’
Senator Goldwater then said, ‘The court is not making decisions on constitutional grounds — here are nine men who see things they would personally like to change. The majority of them think it is wrong to pray in the schools, but there is nothing in the Constitution that gives them the power to make such a decision.’
Senator Goldwater also said, ‘Worse decisions are made in the field of crime; it is now safer to be a criminal than to be a law-abiding citizen. It is easier to let the fellow go than to put him in jail.’
Brother Benson then said that there is a recent article in the Deseret News that states that it is not safe to walk in Central Park in New York — if you take a walk in there, you do it at your own risk.’
Sister McKay spoke up and said, ‘Just think of that!’
Then a discussion followed regarding the sacredness of the Constitution of the United States; that it is an inspired document, and how some feel that because of the increase in population, changes will have to be made. Brother Wilkinson said that with respect to this matter, President Lyndon Johnson has been in favor of all the changes that have been made.
Brother Benson said, ‘We know how President McKay has instructed the people on the Constitution; that it is in very deed an inspired document.’
Senator Goldwater then said, ‘You do not have trouble with Mormons; you get to the family, and this is the real root of it — the family teachers the right principles, and you would really have to look hard to find a Mormon boy in trouble. I wish I could say the same of my own church.’ He then said that he is an Episcopalian, and said that they had had to let one of their leaders who was too liberal know where they stood, and they got rid of him, and now they have one on whom they can depend.
President McKay then said, ‘We are a long way down the road from the ideals of our Founding Fathers.’
(At this point President McKay seemed somewhat weary and had a little difficulty in bringing out the words he wanted to say, and Brother Benson remarked, ‘He is entitled to hesitate a little — he has done so well for ninety-one years!’)
Senator Goldwater then said, ‘I do not want to keep you — I think our time is running out.’ (The conversation had now been going on for forty minutes or more.)
President McKay said to Senator Goldwater, ‘I am proud to talk to you, and I am concerned over the way conditions are going.’
Senator Goldwater then said, ‘There is enough power in the Executive Branch of our Government that if a man wanted to take over the Government, he could,’ and Brother Wilkinson answered, ‘He could, pretty much.’
Senator Goldwater then talked about the powers of the government — the unemployment compensations, etc., and said that if you do not go along with the government, they can say to the States, ‘All right, no more money; if you do not vote for what we want, we shall have to stop unemployment compensation. The power they have is great, and our job is to get it back where it belongs.’
Senator Goldwater said the theme he wishes to talk about tonight he knows is in the hearts of the people, young and old. He said he hesitated going into it even though many advisors have told him to. He said it is hard to know how to approach the problem of crime and immortality, but that the people seem to respond and want to hear about it.
President McKay said, ‘They want to know about it.’
At this point President McKay picked up a photostat copy of his diary of June 6, 1960, when he first met Senator Goldwater, introduced by Bishop Thorpe B. Isaacson. He read to him from his diary that he had been impressed at that time that ‘he was a good man; one favorable to the Mormons.’ President McKay also read from a photostat copy of his diary of June 2, 1961, when Senator Goldwater was a Commencement speaker at the Brigham Young University at which time an honorary doctor’s degree was conferred upon him. Senator Goldwater said that he felt very honored and that he had a very choice picture of President McKay which was taken at that time — that a friend had sent it to him, and that he prized it highly.
President McKay remarked at this time that his secretary, Clare Middlemiss, had ‘done a great job in keeping records for him’, and Senator Goldwater said, ‘Yes, I have heard about it.’
President McKay then presented Senator Goldwater with an inscribed copy of his book, ‘Treasures of Life’, a compilation of some of his writings. Senator Goldwater said, ‘I have heard of this, and I am very proud to have this copy, President McKay. If I sound like you in some of my talks, you will know I have been reading your book. Thank you very much.’
Brother Wilkinson then said to Senator Goldwater, ‘Your speeches and talks sound very much like the President of the Church.’
Senator Goldwater then said that his mother had taught him in his youth that if he smoked or drank coffee, he wouldn’t grow very much, so he had never indulged in these things, and that many times when he had refused to take liquor, smoke, or drink coffee, people had asked him if he were a Mormon.
Brother Wilkinson told of an incident in 1949 when Goldwater and another man had cleaned up the city of Phoenix from vice and crime. Senator Goldwater also reminisced about some of the Mormons he had known in Arizona, especially the Udall family.
President McKay remarked that we should have men who uphold high principles and high ideals, in politics and government; that federal influence is very pronounced in this country, and that the states are losing their influence.
Brother Wilkinson then asked President McKay if he had anything to say to Senator Goldwater about his candidacy for the Presidency, and President McKay said, ‘I wish you success’ and Brother Wilkinson said, ‘The more I see him (Goldwater), the more I admire him.’
Sister McKay said, ‘Yes, I do wish him well.’
Senator Goldwater then said that his wife wished him to extend to President and Mrs. McKay her greetings and best wishes; that she had been overly tired from the campaign trips they had been taking, and that he had let her go home for two or three days rest. President McKay said, ‘Give her our kindest personal regards.’
At this point, the reporters from the Deseret News, the Tribune, the Associated Press, and one from the Goldwater party were invited in, and they spent fifteen or twenty minutes asking questions and taking notes for the newspapers. Photographers from newspapers and Television had been allowed to come in for pictures just previous to the interview.
Following their departure, Senator Goldwater, Elders Ezra Taft Benson and Delbert L. Stapley, Ernest L. Wilkinson, Fred Finlinson, Richard Andrews, and Senator Goldwater’s assistant Mr. Justice, left the McKay suite.
Before Senator Goldwater left, he presented to President McKay a copy of the speech that he was to deliver in the Salt Lake Tabernacle this evening. Attached to it was a card upon which he had written a personal message to President McKay.
At 7:30 p.m. Senator Goldwater was the speaker in the Tabernacle. He was very well received, and the building was crowded to overflowing.”
Tues., 13 Oct. 1964:
11:00 to 12:30 p.m.
Had a meeting with my secretary, Clare. She presented many letters and requests for appointments. I scheduled four meetings for tomorrow morning.
One letter presented was from Frank E. Moss, Utah Senator, requesting that the Salt Lake Tabernacle be opened to President Lyndon B. Johnson for a political meeting on October 20, 1964. I told Clare to call Senator Moss and tell him that the Tabernacle is always open to a President of the United States.
Later, because of national affairs, and particularly the explosion of an atomic bomb by Red China, President Johnson’s trip to Utah was cancelled.
Fri., 16 Oct. 1964:
“4:00 p.m.
Dr. Ernest L. Wilkinson, Republican candidate for the Senate, called at the apartment and gave me a report of the progress of his campaign. He mentioned the slandering and unwarranted methods of the opposition party.”
Wed., 21 Oct., 1964:
10:30 a.m.
Dr. Ernest L. Wilkinson called at the apartment. He reported that his campaign for the Senate on the Republican ticket is not coming very well; that he is spending a small fortune. He said that his opponent seems to have unlimited funds.”
Thurs., 22 Oct. 1964:
“8:30 to 9:00 a.m.
Held a meeting with my counselors in the office at the Hotel. Among the matters discussed were:
Politics
I presented to my counselors an article for the press which I had prepared to be signed by the First Presidency urging our people to vote in the coming election for the candidates of their choice after a careful study of the situation. (See Diary of Friday, October 23, 1964.)
Fri., 23 Oct. 1964:
“Political Statement
Statement signed by the First Presidency urging the people to vote in accordance with their honest, political convictions, and to strive to support good and conscientious candidates, of either party, who are aware of the dangers inherent in Communism, etc., was issued in the daily newspapers.
Friday, October 23, 1964
October 22, 1964
We find ourselves now immersed in a great political campaign in America for the purpose of selecting candidates for office in local, state, and national positions. We urge you as citizens to participate in this great democratic process, in accordance with your honest political convictions.
However, above all else, strive to support good and conscientious candidates, of either party, who are aware of the great dangers inherent in Communism, and who are truly dedicated to the Constitution in the tradition of our Founding Fathers.
They should also pledge their sincere fealty to our way of liberty — a liberty which aims at the preservation of both personal and property rights.
Study the issues, analyze the candidates on these grounds, and then exercise your franchise as free men and women.
Sincerely yours,
David O. McKay
Hugh B. Brown
N. Eldon Tanner
The First Presidency”
Mon. 26 Oct. 1964:
“8:30 a.m.
Held the regular meeting of the First Presidency in my apartment in the Hotel. We discussed matters pertaining to the following:
President Lyndon B. Johnson’s Visit
President Brown reported that President Lyndon B. Johnson will spend Wednesday night in Salt Lake City and would like to see me the first thing Thursday morning, after which he will speak at a Democratic meeting to be held in the Tabernacle at 10:00 a.m. It was agreed that we should postpone the hour for holding the Council Meeting that day until 11:00 a.m. (It was unnecessary to postpone the meeting as President Johnson spoke in the Tabernacle at an earlier hour than was first planned.)
Wed., 28 Oct. 1964:
President Lyndon B. Johnson’s Visit
This afternoon, in talking with Sister McKay about President Johnson’s visit, we decided to invite him to have breakfast with us here in our apartment.
The advance men of President Johnson’s party who were already in the Hotel got in touch with the Presidential plane and asked President Johnson if he and Mrs. Johnson would accept an invitation to have breakfast with Sister McKay and me tomorrow morning. President Johnson immediately sent word back that Mrs. Johnson and he would be pleased to accept the invitation.”
Thurs., 29 Oct. 1964:
“Visit of President and Mrs. Lyndon B. Johnson to President McKay’s Apartment
As President and Mrs. Johnson entered the living room, President Johnson walked over to where I was sitting. As I started to rise, he said, ‘Don’t get up, Mr. President.’
After we had exchanged greetings with President and Mrs. Johnson, we immediately went into the dining room where breakfast was served to us. President Johnson sat on my right, and Mrs. Johnson on my left, and Sister McKay sat on Mrs. Johnson’s left, and our daughter Emma Rae at the end of the table.
(Emma Rae later reported that her father gave a most beautiful prayer and blessing on the food.)
A delicious breakfast of orange juice, sausages, ham, and scrambled eggs was served. President and Mrs. Johnson drank sanka coffee, and Mrs. Johnson remarked that she was glad that President Johnson was eating so well, because he had not eaten very much for several days. President Johnson said that it was the best meal he had had in a long time.
Before we were seated at the table, President Johnson looked out on the mountains from the East window of the dining room, and commented upon the beautiful view. As we looked out on the rose-hued sky, I told him that the sky was all aglow this morning just for his coming.
During the course of conversation, Mrs. Johnson talked about what she had heard about the Mormons who had come to settle in Texas in the pioneer days — that they were fine, hard-working, industrious people. I then told them a little about how they had left Missouri and settled in the far west, and were the first to settle and build the towns and cities in the surrounding states. I them mentioned Lady Bird’s gift of the letter written by President Brigham Young to President James K. Polk at the time the Saints were being driven out. Mrs. Johnson said that they had looked carefully through their historical documents for something that would please us. Our daughter, Emma Rae, then talked about Lady Bird’s visit in August, and of how they admired her standing in the rain to talk to the students. Mention was then made of their two daughters who have been campaigning for President Johnson, and President Johnson said, ‘Yes, our seventeen-year-old has a boy friend, and she said the other day, ‘I haven’t had a weekend off since May.’ Emma Rae then talked about her five children; that one son was now in the service, and the other on a mission in Europe. This brought the conversation into our missionary system, and President and Mrs. Johnson asked several questions regarding it.
President Johnson then talked about the wonders of the modern-day travel, of the cities he had visited on this last trip, of the crowds, and how his hand was sore from shaking hands.
At this point, President Brown and President Tanner, and Senator Frank E. Moss arrived at the apartment. So we gathered in the living room and visited for about ten minutes. Two photographers were permitted in the room — no reporters or political representatives were allowed in. My secretary, Clare, was present, and took notes of the interview.
8:50 a.m.
President and Mrs. Johnson stood up to go as they had an appointment to appear for a few moments at the gathering which was being held in another part of the Hotel. Sister McKay and I told them how pleased we were to have them with us this morning; that we knew of their heavy schedule and felt honored that they would call on us. President Johnson said he was delighted to meet with us again.
They then said good-bye and left the apartment. They went directly to another suite where a breakfast was in progress with George Eccles as the host. President Johnson paused long enough to greet those attending this breakfast.
I think a great deal of President Johnson, and he seemed to reciprocate that feeling, and so did Lady Bird, who is very charming.
At 9:00 a.m. President and Mrs. Johnson arrived at the Tabernacle, where President Johnson delivered a major political speech.
At this time a hook-up from the Tabernacle to our Television set in the Hotel was completed, and Sister McKay and I, Emma Rae, Clare Middlemiss, the nurse, and Gaby — the housekeeper, sat in the living room and heard and saw President Johnson deliver his speech to a large audience crowded into the Tabernacle.
Note by CM
The following is the report made by President McKay at the Council Meeting:
‘President McKay said he had no special report to make. He mentioned that he had been somewhat worried recently because of his speech defect, that he did not know just what to do to correct it. The President said that he had had difficulty with his speech for several months. He also said that he was very happy to be with the brethren again and that he had come a long way since the occasion when he was administered to in the Hospital, and the brethren held a fast and prayer meeting in his behalf.
The President reported that President Lyndon B. Johnson and his wife, Lady Bird Johnson, were the guests of President and Sister McKay at breakfast in their apartment this morning. President McKay said he thought a great deal of President Johnson and President Johnson seemed to reciprocate that feeling and so did Lady Bird, that she was very gracious. The President said he enjoyed the few minutes he and Sister McKay had with President Johnson and his wife. He said he considered them very nice people.
President Tanner commented that he thought President and Mrs. Johnson showed a real affection for President McKay by having breakfast with President and Sister McKay, notwithstanding the fact that Marriner Eccles and others had arranged for the President to have breakfast with him and a group of friends at $500 a plate. It was understood that President Johnson met with Mr. Eccles and his group for about ten minutes after he left President McKay.'”
Sat., 31 Oct. 1964:
“10:30 a.m.
Dr. Ernest L. Wilkinson came to the apartment and reported about a scurrilous letter referring to his attitude as President of the Brigham Young University on Federal Aid to Education that is being circulated by his opponents, which involves the integrity of the Board of Trustees of the Brigham Young University as well as Dr. Wilkinson.
A statement regarding this matter will be published in the newspapers Monday.”
Sun., 1 Nov. 1964:
“10:30 a.m.
According to appointment, Dr. Ernest L. Wilkinson called on me at the office in our apartment at the Hotel Utah. He reported that within the past few days a very unfortunate and scurrilous attack has been made on him by his political opponents; that an anonymous letter, filled with errors, distortions and innuendos, is now being circulated, which has caused the Federal Bureau of Investigation to make an investigation of the charges that are being made against him. Since this attack impugns the motives and objectives of the Board of Trustees of the Brigham Young University, as well as those of Dr. Wilkinson, the former President of the school, Dr. Wilkinson recommends that I issue a statement concerning this matter in order to correct the impressions that have been given.
I told Brother Wilkinson that I shall gladly sign a statement correcting these untruths, and that I shall see that it is published in tomorrow’s newspapers. (See Monday, November 2, 1964, for newspaper clippings regarding this.)
Dr. Wilkinson then reported that he had just been informed that the entire editorial staff of the ‘Y’ Universe (the BYU student newspaper) had decided that in Monday’s edition of the paper they would unanimously endorse Dr. Wilkinson for the office of United States Senator in view of the contributions he has made to the BYU, which they had listed in a carefully-prepared statement.
Wanting to make sure that there would be no objection to this statement, they took it to President Earl C. Crockett, who in turn presented it to President Hugh B. Brown. President Brown informed them that it was the policy of all Church newspapers never to endorse any candidate for office, and he considered the student newspaper to be a Church newspaper for this purpose, and that they should not run this endorsement. Brother Wilkinson said that President Brown may be correct in making this deduction, but on the other hand, he could see a great difference between the expression of opinion by the editors of a school newspaper and any form of declaration by the Deseret News or the First Presidency.
I made no commitment to Brother Wilkinson on this matter, but felt that there would be no objection to the students expressing their preference for their former President if they desired to do so; however, the school paper had already gone to press before I had an opportunity to talk to President Crockett about it, so this matter was not corrected.”
Mon., 2 Nov. 1964:
“Telephoned to my secretary, Clare Middlemiss, and told her of Dr. Wilkinson’s visit with me yesterday at which time he reported the scurrilous attack made on him by his political opponents. I stated that a statement has been signed by me correcting the falsehoods appearing in the anonymous letter that has been sent out as an attack on Dr. Wilkinson. I instructed her to get in touch with Earl Hawkes, General Manager of the Deseret News, immediately and see that he follows through with the publishing of this statement in the paper today.
I also said that a revised statement regarding the people’s getting out to vote signed by the First Presidency would be re-run again in today’s papers.
9:00 a.m.
Senator Frank E. Moss, with one of his aides, came into the office in the Hotel without an appointment. He was all upset about the statement regarding the anonymous letter which is to be published. He said that he felt that the statement indicated that I was endorsing Dr., Wilkinson, and that it would ‘ruin’ him, and asked that I add the following paragraph, which he had already prepared, to the statement:
‘We know that Senator Moss had nothing to do with either the scurrilous letter or the political advertisements. Senator Moss also holds positions within the Church, and we know him to be a man of high principle and integrity. The Church neither favors nor endorses Senator Moss or Dr. Wilkinson. We are proud of both of them, and will not side with either or against either of these fine men.’
Before I could give consideration to the matter, he picked up the telephone and called Mr. Hawkes of the Deseret News and read the statement to him.
Later, after reconsidering the matter, I called Brother Hawkes of the Deseret News and revised the paragraph to read:
‘Senator Moss denies having had anything to do with either the scurrilous letter or the political advertisements. The Church neither favors nor endorses Senator Moss or Dr. Ernest L. Wilkinson.'”
Wed., 4 Nov. 1964:
“11:00 a.m.
Sister McKay and I listened to the election returns — the country in a record voting, has elected Lyndon B. Johnson as President, and Hubert H. Humphreys as Vice-President. Here in Utah, it is also a Democratic victory, with Calvin Rampton as Governor, who defeated the Republican candidate Mitch Melich, and Senator Frank E. Moss (Democrat) was re-elected to the Senate, defeating Dr. Ernest L. Wilkinson.
The people of the country have now made their decision, and have voted for a more liberal form of government!
President Lyndon B. Johnson – Telephone Call
I learned from the nurse that after I had retired this evening, President Johnson called me from his ranch in Texas. As I was sleeping she did not feel to awaken me, and I therefore did not get the opportunity to talk to the President.”
Thurs., 5 Nov. 1964:
“Thursday, November 5, 1964
November 9, 1964
My dear President McKay:
I have thought a great deal about you in the past months as I have been in the midst of a vigorous campaign. I’ve kept posted on your progress and improvement and am naturally delighted that you have made so much progress.
The election results this year certainly bear out the counsel you gave me to stay out of the national picture in 1964, unless I was drafted. It is almost unbelievable that the results should have focused as much attention on the Michigan election. Hopefully, I can measure up to the tremendous opportunity we have here in Michigan to point the road to sound state and local government and at the same time take some hand in rebuilding, broadening and unifying the Republican Party nationally.
I just wanted you to know how grateful I am to be able to have the benefit from your inspired counsel and advice. Lenore joins me in our prayerful good wishes expressed daily for you and your lovely wife. You are a great inspiration.
Sincerely,
George Romney
President David O. McKay
47 East South Temple Street
Salt Lake City, Utah”
Sun., 29 Nov. 1964:
“At 5:30 p.m., the telephone rang. The nurse answered it and reported that President Lyndon B. Johnson was calling.
I took the receiver and heard a cheery exclamation: ‘President McKay, how are you — this is President Johnson!’
After a few words of greeting, I extended congratulations to him on his election to the Presidency, and said that I was very sorry that I missed talking to him when he called several days ago. He said that he wanted to talk to me and express appreciation for the hospitality I extended to him on his visit recently to Salt Lake City. He then asked about Sister McKay, and I said, ‘She is right here by my side — she would like to say hello to you.’ Sister McKay took the phone and had a very pleasant conversation with the President. I then talked to President Johnson and thanked him for his graciousness in calling.”
Tues., 22 Dec. 1964:
“11:15 a.m.
Senator and Mrs. Wallace F. Bennett called. My son Lawrence and his wife Mildred and daughter Joyce accompanied them. We had a very pleasant visit with them.
Church Properties – Taxation of
Senator Bennett reported that he has written calling attention to a bill that is expected will come before Congress which Representative Long of Louisiana is presenting and which has as its objective the taking away the rights of churches to be exempt from taxation. Senator Bennett says he is watching the matter and will keep us informed.”
Thurs., 31 Dec. 1964:
“8:30 a.m.
President Tanner and I met in my private office for the regular meeting of the First Presidency, President Brown being in California for the Holidays.
Tabernacle Choir – Invitation to Sing at President Lyndon B. Johnson’s Inaugural Ceremonies
Before we got started with our meeting, I received a call from Brother Isaac M. Stewart, President of the Tabernacle Choir, who was in California. He said that Senator Frank E. Moss of Washington, D.C. had contacted him and said that President Lyndon B. Johnson has requested that the Tabernacle Choir sing at the Inauguration in Washington, D.C. on January 20, 1965.
Brother Stewart said that Senator Moss will call me from Washington and that he wants to speak with President Tanner also. If permission is given for the Choir to go to Washington, Brother Stewart would like to go ahead with arrangements for lodging for the Choir members. The expenses will be paid from Washington. (See letter from Brother Stewart and announcement following.)
9:05 a.m.
Senator Frank E. Moss called from Washington, D.C. and spoke to President Tanner who was in my office. He stated that President Johnson has requested that the Choir sing at the Inaugural Ceremonies. Senator Moss said he felt that this is quite an honor, and hoped that I would give my consent for the Choir to accept the invitation.
I told President Tanner to tell Senator Moss that I take the position that if we receive an invitation, we shall accept it. Senator Moss then asked that no announcements will be made at present – not until the invitation has been sent out. He said he just wanted to know right now if the Choir would be given permission to accept the invitation, because he has to arrange for the Choir’s lodging.
Senator Moss then asked that President Tanner give his best wishes to me, at which time I took the phone and had the following conversation with Senator Moss:
Senator Moss to President McKay: ‘Oh, President McKay, Happy New Year!’
President McKay: ‘Happy New Year to you!’
Senator Moss: “I am delighted to wish you a Happy New Year! It is wonderful that the Choir is invited to sing at the Inauguration.’
President McKay: ‘If President Johnson has requested it, it will be an
honor for the Choir to sing.’
Senator Moss: ‘Yes, the President requested that the Choir sing.’
President McKay: ‘We shall then wait for the invitation.’
Senator Moss: ‘Thank you, and again Happy New Year!, also to your
sweet wife.’
President McKay: ‘Thank you. Happy New Year!’
Following the conversation with Senator Moss, I said that I considered the invitation an honor and that the Choir would be pleased to sing at the Inaugural in response to the President’s invitation.
Sun., 3 Jan. 1965:
“This morning, Dr. Ernest L. Wilkinson of the Brigham Young University came over to the apartment and discussed with me the proposed legislations for the forthcoming State legislature. He said that because of his recent political experience he is quite familiar with the proposals of the Legislature, and that he is concerned about some of them. He feels that the Right-to-Work law should not be repealed; that the State should not be authorized to engage in a heavy bonding program; and that grants to education be reasonable, but not consonant with the excessive demands of the Utah Educational Association.
It was decided that Elder Delbert L. Stapley should be asked to watch the interests of our people in these State Legislative matters in the best way he could; that the Church as such could not enter into these political matters.”
Wed., 20 Jan. 1965:
4:00 p.m.
Telephone Call from President Lyndon B. Johnson
I was surprised to receive a telephone call from President Lyndon B. Johnson from The White House, Washington, D.C. It was indeed gratifying that he would call during this unusually busy time, right in the midst of his inaugural activities, to tell me that I was in his thoughts during his Inaugural Address, and to express appreciation for the singing of the Tabernacle Choir. (For details, see following notes.)
Wednesday, January 20, 1965
Telephone Call From President Johnson
At 4:00 p.m. I was surprised to receive a telephone call from the President of the United States (Lyndon B. Johnson) who had been inaugurated in services between 10:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon today.
President Johnson said: ‘Dr. McKay, I want you to know that I was thinking of you during the time I was delivering my address, and I think you will be pleased to know that the singing of the Tabernacle Choir was the best thing connected with the Inaugural Ceremonies — they did wonderfully well. They had a very difficult time in getting here and they were worn out, but their physical discomforts were not reflected in their voices. You can be might proud of your work with them, and the whole world heard them by Telstar, television, and radio. I think you will be getting some very fine reports about them.’
President McKay answered, ‘I am highly honored to received this call. I am thankful to know that you were satisfied with the singing of the Choir, and to know that I was in your thoughts during this busy time.’
The President Johnson inquired regarding Mrs. McKay’s health, and President McKay answered, ‘She is by my side,’ and President Johnson said, ‘Let me talk to her.’ President Johnson then told Mrs. McKay how pleased he was with the singing of the Choir, and repeated to her that it was one of the finest things connected with the Inaugural Ceremonies, and Mrs. McKay said how happy she was that the President was pleased with the singing of the Choir. He then said, ‘Take care of my good friend President McKay.’
At this point, Mrs. McKay handed the phone to President McKay, and he again talked to President Johnson, who said to him, ‘You take care of yourself, we want you to know that we are thinking of you.’ He expressed again his appreciation for the singing of the Choir and for their contribution to the Inaugural Ceremonies, and President McKay said again, ‘I am honored with this call.’
President Johnson said, ‘God bless you, President McKay’, and President McKay answered, ‘The Lord continue to bless you.’
President Johnson then said, ‘Good night, and give my love to Mrs. McKay.’
Wednesday, January 20, 1965
THE WHITE HOUSE
Washington
January 26, 1965
Dear President McKay:
I cannot find the words to express to you the pride that swelled in my heart last week, when, after taking the oath of the highest office of the land, I sat and listened to the wonderful and majestic voices of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir.
It was a moment of inspiration that will live with me — and with Mrs. Johnson — for the rest of our days. I am glad that the country — through television and radio — could share that beautiful moment with us, because I am sure it made all Americans proud of their land and the beauty and strength our America has produced.
Our day was marred only by your absence but the personal strength we have taken from you in the past was present — and very real — for both Mrs. Johnson and me. Our best wishes and prayers are with you and we are thankful that the choir could participate in this Inaugural Ceremony, for their participation had a personal meaning to us both.
Sincerely,
/s/Lyndon B. Johnson
President David O. McKay
Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-Day Saints
47 East South Temple
Salt Lake City, Utah
Wednesday, January 20, 1965
February 15, 1965
My dear Mr. President:
Your letter of January 26, 1965, was handed to me upon my return from California where Mrs. McKay and I have been taking a short respite under doctors’ orders.
I want you to know that I deeply appreciate your taking the time to write to me expressing again Mrs. Johnson’s and your appreciation for the singing of the Tabernacle Choir at your Inaugural Ceremonies. I am grateful to know that the Choir’s participation added to the significance of that occasion, and had a ‘personal meaning’ to you and Mrs. Johnson. Your thinking of me at this time and your interest and prayers in my behalf mean much to me.
Mrs. McKay joins me in extending greetings and best wishes to you and Mrs. Johnson, and in sending our prayerful wishes for your continued health and guidance.
Affectionately,
David O. McKay
(President)
President Lyndon B. Johnson
The White House
Washington, D.C.”
Fri., 19 Feb. 1965:
“3:00 p.m.
President Joseph Fielding Smith and Elder Spencer W. Kimball came up to the Hospital and gave me a blessing, President Smith being voice.”
Sat., 20 Feb. 1965:
“In the LDS Hospital
I had given the doctors my bond that I would stay in the hospital until today, but Dr. Viko and others convinced me that it would be better for me to stay until Tuesday. Dr. Viko said that Monday, being a holiday, it would probably be difficult to arrange for the delivery of an oxygen tank to the Hotel apartment, so I relented and promised that I would stay until then. To say the least, I was greatly disappointed about this.
Was surprised and very much pleased to received a beautiful bouquet of two and one-half dozen carnations from President Lyndon B. Johnson. This cheered my whole day, and I think it was very thoughtful of President Johnson to remember me. (See copies of note, letter, and newspaper clippings following.)”
Tues., 23 Feb. 1965:
“Invitation from Dean Rusk, Secretary of State, to Attend Foreign Policy Conference
Clare then read to me a letter from Dean Rusk, United States Secretary of State, in which he extended to me an invitation to attend the Foreign Policy Conference of non-governmental organizations to be held in Washington, D.C. March 16 and 17, 1965. Dean Rusk asked that I send a representative if I am unable to be present.
I instructed Clare to answer the letter and to tell Dean Rusk, due to my present illness, that I shall not be able to attend the conference, and that I have asked Elder Howard W. Hunter of the Council of the Twelve to represent me.
Fri., 26 Feb. 1965:
Note by CM
3:00 p.m.
Letter to President Lyndon B. Johnson Regarding Appointment of Mormon Chaplain
President Hugh B. Brown came into the office and talked to secretary Clare Middlemiss regarding sending a letter to President Johnson over President McKay’s signature asking President Johnson to make an appointment for Senators Frank E. Moss of Utah and Howard Cannon of Nevada to see him regarding the chaplaincy in the Armed Forces of the United States. President Brown explained that President McKay had told him that he would write to President Johnson about this matter, and he asked the secretary if she could take the letter to President McKay, and the secretary answered ‘No, the family have asked me to take no matters to the President which might cause him concern.’ President Brown then said that he had had a meeting with President McKay that morning, but had not brought this matter up. The secretary said, ‘I cannot do anything about it right now, bit if the President asked you to do this, and that if he (President Brown) instructed me to sign President McKay’s name to it, I, of course, would do what he (President Brown) told me to do.’ President Brown then instructed the secretary to prepare the letter for President McKay’s signature. This was done and the letter handed to President Brown who mailed the letter to President Johnson with a letter from his office.
Friday, February 26, 1965
February 26, 1965
President Lyndon B. Johnson
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Dear President Johnson:
May I express to you my sincere appreciation for the telegraphic message which you sent to the committee in Ogden on the occasion of the ‘First Annual David O. McKay Honor Day’ held there last evening. Though I could not be present, I was deeply touched when told of this gracious act. I am sure that all present were most grateful for your message.
There is a matter causing us considerable concern as a Church relating to the chaplaincy in the Armed Forces of the United States. This matter has been discussed with Senators Frank E. Moss of Utah and Howard Cannon of Nevada, who have suggested that it be presented to you personally.
It would be greatly appreciated if a representative of our Servicemen’s Committee, together with the two mentioned Senators, could meet with you to discuss this problem.
Cordially and sincerely,
David O. McKay
(President)
cc: Senator Frank E. Moss
Friday, February 26, 1965
THE WHITE HOUSE
Washington
Mary 1, 1965
Dear President McKay:
It is always a source of comfort to me to hear from you either by letter or in person.
I would be gald to meet with Senators Moss and Cannon and a representative of your Servicemen’s Committee at any time that is mutually convenient.
Please be assured that whatever problems or requests that you have will always be given warm and sincere consideration here.
Sincerely,
Lyndon B. Johnson
Honorable David O. McKay
President, The Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-Day Saints
47 East South Temple Street
Salt Lake City, Utah
Friday, February 26, 1965
March 10, 1965
My dear Mr. President:
Just a word to express my heartfelt thanks to you for meeting with Senators Moss and Cannon and our Dr. Boyd K. Packer of our Servicemen’s Committee regarding ‘Mormon’ chaplaincy appointments.
Your prompt response and intervention in this matter have cleared up a problem which has caused us great concern for a number of years. I appreciate more than I can say your consideration and kindness in this regard.
Mrs. McKay joins me in sending cordial greetings to you and Mrs. Johnson.
Sincerely and appreciatively,
David O. McKay
President Lyndon B. Johnson
The White House
Washington, D.C.”
Sun., 7 Mar. 1965:
Note by CM
President Lyndon B. Johnson – Return of Lincoln Plate by Nicholas G. Morgan to The White House
Brother Nicholas G. Morgan returned to The White House a dinner plate from the Abraham Lincoln collection, which had been a gift to his uncle, James Morgan, who for many years was an editor of the Boston Globe. One day, during Theodore Roosevelt’s presidency, the Boston editor visited the President and commented on the beauty of the dishes, saying, ‘My wife certainly would be thrilled to own one of those plates.’ President Roosevelt stepped to the cabinet, took a plate from the lower left-hand corner, and presented it to him. The plate came into Nicholas G. Morgan’s possession from his Aunt Helen, the widow of James Morgan.
Brother Morgan said he was interested in sending the gift to repay, in a manner of speaking, the courteous visits President Johnson has made to President McKay. (See following copies of letters and newspaper clippings.)
Tues., 9 Mar. 1965:
“Did not hold a meeting with my Counselors today.
Following Brother Isaacson’s departure, I held a short meeting with my secretary, Clare. She read to me a letter from President Lyndon B. Johnson, in answer to one I sent him on February 26, 1965, asking him to meet with Senators Moss and Cannon regarding appointment of Mormon Chaplains. President Johnson very promptly replied that he would gladly meet with these Senators and our representative and do what he could to see that Mormon chaplains are appointed. (See Diary of February 26, 1965 for copies of letters.)
Wed., 10 Mar. 1965:
“8:15 a.m.
President Lyndon B. Johnson – Assistance Given in Appointment of Mormon Chaplains
Met by appointment in my apartment in the Hotel Utah Elder Boyd K. Packer of the LDS Servicemen’s Committee, who reported the visit of Senators Frank E. Moss of Utah and Howard Cannon of Nevada and himself with President Lyndon B. Johnson regarding the Mormon chaplaincy appointments. He gave a very interesting account of President Johnson’s ready response to help us in getting these appointments, which we have been trying to get for six years.
Elder Packer said that my letter to President Johnson was honored immediately by him. (See Elder Packer’s interesting account following, also copies of letters to and from President Johnson. See also copy of First Presidency’s minutes of this day, giving Elder Packer’s report.)
Wednesday, March 10, 1965
REPORT ON THE INTERVIEW WITH PRESIDENT LYNDON B. JOHNSON
For the past six years we have not had a chaplain commissioned in the military forces of the United States. There has been a long and consistent effort to effect a change in Defense Department regulations which were disciminatory against the Church.
On Friday, February 26, a letter was sent to President Lyndon B. Johnson from President McKay requesting that he meet with Senators Frank E. Moss and Howard Cannon, together with a representative of the Servicemen’s Committee to discuss this matter. On that date it was decided in a meeting of the First Presidency with the Servicemen’s Committee that I would meet that appointment should it be arranged.
On Thursday, March 3, at 12:30 p.m. I went to the White House with Senators Moss and Cannon and met with President Johnson. He indicated that he had already phoned Cyrus Vance, Deputy Secretary of Defense, concerning this matter, that he had taken that action immediately upon receipt of the letter from President McKay.
He listened to a statement of the situation and then read to us from a memo from Cyrus Vance which proposed no solution to the problem and actually would have been negative in its effect.
President Johnson immediately had Cyrus Vance on the telephone and instructed him to ‘give us what we wanted.’ He told Mr. Vance over the telephone something about the training our boys receive and that it was his wish that they get an exception or a waiver or a change in regulation that would clear this problem for us.
He indicated to Mr. Vance that he did not want Dr. McKay to feel that he was not doing everything he could to solve this problem.
There was some discussion on the matter and President Johnson made a final statement to Mr. Vance that he was to solve this problem.
Later in our conversation he spoke respectfully of the Church indicating that he had never met a poor Mormon. He said ‘I suppose you have them, but I haven’t met them.’ He indicated his regard for Senators Howard Cannon and Frank Moss.
When I expressed appreciation for the action he had taken, and expressed appreciation from President McKay, he said, as nearly as I can quote, ‘I don’t know just what it is about President McKay. I talk to Billy Graham and all of the others but somehow it seems as though President McKay is something like a father to me. It seems as though every little while I have to write him a letter or something.’
President Johnson was in all ways courteous to us and certainly in the few minutes we solved a problem that has been insurmountable for the past six years.
He sent his personal regards to President McKay and the other members of the First Presidency.
Later that afternoon I met with Mr. Cyrus Vance, Deputy Secretary of Defense, together with Mr. Norman Paul, his assistant in charge of Manpower, and discussed in length and in detail the chaplains problem. We presented them with the statement which we had prepared. They listened attentively and carefully and indicated their sympathy to our problem and promised an immediate solution.
Mr. Vance directed Mr. Paul to notify the Chiefs of Chaplains that a decision had been made favorable to the request we had made and that the details would be worked out between Mr. Paul and myself. We mutually agreed that I would meet with him when in Washington, D.C., on March 30th and 31st to work out the final details of this matter.
Boyd K. Packer
Wednesday, March 10, 1965
Report of Interview with Pres. Lyndon B. Johnson
Items reported for the record of the First Presidency, Wednesday, March 10, 1965, at 8:30 a.m.
Church Chaplains
Boyd K. Packer called and reported his visit with President Johnson in Washington. He said that he had dictated a report which he had given to President McKay. Elder Packer stated that two days subsequent to the sending of a letter to President Johnson, and while he was in Washington, he had a call from Cyrus Vance, Deputy Secretary of Defense, indicating that President Johnson had called Mr. Vance and asked that he go into the matter of chaplains for the Church. Mr. Vance wanted to set up an appointment at that time. Elder Packer said he was hesitant about doing this for the reason that this same matter had been discussed on that same level before, without results. Therefore, he made no appointment at this time but called on Senator Moss and told him that we had been turned down before by people on that same level. Senator Moss happened to see the President at a reception that morning and the President said to the Senator that they had solved our problem. Senator Moss answered that he and Brother Packer would still like to meet with him and he nodded affirmatively. Brother Packer and the Senator went to the white House the next day. In the meantime Cyrus Vance had sent the President a memo which was negative. President Johnson listened for a few minutes to the issue and Brother Packer said he doubted that he was interested in the issue but he was interested in President McKay. President Johnson telephoned Mr. Vance while they were there and Mr. Vance evidently protested over the phone. The President said, ‘I do not care, I want this done.’ he said, ‘You give these men what they want.’ Evidently Mr. Vance even then protested a little because President Johnson said, ‘Listen here, these Mormons, from the minute they are out of their mothers’ womb, have been praying and teaching and leading one another, and then they go out on missions.’ He said, ‘I would rather have one of their boys than one of the preachers you get out of the seminary, so you fix it up so that they can get their chaplains.’ Then he said, ‘I cannot have Dr. McKay out in Salt Lake City sitting there thinking I am not doing the thing he has asked me to do, so you do it.’ Brother Packer said that as they were leaving President Johnson they thanked him, telling him how much they appreciated it. He told President Johnson that President McKay would be greatly appreciative of this. President Johnson said he did not know what it was, that he met with different clergymen but he said there is something about Dr. McKay, that it seemed as though he were like his father, and he said that every few days he found himself wanting to write him a letter. Brother Packer said that the thing that solved this problem in spite of all that has been done is President Johnson’s relationship with President McKay. Brother Packer had an appointment later with Mr. Vance and his deputy and they listened to the matter that had been prepared and went through it, and he obtained the feeling that they were acting not because the President had told them to do so but because they listened. He said that is the first audience they have ever had when they went through the question point by point. He said they asked pointed, sensible questions about the program. Mr. Vance had two fears, one of them was that we would flood the army with chaplains if we had an opening. Brother Packer told him that all we ever wanted was our just representation. Mr. Vance then turned to Mr. Paul and said to announce to the chief of chaplains that this is taken care of, and to him, ‘You understand you are to make an announcement to them not to get an opinion. You tell them we have decided this issue.’ Mr. Vance then asked Brother Packer if he would work out the details with Mr. Paul who is chief of all the manpower for defense, and Brother Packer told him he would make an appointment at any time. Mr. Paul was arranging to take a trip out of the country and inasmuch as Brother Packer had an appointment with the Indian Bureau on March 30th it was agreed that that would be an ideal time. Brother Packer explained that this means they will authorize chaplains who are college graduates whom we recommend. Brother Packer said that he had subsequently talked to General Root day before yesterday, who assured him that for three years he has been willing and ready and could have solved this problem if we had asked him to do so. Brother Packer said that he had a hard time in the telephone conversation to restrain himself but he told him that we greatly appreciated his willingness to assist because with all the services the problem was a little more complicated and we are grateful we could count on him. Brother Packer said that in the past this General has been as uncommunicative as could be. He also said that the admiral in charge of chaplains went right over to see Brother Marriott the next day saying that he had never been against this, whereas ten days before he had said, ‘You can rest assured I will be opposed to you. I have to be that frank with you.’ Brother Packer said it appears at this time that the matter is solved. He said there are two things we need to get now and he thought if we are careful we can get them; one is the deployment of LDS chaplains to areas where there are large numbers of LDS serviceman, and the other is that we will want some day to be designated as Latter-day Saint chaplains rather than just Protestants. He stated that our LDS chaplains should be assigned to areas where we have large numbers of Latter-day Saint serviceman, which they have failed to do in the past.
Minutes by Joseph Anderson
Fri., 19 Mar. 1965:
12:00 Noon
By appointment at his request, I met with Governor Calvin Rampton, who reported that he is attending a meeting of Governors with President Lyndon B. Johnson at The White House. He asked if there is a message I would like him to take to President Johnson.
I said yes, please express again to President Johnson my deep appreciation for his prompt and effective cooperation in asking the Deputy Secretary of Defense and Chief of Chaplains to see to it that the Mormons are given the right to have Chaplains appointed for our Servicemen — a right that has been denied to us for the past six years. Governor Rampton said that he would be pleased to do this.
Monday, April 19, 1965
CONFIDENTIAL MEMORANDUM OF CONFERENCE WITH PRESIDENT DAVID O. MCKAY BY ERNEST L. WILKINSON
9:30 A.M. ON APRIL 19, 1965
Pursuant to appointment and a request of President McKay that I keep him advised on certain matters, I met with him at 9:30 a.m. on April 19. The following business was transacted:
1. Scurrilous letter denouncing me during campaign.
I reported to the President that although the F.B.I. had been asked to investigate the source of the scurrilous letter written against me during the last campaign, the F.B.I. had conducted a very superficial investigation. I inquired if he would like to write a letter to President Johnson asking for a thorough investigation to be made. I told him I was not pressing the matter but merely wanted to raise it. He answered that he preferred not to write such a letter.
12. Republican State Chairman
I pointed out to President McKay that leaders in high Church positions or closely related to the Church had seldom been successful in politics in Utah and that I thought one of the reasons for it was that leaders of the Church had never used their influence in seeing that proper State Chairmen were appointed. I advised him that a new State Chairman of the Republican Party would be appointed on May 15th but that we were having difficulty in obtaining real prominent members of the Church becoming interested in such an appointment. I asked if we came up with a good name whether he would urge that person to accept this as a civic duty. He told me to recommend someone to him and he would give full consideration to it.
Ernest L. Wilkinson
Wed., 21 Apr. 1965:
Johnson, President Lyndon B.
Sent a telegram to President Lyndon B. Johnson expressing appreciation for the recent appointment of Mr. Kenneth A. Randall as Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Also sent a telegram to Mr. Randall congratulating him upon his appointment. (See Diary of February 25, 1964, for appointment of Mr. Randall to the Board.)
Fri., 23 Apr. 1965:
“8:30 a.m.
My Counselors and I met by appointment Governor Calvin L. Rampton, at which time we discussed the matter of federal government youth camps to be set up in Utah. The Governor mentioned that the federal government has provided for the placing of youth camps similar to Civilian Conservation Corps camps that were set up some years ago in certain areas, to be administered under the Bureau of Land Management or Forest Service Department. He said that the government does not wish to place any of these camps where the local populace does not want them, that they would not wish to establish them in a hostile area. The Governor mentioned that they had expected to establish camps in the Milford and Clearfield areas, but that the Stake Presidents in those areas had expressed opposition to the camps; that, therefore, it was decided not to establish them in those areas. He stated that in the Panguitch area President Holman of the Panguitch Stake has advocated the placing of a camp there and that one is also being placed in the price area where there is no opposition. The Governor stated that the opposition to the establishment of these camps in the areas mentioned was on the theory that it would bring into the communities young men of rather rough character. He stated that they would be young men principally from larger cities outside the State whose home life has not always been what it should be, and that there could be a certain amount of friction, but he did not think there would be anything serious, that they would be under rather strict discipline. He said that they would be under semi-military discipline in the camps, that they would have commanding officers with various subordinate commanders, that the camps would be some distance from towns but should be located in an area where a town would not be far away.
The Governor explained in answer to my question that during the day time these boys would work on the public lands re-seeding the range, and in the forest that they would be planting trees; that they would be engaged during the day time but would be free during the evening, except that they would have the opportunity of taking educational courses which would occupy much of their time in the evenings; that in addition, entertainment would be provided in the camps.
In answer to President Brown’s inquiry as to what percentage of them would be Negroes, the Governor had no information on this phase of the situation. I asked how many boys would be in a camp and the Governor said that he thought that there would be around 150 boys in each camp, perhaps more in some places. In regard to sleeping quarters he said that barrack-type sleeping quarters would be provided, large wooden buildings, and that the boys would sleep in large rooms very much as do enlisted men in the army, perhaps 30 to 40 in one large room, on steel cots.
I said that this is a government matter with which we do not wish to interfere or oppose. In answer to my question as to how many camps it was anticipated would be established in the State, the Governor said he thought that there would be six this year — two that have already been established, and four others. I said that it seemed to me that in general it would be a good thing to give the young men occupation. As to the moral question that might be involved, I said that that is a matter that the Presidents of Stakes and Bishops of Ward should look after. Presidents Brown and Tanner also expressed themselves in favor of the program.
Liquor Distribution
The Governor said that there was another matter he wished to discuss with the First Presidency. He mentioned that the handling of liquor in Utah is a constant problem and challenge to the Governor and the enforcement agencies. He stated that one of the problems involved is that we have liquor stores which are established in order to make liquor readily available to the populace, but that it is almost impossible for the tourists who come here to know where to go to find liquor. The Governor said that he is faced with the problem now of closing the liquor store on Second South and Second East because it is becoming a community nuisance, and that since the closing of the liquor store on the west side of Second South and Third West the liquor store on Second South and Second East is drawing to that store winoes and others, and that the Second South and Second East area is a residential neighborhood, that the store is across the street from a Methodist Church, and that there is also a parking problem involved.
The Governor mentioned that it was his proposal to place twelve small package agencies in hotels and large motels that cater to tourists, that this would be merely an experiment, so that the visitors to our city who desire to obtain it might be able to obtain liquor. The Governor said he was opposed to the sale of liquor by the drink and he thought there was growing pressure for the handling of liquor in that manner. He hoped that the package agency proposal would satisfy the situation. He explained that under this arrangement the liquor would not be sold by the drink, but would be sold in bottles the way it is now, that it is only a question of whether these distributing agencies should be located in residential areas or in tourist centers.
After listening to the Governor’s presentation of the matter, I said this, too, is a matter of a governmental nature which I do not feel to oppose. The Governor said that he would adopt this policy on an experimental basis for a period not to exceed one year to ascertain how it would work out.
I told the Governor that no matter how it is handled, that when one touches liquor it contaminates him. The Governor said he would make a report to the Presidency regarding the progress of the program. The Governor further said that if the brethren have anything they wish to tell him he would appreciate any advice they would care to give.
I told Governor Rampton that we were watching him with interest.
Rampton – Committee of Authorities with whom the Governor may confer
The Governor suggested that he would appreciate it if they would designate a group of three or four of the General Authorities whom he might contact regarding matters that arise from time to time. He said he did not want to bother me with these things, but he would appreciate it if the Presidency felt disposed to designate certain members of the General Authorities with whom he could confer. The Governor said he thought it would be well to have a member of the First Presidency on the committee.
I thanked the Governor for the suggestion, and said that I would call him later and give him the names of those whom we might wish to suggest to serve in the capacity mentioned.
President Lyndon B. Johnson – Sent Regards to President McKay
Before leaving the meeting, Governor Rampton said that he was recently in Washington, D.C. where he conferred with President Johnson, and that the first thing the President did was to ask regarding my health, and told him to convey his regards to me.
I thanked the Governor for his interest and willingness to submit these matters to us.
After the Governor left the meeting, we gave consideration to the question of who might be assigned to serve on the committee suggested by the Governor. It was agreed that Elders Howard W. Hunter and Marion G. Romney would be good men to suggest. No definite action was taken, however.
Tues., 27 Apr. 1965:
Governor Calvin L. Rampton – Appointment of Committee With Whom He Can Confer
President Tanner mentioned that Governor Rampton had inquired of him yesterday if President McKay had as yet appointed a committee from among members of the Twelve and the First Presidency with whom he could consult from time to time. President Tanner told the Governor that this had not as yet been done, but would be in the very near future. In discussing the membership of the committee the Brethren were agreed that Elders Marion G. Romney and Howard W. Hunter should be members of the committee, with President Tanner associated. President Tanner was asked to so advise Governor Rampton and Elders Romney and Hunter.
Mon., 3 May 1965:
Cigarette Legislation
President Brown presented to me for my signature a letter which Robert W. Barker had prepared from me to President Lyndon B. Johnson, commending President Johnson for his work and that of his committees on the anti-cigarette legislation.
4:00 p.m.
By pre-arranged appointment, met with Mr. Mark Evans Austad of Washington, D.C. He was accompanied by Mr. Ted Cannon of the Church Information Service. Brother Austad, a member of the Church, presented to me in a simple ceremony one of the three flags which were flown over the Nation’s Capitol during the Inaugural Ceremonies of President Lyndon B. Johnson on January 20, 1965. The flag, measuring 8 x 12 feet, was given to me in appreciation of the Tabernacle Choir’s participation in the Inaugural Ceremonies. The other two flags went to President Lyndon B. Johnson and to Vice-President Hubert H. Humphrey.
Mr. Austad said that he was told by The White House secretary that ‘President Johnson and everyone on down send love and appreciation to President McKay for permitting the Tabernacle Choir to fly to Washington, D.C. to participate in the Inaugural Ceremonies.’
(See following memorandum, copies of correspondence with President Johnson and Mr. Austad, and newspaper clippings.)
On May 20, 1965, I received an acknowledgment from President Johnson to my letter to him expressing appreciation for the flag. In President Johnson’s letter, he expresses his greetings and friendship, and his hopes that it will not be too long before we meet again.
Monday, May 3, 1965
May 11, 1965
President Lyndon B. Johnson
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Dear President Johnson:
We wish to compliment you for the constructive and courageous leadership given by two key officials of your administration.
The Surgeon General of the United States Public Health Service, Dr. Luther L. Terry, has made a great contribution to the public interest in his work on smoking and health. The report of his advisory committee and the forthright positions taken by Dr. Terry before Congressional committees in recent weeks are important steps toward the safeguarding of the health of the people of this nation, perhaps our greatest resource.
Likewise, the Federal Trade Commission, under the Honorable Paul Rand Dixon, has contributed much to the public interest in its proceedings dealing with proposed trade regulation rules ‘for the prevention of unfair or deceptive advertising and labeling of cigarettes in relation to the health hazards of smoking’. Mr. Dixon’s vigorous and responsive testimony before the Congressional committees, like Dr. Terry’s, has been unpopular among people concerned with cigarette advertising, production, and distribution. Nevertheless, their clear and unmistakable statements concerning action required to protect the public health should be strongly commended. We feel their contributions are excellent examples of government officials seeking to serve the welfare of the people.
We extend to you and Mrs. Johnson our own best wishes, and pray that God will continue to sustain you in your heavy burdens.
Sincerely yours,
David O. McKay
Hugh B. Brown
N. Eldon Tanner
The First Presidency
Monday, May 3, 1965
May 13, 1965
Dear President Johnson:
It was a real thrill for me to receive as a gift from you one of the three large American flags that flew over the Nation’s Capitol during your Inaugural Ceremonies on January 20, 1965.
Mr. Mark Austad, who presented the flag when he called on me at the Hotel Utah on May 4, explained that he had called The White House to make sure you approved of the presentation, and that he was informed that you sent this flag as a further expression of your appreciation for the participation of the Tabernacle Choir in the Inaugural Ceremonies. He also informed me that one of the flags went to you, and one went to Vice-President Hubert M. Humphrey.
I want you to know, President Johnson, that I am deeply honored to receive this flag, which will forever be associated with a significant, historical event in our country. I shall prize it highly, and it will always be a reminder to me, and to those who come after me, of your genuine friendship and kindness to me and to the Church.
Mrs. McKay joins me in sending warmest regards to you and Mrs. Johnson, and prayerful wishes for your continued health and strength.
Sincerely yours,
David O. McKay
President Lyndon B. Johnson
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Monday, May 3, 1965
The White House
Washington
May 20, 1965
Dear President McKay:
I appreciate so much your fine letter of May 13 and I am proud for you to have the flag as a memento of an event at which I felt your presence even though you could not be in attendance.
Your friendship is cherished by both Mrs. Johnson and me and has been a blessing for us. Mr. Isaac Stewart, the President of the choir, visited the White House last week to bring your greetings and to report that your health is much improved. I am thrilled by that report and hope that not too much time will pass before we have an opportunity to meet in person again.
Sincerely,
Lyndon B. Johnson
President David O. McKay
The Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-day Saints
47 East South Temple Street
Salt Lake City, Utah”
Wed., 5 May 1965:
“10:30 to 11:30 a.m.
Took up requests for appointments and other office matters with the secretary. Among the matters discussed were:
Wilkinson, Dr. Ernest L.
The secretary then read to me a letter from Dr. Ernest L. Wilkinson in which he requests that I talk with Brother Royden Derrick and ask him to serve as the State Republican Chairman. After considering the matter, I told her to tell Brother Wilkinson that I shall have nothing to do with this — that if Brother Derrick accepts this position he should do so on his own.
Tues., 11 May 1965:
“I dictated a letter to President Lyndon B. Johnson thanking him for his invitation to attend The White House Conference on Natural Beauty to be held on May 24 and 25, 1965, and expressing regrets that because of my physical inability it will not be possible for me to be present. Later, I received an invitation from the Right Reverend Chandler Sterling to attend a ‘breakfast for Churchmen attending The White House Conference on Natural Beauty’. I sent him a letter declining the invitation.”
Thurs., 13 May 1965:
“8:30 a.m.
Held a First Presidency’s meeting with my counselors in my apartment in the Hotel. Some of the matters we discussed were the following:
White House Conference on International Cooperation
President Brown read a statement prepared for the First Presidency at our suggestion by G. Homer Durham, President of the Arizona State University at Tempe, Arizona, in response to the invitation of Robert Benjamin, Board Chairman, indicating desirable objectives to be sought in international cooperation for consideration of The White House Conference on International Cooperation in November 1965. With the statement is a proposed letter to Mr. Benjamin to be signed by the First Presidency, submitting the First Presidency’s statement to him and suggesting that copies thereof be made available to other groups. Brother Durham suggests that I send a copy of this letter and statement to President Lyndon B. Johnson, and encloses a suggested letter for this purpose. President Tanner, in commenting upon the proposed letter to President Johnson, suggested that a sentence be included indicating that the statement had been prepared at the invitation of this group. Attention was called to a further letter to be signed by Brother Durham replying to Mr. Benjamin’s letter informing him that the matter is receiving every consideration and that further reply will be forthcoming in and through consultation with the First Presidency of the Church. President Brown said that Brother Durham would like to know if this is in general what we want him to do. If so, he will make these further studies and submit his suggestions to the proper persons in Washington.
I said that I can see nothing objectionable about it. President Brown will reply to Brother Durham accordingly. President Brown further explained that Brother Durham understands that before he sends anything to Washington he will submit it to the First Presidency for approval in each instance.
Fri., 14 May 1965:
8:30 a.m.
Meeting of the First Presidency. Among matters discussed were:
White House Conference on International Cooperation
President Brown, referring to letters that had been prepared by Dr. Homer Durham pertaining to The White House Conference on International Cooperation, stated that Dr. Durham had also drafted a letter for President McKay to sign addressed to President Lyndon B. Johnson, enclosing to President Johnson a copy of the statement that he had prepared for submission to the International Cooperation organization. After having read the letter, I authorized that it be sent. (See following copy of letter and statement) (See Diary of August 3, 1965, for further statement.)
Friday, May 14, 1965
May 14, 1965
Dear President Johnson:
Pursuant to your proclamation of October 2, 1964, designating the year 1965 as International Cooperation Year in the United States of America, I am enclosing a copy of a statement entitled ‘Some Desirable Objectives to be Sought in International Cooperation’.
Copies of this statement have been sent to the National Citizens’ Commission on International Cooperation and to your Cabinet Committee on the International Cooperation Year, in care of Secretary of State Dean Rusk.
In view of our past personal conversations approaching these themes, I also thought it important to send a copy of this statement directly to you.
Sincerely yours,
David O. McKay
President Lyndon B. Johnson
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Friday, May 14, 1965
May 14, 1965
SOME DESIRABLE OBJECTIVES TO BE SOUGHT IN INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION
A Statement by the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for Consideration by the White House Conference on International Cooperation
November, 1965, Pursuant to the Proclamation of the President of the United States
October 2, 1964, Designating the Year 1965 as International Cooperation Year
Whereas each of the 26 different aspects of international cooperation outlined by the Cabinet Committee, ranging from ‘Agriculture and Food’ to ‘Youth Activities,’ bear deep significance, we feel such topics deserve consideration and study in relation to the more profound tasks and concerns of international cooperation. Towards such discussion, with full cognizance of the present state of international tensions and divergent political theories, we submit the following:
1. We believe that the essential basis for human cooperation in any form is mutual recognition of the worth of the individual. Inherent and implied in each undertaking of the United States should stand the purpose of maintaining, promoting, and extending the free exercise of individual conscience and the protection of life. We also believe that the individual’s right to the ownership and control of property is an important adjunct of such purpose. This is in line with the common law maxim that a man’s home is his castle and subject only to due process of law respecting the rights of life, liberty and conscience.
2. We affirm the historic principles set forth in the ‘Declaration of Belief Regarding Governments and Laws in General,’ adopted at a general assembly of the Church in Kirtland, Ohio, August 17, 1835. Included is the belief that religion is instituted of God, and that men are amenable to him, and to him only, for the free exercise of it, unless their religious opinions prompt them to infringe upon the rights and liberties of others. Under such circumstances, governments may intervene by lawful means to safeguard the rights thus jeopardized. But we do not believe that human law has a right to interfere in prescribing rules of worship to bind the consciences of men, nor dictate forms for public or private devotion. The civil magistrate should restrain crime, but never control conscience; should punish guilt, but never suppress the freedom of the soul.
We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside, while protected in their inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such governments; and that sedition and rebellion are unbecoming every citizen thus protected, and should be punished accordingly; and that all governments have a right to enact such laws as in their own judgments are best calculated to secure the public interest, at the same time, however, holding sacred the freedom of conscience.
We believe that rulers, states, and governments have a right, and are bound to enact laws for the protection of all men in the free exercise of their religious belief; but we do not believe that they have a right in justice to deprive any man of this privilege, or prescribe men in their opinions, so long as a regard and reverence are shown to the laws and such religious opinions do not justify sedition nor conspiracy.
We do not believe it just to mingle religious, or anti-religious influence with civil government, whereby one religious society is fostered and another proscribed in it spiritual privileges, and the individual rights of its members, as citizens and as men, denied.
3. We feel that the right to know, to inquire, to communicate and exchange ideas is fundamental to human well-being, and an essential concomitant of freedom of conscience; that to extend by peaceful means the boundaries within which may occur the free exchange of ideas, without incitement to contempt or violence, should be an important objective of current efforts at international cooperation. Likewise, the safety of the individual, traveling from state to state on lawful business duly evidenced by passport, subject to the same laws and their protection, is a matter of equal concern.
We feel, demonstrated by our experience abroad, that it should be a constant aim and objective of the United States to encourage the establishment and acceptance of a growing juridical scheme in international affairs reflecting the foregoing principles. Although frustrated and seemingly foreshortened from time to time by misunderstandings, conflicting principles and practices, the United States should nevertheless, with patience, inventiveness, and firmness, endeavor to find open pathways towards acceptance, in practice, of such principles.
We feel to commend the foregoing considerations to the President of the United States, to the Cabinet Committee for the International Cooperation Year, established by the Secretary of State at the direction of the President, to the National Citizens’ Commission on International Cooperation, and to the working parties during the International Cooperation Year. Especially do we commend them to those concerned with Communications, Culture and Intellectual Exchange, Development of International Law, Education and Training, Human Resources and Manpower, Human Rights, Labor, Peaceful Settlement of Disputes, Peacekeeping Operations, Science and Technology, Social Welfare, Technical Cooperation and Investment, Trade, Transportation, Travel and Recreation, and Youth Activities.
Friday, May 14, 1965
May 21, 1965
Dear Dr. McKay:
I’m deeply grateful to you for your articulate statement of objectives in international cooperation.
It’s a profound, thought-provoking document which advances our mutual goals remarkably well.
Sincerely,
Lyndon B. Johnson
Dr. David O. McKay
President
The Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-Day Saints
47 East South Temple Street
Salt Lake City, Utah”
Tues., 15 June 1965:
8:30 a.m.
Met with President Nathan Eldon Tanner in the office in the apartment. President Brown is in Hawaii. Discussed with him several Church matters.
Right-to-Work Law
We discussed the Right-to-Work Law which President Lyndon B. Johnson is proposing for federal legislation, which law would make it obligatory in all states that working people seeking employment join a union, which takes away the free agency of man. President Tanner said that he felt that this is one case where our liberty is at stake and concerning which the Church has stated its position on numerous occasions in the past, and that it seemed to him that the First Presidency should write to our congressional delegation and tell them that we are definitely opposed to such legislation.
I said that I shall give the matter further thought before making a decision. (See Diary of Friday, June 25, 1965, for letters sent to President Johnson and members of Congress.)
Wed., 16 June 1965:
“After the departure of the above-named persons, we held the regular meeting of the First Presidency. We discussed a number of items, among them were:
Right-to-Work Law
Discussed again the matter of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s recommendation to Congress that legislation be passed whereby all states would be required to adopt the policy that where unions are established, men could not be employed without joining a labor union. The question was raised as to whether letters should be written to our congressional delegation informing them of our attitude against such legislation, or if a letter should be written to President Johnson.
It was decided to prepare a letter to be sent to President Johnson, stating that the Church is opposed to such legislation, this letter to be signed by the First Presidency. (See June 26, 1965.)”
Fri., 25 June 1965:
“Right-to-Work Law – First Presidency’s Statement on Taft-Hartley Law
There was released to the newspapers on this day a statement from the First Presidency regarding the Church’s stand on the bill now before Congress to repeal Section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Law, which would make it compulsory throughout the United States that persons remain or become members of a labor union as a condition of employment or continuation of employment. (See following copies of letters sent to President Lyndon B. Johnson, Utah and other Mormon Senators and Representatives, Replies thereto, and newspaper clippings.) (For re-statement by First Presidency, see Diary of July 27, 1965.)
Friday, June 25, 1965
June 18, 1965
In view of the reports disseminated through the press and other news agencies to the effect that the Congress of the United States is being urged to pass and is seriously considering the passing of legislation repealing Section 14-B of the Taft-Hartley Law, which would in effect make it compulsory throughout the states of the Union that persons remain or become members of a labor union as a condition of employment or continuation of employment where an organized union is recognized as the bargaining agent, we hereby reiterate a statement heretofore made by President McKay and published at his request to the following effect:
‘We stand for the Constitution of the United States, and for all rights secured thereby to both sovereign states of the Union and to the individual citizen.
‘We believe it is fundamental that the right to voluntary unionism should once again be reestablished in this nation and that State right-to-work laws should be maintained inviolate. At the very basis of all of our doctrine stands the right to the free agency of man. We are in favor of maintaining this free agency to the greatest extent possible. We look adversely upon any infringement thereof not essential to the proper exercise of police power of the state.’
It is our sincere desire and earnest prayer that no action will be taken by the President or the Congress of the United States that would tend to interfere with the God-given right of men to exercise free agency in seeking and maintaining work privileges.
David O. McKay
Hugh B. Brown
N. Eldon Tanner
The First Presidency
Friday, June 25, 1965
June 17, 1965
Honorable Lyndon B. Johnson
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. President:
It has come to our attention through press and other reports that you as President of the United States are recommending to Congress the repeal of Section 14-B of the Taft-Hartley Law, which would in effect make it compulsory throughout the states of the Union that persons remain or become members of a labor union as a condition of employment or continuation of employment where an organized union is recognized as the bargaining agent.
We wish to reiterate a statement heretofore made by and published at the request of President McKay, to the following effect:
‘We stand for the Constitution of the United States, and for all rights secured thereby to both sovereign states of the Union and to the individual citizen.
‘We believe it is fundamental that the right to voluntary unionism should once again be reestablished in this nation and that State right-to-work laws should be maintained inviolate. At the very basis of all of our doctrine stands the right to the free agency of man. We are in favor of maintaining this free agency to the greatest extent possible. We look adversely upon any infringement thereof not essential to the proper exercise of police power of the state.’
Feeling assured of your desire to maintain the principles announced in the foregoing, we respectfully express the hope that no action will be taken by the President or the Congress of the United States that would tend to interfere with the God-given right of men to exercise free agency in seeking and maintaining work privileges.
Sincerely yours,
David O. McKay
Hugh B. Brown
N. Eldon Tanner
The First Presidency
Friday, June 25, 1965
June 28, 1965
Dear President McKay:
The President has asked me to reply to your letter of June 17 in which you were joined by Mr. Brown and Mr. Tanner commenting on section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Act.
Please be assured that the President appreciates knowing the views of the leadership of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on this issue which has engendered considerable discussion and controversy. As you may know, the platform of the Democratic Party upon which President Johnson sought and attained election last November flatly pledged to work for the repeal of 14(b). Accordingly, the President in a recent message to the Congress fulfilled the commitment by requesting Congress to repeal section 14(b).
In any event, again, let me express the appreciation of the President for your views on this subject.
Sincerely,
Lee C. White
Special Counsel to the President
Mr. David O. McKay
President
The Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints
47 East South Temple Street
Salt Lake City 11, Utah
Friday, June 25, 1965
June 18, 1965
Senator Wallace F. Bennett
Senator Frank E. Moss
Senator Howard Cannon
Representative Laurence J. Burton
Representative David S. King
Representative John E. Moss
Representative Morris K. Udall
Representative Ken W. Dyal
Representative Richard T. Hanna
Representative Delwin M. Clawson
Representative George V. Hansen
Dear Senators and Representatives:
We are informed that the Congress of the United States is seriously considering introducing legislation which, if passed, would result in the repeal of Section 14-B of the Taft-Hartley Law, thus making it compulsory throughout the states of the Union that persons remain or become members of a labor union as a condition of employment or continuation of employment where an organized union is recognized as the bargaining agent.
That you may be informed of our attitude regarding this matter we reiterate a statement heretofore made by President McKay and published at his request to the following effect:
‘We stand for the Constitution of the United States, and for all rights secured thereby to both sovereign states of the Union and to the individual citizen.
‘We believe it is fundamental that the right to voluntary unionism should once again be reestablished in this nation and that State right-to-work laws should be maintained inviolate. At the very basis of all of our doctrine stands the right to the free agency of man. We are in favor of maintaining this free agency to the greatest extent possible. We look adversely upon any infringement thereof not essential to the proper exercise of police power of the state.’
We respectfully express the hope that no action will be taken by the Congress of the United States that would in any way interfere with the God-given rights of men to exercise free agency in seeking and maintaining work privileges.
Sincerely yours,
David O. McKay
Hugh B. Brown
N. Eldon Tanner
The First Presidency
Friday, June 25, 1965
June 28, 1965
Elder David O. McKay
Elder Hugh B. Brown
Elder N. Eldon Tanner
The First Presidency
The Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-day Saints
47 East South Temple
Salt Lake City, Utah
Dear Brethren:
I have your letter of June 22, which is directed also to all of the Senators and Congressmen who are members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. From this list of addressees, I gather that this is a communication from the First Presidency to members of the Church who hold political office in the Congress of the United States.
When your statement concerning the repeal of Section 14-B of the Taft-Hartley Act was printed in the Deseret News, I was approached by the correspondent for the Deseret News here in Washington and asked for my comment. I gave my comment on the 25th of June. A copy is attached to this letter.
Sincerely yours,
Frank E. Moss
United States Senator
cc:
Senator Wallace F. Bennett Representative Morris K. Udall
Senator Howard Cannon Representative Ken W. Dyal
Representative Laurence J. Burton Representative Richard T. Hanna
Representative David S. King Representative Delwin Clawson
Representative John E. Moss Representative George V. Hansen
Friday, June 25, 1965
STATEMENT OF SENATOR FRANK E. MOSS (D-UTAH)
WITH REGARD TO REPEAL OF SECTION 14(b).
I am rather surprised to learn that the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has chosen to speak on a legislative and political matter, the repeal of Section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Act.
It has been my position, and I thought it was the position of the Church, that the Church should stand aloof in matters of political controversy where members of the Church disagree by reason of honest difference of belief as to what political or governmental action is desirable.
It has been my understanding that the Church urged its members to perform their duties as citizens to study the political issues of the day, and then to make up their own minds objectively and on the facts — that the Church would not pre-judge these issues nor attempt to pre-empt the free agency of each person to make his own judgment. On this basis, as a member of the Church and as a member of the U.S. Senate, I have diligently studied the issue of repeal of Section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Act. I have listened to Congressional witnesses, I have read much on this subject, I have talked with many, many persons who are well informed on the problem.
As a Senator, I will form my judgment and I will vote my honest conviction in accordance with my conscience.
June 25, 1965 PR-445
Friday, June 25, 1965
RELIGION: MORMONS AND 14(B)
By John Cogley
There are ‘right-to-work’ laws on the books in 19 of the 50 states. These laws make it illegal to enforce labor contracts that require membership in a union as a condition of employment. Section 14-b of the Taft-Hartley Act permits the states to pass such laws. It is President Johnson’s wish that this section of the controversial law be repealed.
The issue has revived the old question of religiously based conscientious objection, for certain religious groups — notably the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) – are opposed to the closed shop on grounds of theological doctrine.
The Mormon doctrine is called ‘free agency’ — a belief that men are free to choose between good and evil and thereby to influence the condition of their souls in life after death. Civil laws that narrow the area of choice are consequently regarded with disfavor.
It was learned last week that on June 22, the three top leaders of the Mormon church wrote to three Senators and eight members of the House of Representatives who have links with the church and urged them to oppose the repeal of Section 14-b.
The church leaders – David O. McKay, 91 years of age, President; Hugh B. Brown, 81, First Counselor, and N. Eldon Tanner, 67, Second Counselor – form a body called the First Presidency of the church. Their letters went to Senators Howard W. Cannon, Democrat of Nevada; Frank E. Moss, Democrat of Utah; and Wallace F. Bennett, Republican of Utah. Democratic Representatives receiving letters were John E. Moss, Kenneth W. Dyal and Richard T. Hanna, all of California; Morris K. Udall of Arizona and David S. King of Utah. Republicans were George V. Hansen of Idaho and Del Clawson of California.
The First Presidency’s objections were grounded in theology. ‘At the very basis of all our doctrine,’ Mr. McKay wrote, ‘stands the right to free agency of man. We are in favor of maintaining this free agency to the greatest extent possible.’ Repeal of the Taft-Hartley section backing up ‘right-to-work’ legislation, he indicated, ‘would interfere with the God-given rights of men to exercise free agency in seeking and maintaining work privilege.’
The legislators, some of whom intend to vote against the proposed appeal, politely rejected any indication that their votes would be determined by ecclesiastical directives. Five of the Democrats among them replied that while they respected the office of the First Presidency, they could not ‘delegate their own free agency to any but ourselves.’
Still, the problem of conscience remains. A number of religious groups share the Mormons’ objections to enforced union membership. If the Taft-Hartley section is repealed, they will insist on some provision for conscientious objectors. Some of them have indicated that, to meet the charge that they will be benefiting from union membership without paying union dues should their conscientious claim be recognized, they would be willing to pay an amount equivalent to union assessments to the Federal Government, to be used for general purposes.
New York Times – Sunday, July 18, 1965″
Wed., 7 July 1965:
“8:30 to 10:45 a.m.
Held a meeting with my Counselors. Among matters discussed during this time were:
Right-to-Work Law
President Tanner reported that this morning he had attended a breakfast at the Alta Club in connection with the United Fund drive, that Governor Rampton sat next to him and the right-to-work question came up. The Governor said that he was well acquainted with the attitude of the First Presidency on this matter. President Tanner told him that he was glad he did know what the attitude of the First Presidency is regarding any question that affected man’s free agency. The Governor said that when he and all other Democratic nominees accepted their nomination they made a commitment, including President Johnson himself, that they would work for the repeal of Section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Law, and that he had to carry out his commitment. He explained that this was a part of the Democratic platform.
Tues., 13 July 1965:
“8:30 to 10:00 a.m.
Met with Presidents Hugh B. Brown and N. Eldon Tanner and discussed general Church matters, among which were:
Humphrey, Vice-President Hubert H. – Short Stop at Airport
President Brown reported that yesterday morning he had met with Vice-President Hubert H. Humphrey, who was here but a short time enroute to San Diego for a speaking appointment. President Brown said that Vice-President Humphrey sent his personal regards to me, and also said that Presidency Johnson had said that if he had the opportunity he would like him to express his personal regards and best wishes to me.
Right-to-Work Law
There was read to us a letter from Senator Frank E. Moss, and Congressmen John E. Moss, Ken W. Dyal, Morris K. Udall and Richard T. Hanna, in answer to the First Presidency’s letter addressed to these brethren setting forth the Church’s attitude regarding the proposed repeal of Section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Law. Senator Moss and the Congressmen indicate that they ‘act in conformity with the highest principles of our Church in declining to be swayed by the views expressed in the communication of June 22, under the signatures of the First Presidency.’ Congressman Udall in an addendum to the letter states that he considers himself bound by the referenda of the electorate of Arizona to vote against repeal of Section 14(b), but that he has serious personal reservations about its wisdom, although he does raise a question as to the advisability of publishing the First Presidency’s communication.
Attention was also called to a letter from Senator Wallace F. Bennett indicating his position in opposition to the proposal to repeal Section 14(b), also a letter from Delwin M. Clawson, a member of Congress from California, which indicates that he is committed to the preservation of the right of individual free agency.
In connection with this same matter, President Tanner referred to his earlier report of a statement made by Governor Rampton in a conversation with him to the effect that the proposed repeal of Section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Act was a part of the 1964 Democratic platform.
Right-to-Work Law – Interview by Presidents Brown and Tanner with Union Officials
President Brown reported that yesterday he and President Tanner had a conference for an hour or more with four of the union officials of Salt Lake City, all members of the Church, who came to discuss with them the attitude taken by the First Presidency regarding the proposed repeal of Section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley law.
Presidents Brown and Tanner thanked these gentlemen for their visit and told them that the First Presidency had made their statement and felt that the position taken was sound. President Brown said these union officials were not militant but were positive in their opinion that Section 14(b) should be repealed.
Wed., 21 July 1965:
Time Magazine Questions
President Brown presented certain questions which had been submitted by a representative of Time magazine, who had asked him for an interview regarding the statement of the First Presidency (See June 25, 1965) in opposition to the repeal of Section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Law. President Brown said that the man who is asking for the interview is a member of the Church who lives in Salt Lake City. He said that Time is preparing an article for publication, and has asked him to get the facts.
The questions submitted are as follows:
1) Did any special event prompt President McKay to issue the statement?
2) Is this statement considered by Church members to be a religious and moral declaration from the Prophet of God, being in effect an expression of the will of God that the law makers vote against the repeal of that section of the Taft-Hartley Law?
3) Is it an expression of an opinion only on the part of the First Presidency taking it out of the category of divine message relating to morals and Church doctrine and making it the opinion of the Church on political matters?
4) Would a Mormon congressman be considered to have rebuffed the President of the Church if he voted against this repeal? If so, would that rebuff have any effort on the standing of the congressman in question?
5) Such pronouncements on the political questions of the day are not uncommon from the First Presidency. Perhaps one of the most difficult things to understand is how the Church members know if this is to be virtually a commandment from God through His Prophet. How can he tell?
President Brown mentioned that the statement of the First Presidency had been referred to George Romney for his opinion by Newell J. Olsen of Logan, and that Brother Romney had written him, President Brown, attaching correspondence he had had with Brother Olsen on the matter, in which Brother Romney told Brother Olsen that he had not at any time taken a position supporting outright repeal of Section14(b). It would seem that Senator Moss and Congressman King of Utah had quoted Governor Romney as being in favor of the repeal of this section. After some discussion of the matter, it was decided to answer the questions by the representative of Time as follows:
1) That there was no special event which brought forth the statement by the First Presidency.
2) That in answer to the inquiry as to whether the statement should be considered as a religious moral declaration from the Prophet of God, being in effect the will of the Lord, the answer is that the statement sets forth the attitude of the First Presidency of the Church; that, however, that part of the statement reading as follows is from the Lord: ‘It is our sincere desire and earnest prayer that no action will be taken by the President or the Congress of the United States that would tend to interfere with the God-given right of men to exercise free agency in seeking and maintaining work privileges.’
3) As to whether the balance of the statement is an expression of opinion by the First Presidency, President McKay said it is only an opinion. It was suggested that that part of the statement sets forth the attitude or stand of the First Presidency.
4) As to whether Mormon congressmen will be considered to have rebuffed the President of the Church if they vote against this repeal, and so would that rebuff have any effect upon the standing of the congressmen in the Church, the answer is no.
It was thought unnecessary to answer the fifth question regarding pronouncements on political questions by the First Presidency.
Note by CM
Mr. Lawrence B. Johnson of Randolph, Utah, sent to President McKay today a copy of a letter which he had received from Lyndon B. Johnson, President of the United States, in which he makes the following statement regarding President McKay:
‘One of the most inspiring souls Mrs. Johnson and I have been privileged to know is President McKay as well as his family. I am constantly grateful that it has been my good fortune to know him, meet with him and draw strength from his counsel during these months in the Presidency.’
Wednesday, July 21, 1965
THE WHITE HOUSE
Washington
May 19, 1965
Dear Mr. Johnson:
John Carber has sent me your thoughtful and heartening letter and I want you to know I am grateful for your interest and understanding.
One of the most inspiring souls Mrs. Johnson and I have been privileged to know is President McKay as well as his family. I am constantly grateful that it has been my good fortune to know him, meet with him and draw strength from his counsel during these months in the Presidency. More than you may know, your words about our friendship are valued and cherished by me — and I am overlastingly grateful to you for your expression of support.
If we can’t claim direct kinship, at least we can claim a monogram relationship – and I think you might like to have the enclosure.
Sincerely,
Lyndon B. Johnson
Mr. Lawrence B. Johnson
Randolph
Utah”
Mon., 26 July 1965:
“Right-to-work Statement
I also told Clare that I was amazed to read in the Tribune this morning the Right-to-Work statements made by President Brown in New York. I said that he had no authority nor any right whatever to make any additional statement to what was said on this subject by the First Presidency. Clare reported that a number of telephone calls had been received about it, and that Brother Isaac Stewart had reported this morning that word had come over the wires in California that President Brown had said that the Mormon Church had altered its statement in connection with the Right-to-Work Law. I said that that is not true; that that statement stands as we gave it.”
Tues., 27 July 1965:
10:35 a.m.
Right-to-Work Law and Additional Unauthorized Statements
Elder Delbert L. Stapley of the Council of the Twelve came over to the office in the apartment at the Hotel Utah, and reported that the statements made recently in New York by President Hugh B. Brown to the Senator Frank E. Moss, Governor Calvin L. Rampton, and the New York Times, followed by statements made in the press by Senator Moss regarding the Right-to-Work statement made by the First Presidency and published in the newspapers on June 25, 1965, have weakened that statement, and the newspapers have so reported, carrying headlines, ‘Mormons Soften Their Position on Right-to-Work Law’.
After considering the matter very carefully with Elder Stapley, I decided to have Brother Stapely get in touch with Manager Earl Hawkes of the Deseret News, and have him run the following statement in the newspapers:
‘Recent reference has been made to statements in New York and Washington, D.C. that the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints had softened its thinking on repeal of Section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Right-to-Work Law. This thinking and views as reported in the press are unauthorized. The statement as originally given and announced to the nation remains unchanged and is as follows: (June 25, 1965 statement repeated.) (See following newspaper clippings giving statements made by President Brown and Senator Moss, also re-statement by First Presidency, also article which appeared in Newsweek Magazine, also article from Wallstreet Journal.)
I was provoked that anything had been added to our first statement.
After Brother Stapley’s departure, my secretary, Clare, came in and presented letters and other matters to me. She brought over fifteen petitions for cancellation of Temple sealings. I considered each case before granting the cancellation.
Tuesday, July 27, 1965
LDS OFFICIAL CLARIFIES LABOR ISSUE
Special to The Tribune
NEW YORK – A statement concerning repeal of Section 14B of the Taft-Hartley Act, issued June 24 by the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, was clarified Sunday night by President Hugh B. Brown, first counselor.
The First Presidency statement said in part:
Fundamental Right
‘We believe it is fundamental that the right to voluntary unionism should once again be reestablished in this nation and that state right-to-work laws should be maintained inviolate. At the very basis of all of our doctrine stands the right to the free agency of man.’
President Brown Sunday said the reference to ‘free agency’ is a part of LDS doctrine and ‘does refer to what the Lord has given to man.’
Matter of Opinion
However, the statement’s reference to the right-to-work laws is, as a whole, a matter of opinion, President Brown said.
Since the First Presidency’s statement was issued, several LDS members of Congress have indicated that they could not accept the church leaders’ views as binding.
The repeal action is under consideration by Congress. Section 14B now permits states to pass laws banning labor contracts that make union membership a condition for keeping a job.
The Salt Lake Tribune – Monday, July 26, 1965
Tuesday, July 27, 1965
STATEMENT CLARIFIES 14-B STAND
NEW YORK (UPI) – President Hugh B. Brown of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Sunday said a statement by the First Presidency on right to work legislation was, on the whole, a matter of opinion.
President Brown, first counselor in the First Presidency, made the clarifying statement in New York, where he was a guest at Utah Day activities at the World’s Fair.
The First Presidency issued a statement a month ago outlining its opposition of repeal of Section 14-B of the Taft Hartley Act, which allows states to enact so called right-to-work laws.
‘We believe it is fundamental that the right to voluntary unionism should once again be maintained,’ the Church officials said at that time.
‘At the very basis of all of our doctrine stands the right to the free agency of man,’ they added.
President Brown said Sunday night that while the statement’s reference to right to work laws was generally a matter of opinion, the reference to ‘free agency’ was a part of Latter-day Saint doctrine.
MOSS REPLIES
DESERET NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON – Sen. Frank E. Moss, D-Utah, commented Monday on a statement made Sunday by President Hugh B. Brown, First Counselor in the First Presidency, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, in which President Brown explained the Church position on repeal of Section 14-B of the Taft-Hartley Act.
‘I appreciate the clarification by President Brown on the recent statement by the First Presidency with regard to repeal of Section 14-B,’ Sen. Moss said.
‘President Brown points out that the statement represents the opinion held by the First Presidency on a governmental matter and does not constitute enunciation of any principle of religious direction.
‘I respect the opinion and motives of the men who issued the original statement and I will consider their statement in the context in which issued,’ Sen. Moss said.
Deseret News – Monday, July 26, 1965
Tuesday, July 27, 1965
RIGHT-TO-WORK
LDS CHURCH STANDS FIRM
Recent reference has been made to statements in New York and Washington, D.C. that the Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints had softened its thinking on repeal of Section14B of the right-to-work law. This thinking and views as reported in the press are unauthorized. The statement as originally given and announced to the nation remains unchanged and is as follows:
‘We stand for the Constitution of the United States, and for all rights secured thereby to both sovereign states of the Union and to the individual citizen.
‘We believe it is fundamental that the right to voluntary unionism should once again be reestablished in this nation and that State right-to-work laws should be maintained inviolate. At the very basis of all of our doctrine stands the right to the free agency of man. We are in favor of maintaining this free agency to the greatest extent possible. We look adversely upon any infringement thereof not essential to the proper exercise of police power of the state.’
It is our sincere desire and earnest prayer that no action will be taken by the President or the Congress of the United States that would tend to interfere with the God-given right of men to exercise free agency in seeking and maintaining work privileges.
David O. McKay
Hugh B. Brown
N. Eldon Tanner
The First Presidency
Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-day Saints
Deseret News – Tuesday, July 27, 1965
Tuesday, July 27, 1965
RAP UNAUTHORIZED THINKING
LDS VIEW ON WORK LAW UNCHANGED
The First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Tuesday made clear it had not softened its opposition to repeal of Section 14-B of the Taft-Hartley Act despite contrary statements made recently in New York and Washington, D.C.
‘This thinking and views as reported in the eastern press are unauthorized,’ President David O. McKay and his two counselors, Hugh B. Brown and N. Eldon Tanner, said Tuesday.
‘The statement as originally given and announced …remains unchanged and is as follows,’ the First Presidency asserted:
‘We stand for the Constitution of the United States, and for all rights secured thereby to both sovereign states of the Union and to the individual citizen.
‘We believe it is fundamental that the right to voluntary unionism should once again be re-established in this nation, and that state right-to-work laws should be maintained inviolate. At the very basis of all of our doctrine stands the right to the free agency of man. We are in favor of maintaining this free agency to the greatest extent possible. We look adversely upon any infringement thereof not essential to the proper exercise of police power of the state.
‘It is our sincere desire and earnest prayer that no action will be taken by the President or Congress of the United States that would tend to interfere with the God-given right of men to exercise free agency in seeking and maintaining work privileges.’
A measure to repeal Section 14-B of the Taft-Hartley Act is presently under consideration by Congress. If the repeal measure is successful, it would prohibit states from passing laws banning the closed shop.
The Salt Lake Tribune – Wednesday, July 28, 1965
Tuesday, July 27, 1965
MORMONS SOFTEN OPPOSITION TO ‘RIGHT-TO-WORK’ SECTION
SALT LAKE CITY, July 25 (AP) – A Mormon church leader eased the religious bind upon Mormon Congressmen today regarding repeal of the right-to-work section of the Taft-Hartley Act.
Hugh B. Brown, right-hand man to David O. McKay, President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, softened Mr. McKay’s recent stand on the law.
President McKay, considered by Mormons to be God’s true prophet and revelator, told the Congressmen recently ‘that state right-to-work laws should be maintained inviolate.’
Mr. Brown, who is President McKay’s first counselor, said the church leader’s words had been intended as an expression of opinion and not a revelation from God.
Congressional debate opens this week on repeal of the right-to-work section that would nullify state laws prohibiting union shops. Utah has such a law.
The New York Times – Monday, July 26, 1965
Tuesday, July 27, 1965
CLINGS TO STAND ON THE RIGHT TO WORK
Opposition to repeal of 14B Has Not Softened, Mormons Say
Salt Lake City (AP) – The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon) says it has not softened its opposition to repeal of state right-to-work laws.
The church administration issued a statement signed by David O. McKay, Hugh B. Brown and N. Eldon Tanner, the top three church leaders known collectively as the first presidency.
‘Recent reference has been made to statements in New York and Washington, that the presidency of the (Mormon) church has softened its thinking on repeal of section 14B,’ the Taft-Hartley provision allowing state right-to-work laws, the statement said.
‘This thinking and views as reported in the press are unauthorized.’
President Brown was quoted in New York City Saturday as saying church opposition to repeal was the leadership’s opinion and not doctrine. He said that free agency, on which church support of right-to-work is based, is doctrine.
President Brown’s statement was applauded by Sen. Frank E. Moss (D-Utah), and other Mormon members of Congress who had protested the original church statement.
The original right-to-work statement, also signed by the first presidency, said:
‘We believe it is fundamental that the right to voluntary unionism should once again be re-established in this nation and that state right-to-work laws should be maintained inviolate.
‘At the very basis of all of our doctrine stands the right to the free agency of man…
‘It is our sincere desire and earnest prayer that no action will be taken by the President or the Congress of the United States that would tend to interfere with the God-given right of men to exercise free agency in seeking and maintaining work privileges.’
Kansas City Times, Missouri – July 29, 1965
Tuesday, July 27, 1965
THE RIGHT TO VOTE
By legislative tradition, church groups may testify before Congressional committees without breaching the wall between church and state relations. But any pressure brought directly on individual legislators by their own ecclesiastical leaders is definitely considered in bad taste.
Thus leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints ran afoul of political protocol when they sent letters to each of the eleven Mormon members of Congress urging them to vote against repeal of the controversial Section 14(B) of the Taft-Hartley Act (which allows individual states to out-law the union shop with so-called right-to-work laws). The letter, signed by David O. McKay, the church’s ailing, 91-year-old president, First Counsellor Hugh B. Brown and Second Counsellor Nathan Eldon Tanner, expressed ‘the hope that no action will be taken by the Congress of the United States [that] would in any way interfere with the God-given rights of men to exercise free agency in seeking and maintaining work privileges.’
Rebuff: Most of those who got the letter viewed it as an interference with their obligations as elected representatives. Though the repeal bill awaits action in the House, five Mormon Democrats – Sen. Frank E. Moss of Utah, Rep. Morris K. Udall of Arizona, and California Reps. Ken W. Dyal, Richard T. Hanna and John E. Moss – have sent a letter back to their church leaders respectfully telling them to mind their own business. Acknowledging the Mormon doctrine of free agency, which regards the free exercise of individual choice as a God-given right, they wrote: ‘We cannot yield to others our responsibilities to our constituents, nor can we delegate our own free agency to any but ourselves.’
Udall, who had said he would vote against repeal because his state strongly supports its own right-to-work law, now admits he’s tempted to change his vote just to show his independence of church dictation. And Utah’s Moss, who had previously expressed only mild support for repeal, said, after receiving McKay’s letter, that he would now back the measure enthusiastically. ‘In my experience,’ the senator declared, ‘this is the most direct intervention in political matters I have ever seen the church attempt.’
Newsweek – July 26, 1965
Tuesday, July 27, 1965
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, TUESDAY, AUGUST 10, 1965
UTAH & THE MORMONS
As State Bids for Business It comes Into Conflict With Church
By Glynn Mapes
SALT LAKE CITY – When Brigham Young led his hardy band of Mormon exiles across the Rockies into the arid Great Salt Lake Basin, he exclaimed that he’d found a new Zion ‘so desolate and unpromising that no mortal on earth ever would covet it.’
Today, 118 years later, Utah is struggling frantically to shake off this bleak image and to lure businessmen, and tourist into the state. And, in the process, Brigham Young’s Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is being increasingly criticized, from both outside and within its own membership, for policies many consider to be in conflict with the realities of modern life.
Although rich in mineral resources, much of Utah since World War Ii has become dependent on the vagaries of defense spending. Several large missile producers have drawn large numbers of Utahans from their small, tidy farms and towns to a narrow belt of five populous counties running through Salt Lake City. Cutbacks in Minuteman and other missile production in 1963 and 1964 have seriously affected the economic health of these once-bustling areas.
As a result, Gov. Calvin Rampton and his legislature, both swept into office in a 1964 Democratic landslide, have embarked on a wide-ranging program to revive the state’s sagging economy. This spring the lawmakers:
-Enacted a free port bill to exempt goods moving in interstate commerce from property tax.
-Increased the state’s tourism promotion budget to $750,000 a year, a five-fold boost from last year’s $150,000.
-Created a well-financed state Industrial Promotion Bureau.
In addition, the new governor, Mormon himself, travels coast to coast soliciting new investments and, at the same time, tours the back-hill counties of Utah asking wary residents to welcome outsiders.
A Parting of the Ways
Although clannish Mormons traditionally have resisted penetration of the state by outside interests, the Church remained silent as the Rampton administrations’ plan to lure business and tourism breezed through the legislature. However, there came a parting of the ways on one controversial attempt to raise tourism revenues: A proposed easing of Utah’s rigid liquor rules.
Utah law forbids sale of liquor except by the bottle through state-owned package stores. Bars and restaurants provide set-ups, but patrons must bring their own bottles. Through acknowledged spokesmen in the statehouse, the LDS Church views liberalization of the liquor law as ‘immoral’ since Mormon tenets require abstinence from alcohol, as well as from tobacco, coffee and tea. Rarely has the Church’s stand on such sensitive issues been questioned.
But in this spring’s legislature, Church doctrine collided head-on with modern mores. A Mormon senator, with the backing of several prominent Church members and businessmen, introduced a bill to permit sale of miniature liquor bottles in bars and restaurants. At first the Church stood silent as the so-called mini-bill gathered momentum and public support. Then the Church-owned Deseret News, one of two general circulation daily papers in Salt Lake City, opened fire editorially and the bill died a quick death.
That the mini-bill was defeated came as no surprise. But the fact that it even reached the Senate floor, backed by Mormons, marked a milestone in Church-State affairs.
The bill’s sponsor, Senate Republican minority leader W. Hugh Brockbank, says he’s considering going to the voters in 1966 with a referendum to legalize sale of liquor by the drink-in effect, a complete repeal of the present liquor law. ‘It’s the only way to get tourists to Utah,’ declares Mr. Brockbank. ‘I’m a Latter-day Saint myself, and I’d like to see us continue to live on our little island. But the days of islands are gone, and we need a more liberal liquor law.’
Some Concessions Tolerated
In the past few months the Church has tolerated some concessions to business interests. Lawmakers abolished the traditional $1 license which both tourists and Utahans previously needed to buy liquor in a state store. Moreover, in a little-publicized experiment this summer, the State Liquor Control Commission is opening additional package stores at a number of hotels and motels. Even management of the strait-laced Hotel Utah, primarily owned by the LDS Church, is gingerly toying with the idea of a package store in its lobby, according to Liquor Commissioner John W. Pace.
Recent compromises in the liquor controversy have failed to ease the pressure from businessmen. Utah financial leader Marriner S. Eccles, former chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, insists that conventioneers won’t flock here until the state shakes its staid reputation. ‘Can you imagine a convention without a cocktail?’ he asks. Then, with obvious amusement, he recalls pre-Prohibition days when the Hotel Utah had both a bar and a dance hall: ‘The Church hasn’t always had this ‘holier-than-thou’ attitude on liquor. They’ll see the light again soon when this flood of tourists fails to develop.’
Another area in which the LDS Church has drawn fire recently is civil rights. Negroes may join the Church, but they are forbidden from entering the lay priesthood, to which nearly all adult male Mormons belong. In complicated Church theology Negroes are thus barred from Church office on earth, and from the more desirable levels of celestial happiness in after-life; Negroes must remain second-class Mormons, critics charge.
Church officers contend that the Negro’s ranking in Mormon hierarchy is strictly a matter of theological doctrine and shouldn’t be extended to the civil rights debate in Utah. On the other hand, civil rights leaders say the Church’s full acceptance of the Negro would be a big help to their cause because of the powerful Mormon influence in the state’s business and political affairs. The civil rights leaders seek Church backing of a soon-to-be-introduced fair housing bill which is expected to draw heavy opposition from apartment house owners and other special interest groups.
Much of the civil rights criticism leveled at the LDS Church today comes from respected Mormons, members of the Church’s liberal wing centered in the faculty and administration of the University of Utah. Typical of recent insiders’ jobs at the establishment is a letter published in the Salt Lake Tribune from University Provost Sterling M. McMurrin, former U.S. Commissioner of Education. The educator, a devout Mormon and son of a former high Church officer, said he wished to be ‘counted among those who deplore the moral failure of the LDS Church to take a positive stand in favor of civil rights legislation in the state.’
These are strong words, seldom heard before from Church members.
Nor is dissent among the Church membership limited to Utah. Last month several Mormon lawmakers in Washington firmly and publicly rebuffed Church counseling, thereby placing Mormon elders in the unaccustomed glare of national publicity.
A letter to Mormon Congressmen, signed by David O. McKay, 91, president and spiritual leader of the Church, Hugh B. Brown, 81, first counselor, and N. Eldon Tanner, 67, second counselor, asked the legislators to oppose repeal of Section 14b of the Taft-Hartley Law which sanctions state right-to-work statutes. The Church’s officers fear invalidation of Utah’s own right-to-work law would hobble the basic Mormon doctrine of ‘free agency,’ or free exercise of individual choice. In their letter the Church leaders implied that repeal of Section 14b would ‘interfere with the God-given rights of men to exercise free agency in seeking and maintaining work privileges.’
Five Mormon Congressmen sent their answer in a tersely worded rebuke: ‘We cannot yield to others our responsibilities to our constituency, nor can we delegate our own free agency to any but ourselves.’
Many high-ranking Mormons feel the Church’s attempt to influence Washington votes was an out-and-out tactical blunder. Event First Counselor Brown says he would just as soon forget the incident. ‘They (the Congressmen) have the right to tell us to jump in the lake,’ and they did just that,’ he comments.
Mormons parry recent thrusts at Church doctrine by suggesting that the fast-changing times invite Mammon to Zion. Spearheading an assault on alleged irregularities in the heavily Democratic county and state governments is the Church-owned Deseret News, which has hired a former FBI man as its own private eye. Upshot of the furor the paper has raised: The first grand jury here in six years began investigating the paper’s charges last month.
Among the public officials under fire:
A county auditor released from Federal prison earlier this year after having served a sentence for tax evasion. He faces court action seeking his dismissal from public office.
Utah’s new Attorney General, whose July paycheck was withheld by the state to satisfy two bad debt garnishments. Recently he settled out of court a suit brought against him by the Diner’s Club, which was seeking $1,654 in unpaid bills.
In addition, both Salt Lake City newspapers have demanded the resignation of a state supreme court justice who recently was nabbed by police in a motel room with a young female companion who was not his wife. Another justice commented to a reporter that a man is entitled to ‘one whing ding’ and promptly landed in hot water along with his associate. Later he explained he was sleepy when the reporter called at 7 a.m. and that what he had meant to say was that a man is innocent until proven guilty.
In a state long dominated by the scrupulously moral LDS Church, such incidents are sure to raise eyebrows. But to a growing number of Utahans they point to an inevitable casing of the Church’s sway over public morality and mores – one price of progress in a rapidly changing state.”
Fri., 30 July 1965:
“7:00 a.m.
I met with the Counselors this morning at seven o’clock, inasmuch as President Tanner is leaving at 8:00 a.m. to take the plane to Palmyra to attend the Cumorah Pageant. From there he will go to Idaho for a vacation of fishing and horseback riding.
Items discussed were:
Right-to-Work Statement
President Brown mentioned some rumor that is going around to the effect that he had softened the stand of the First Presidency as expressed in the statement regarding the proposed repeal of the Right-to-Work amendment. President Brown wanted me to understand what he did say. He stated that he said to the representative of Time Magazine who had called on him just what I had told him to say and no more, and that this man had come back yesterday and confirmed that and stated that he had reported exactly what President Brown had told him; that, however, when it went to New York, they changed it there and had given it headline value. President Brown then read to me the statement as contained in the minutes of the First Presidency’s meeting which was agreed upon by the First Presidency at that time. He reiterated that he had done nothing that he was not authorized to do. I said that I am glad to hear that.
Tuesday, August 3, 1965
August 10, 1965
Dear President Johnson:
Pursuant to your proclamation of October 2, 1964, and further responding to the invitation from your National Citizens’ Commission on International Cooperation, I am enclosing a copy of our report on current activities and future plans involving international cooperation.
I hope you will find some personal interest in this statement of our efforts.
Because of their interest in this general field, I am also taking the liberty of sending copies to the members of the Senate and House of Representatives who are members of our Church, and also a copy to Secretary of State Dean Rusk.
With greetings and kind personal regards, I remain
Sincerely yours,
David O. McKay
President Lyndon B. Johnson
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Tuesday, August 3, 1965
A REPORT TO THE NATIONAL CITIZENS’ COMMISSION ON INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION: CURRENT ACTIVITIES AND FUTURE PLANS OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS INVOLVING INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION.
As set forth in our statement, ‘Some Desirable Objectives To Be Sought In International Cooperation’ submitted to the Commission with copies to President Johnson, Secretary Rusk and other officials under date of May 14, 1965, we believe the serious need of our times is to preach the gospel to the nations of the earth. The injunction of the Master set forth in the Gospel of St. Matthew, must strike the intelligent mind with force: ‘Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and lo, I am with you always even unto the end of the world.’
This solemn injunction, in the context of the Scripture which also states, ‘All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth,’ is needed to sustain men’s hearts and minds in these times.
Our future plans are identified with the foregoing objectives. The current activities of the Church are representative of our historic efforts to meet this responsibility.
During 1965, the Church is maintaining 51 missions in 27 nations beyond the jurisdiction of the United States of America. In foreign countries 7,702, and in the United States 3,963 (total 11,665) young men and young women, largely from the United States, spend two years or more of their lives in the missions. They are generally about 20 years of age, and have often completed one or two years of college. They normally return to continue their college educations upon the satisfactory completion of their missions. These young men and young women, and their families, voluntarily contribute for their maintenance in this service approximately $14,000,000 each year.
As rapidly as rights of conscience, ownership of property, the privilege of printing and circulating literature become available to us abroad, we attempt to establish these helpful missionary operations. In every instance, since 1830, they have tended to elevate the condition of the people served, broaden their educational and cultural outlook, and enhance their material prosperity.
The young men and women who have returned to the United States from such service for more than 125 years, have brought with them language and other cultural skills, precious understandings of other peoples, fresh faith and appreciation for the gospel and the blessings of liberty.
The Church, from its own revenues, expends approximately $30,000,000 on its international activities annually. The bulk of this annual expenditure budget goes for construction of educational and religious buildings, hospitals, and for educational and missionary service. Most of our hospitals at the present time are in North America.
While the Church has had a long history of providing educational institutions and services in New Zealand and Polynesia, as for example our elementary schools in Tonga, Samoa and French-Polynesia, recent examples of our service to the peoples of the Pacific are exemplified by the new Church College of Hawaii and the Church College of New Zealand (a training ground for all the peoples of the Pacific in leadership and education), and in the new Polynesian center we have also established on the island of Oahu, also in the state of Hawaii.
At the present time, our foreign missionary activity in Asia is generally restricted to missions in Korea, Japan, Hong Kong and the Philippine Islands. From time to time, we have looked hopefully towards India and other parts of the great continent of Asia. In all such cases, we look with humility and with the spirit of service, hoping to make friends for the gospel’s and mankind’s sake.
The Gospel of Jesus Christ, properly understood, we believe, embraces all truth, provides sound bases in human understanding for the ultimate reconciliation of human and cultural differences, while preserving individuality, nationality, and freedom of group identity. In our Father’s house are many mansions. We are mindful that our Lord and Master, himself, was born, lived, and fulfilled his earthly mission in the ‘fertile crescent’ which functions as a significant land bridge between the great continents of Europe, Africa and Asia. Certain common bonds which underlie Christendom, Islam, and Judaism, properly understood and examined, we feel, can be extended and broadened to assist mankind in acquiring a more tolerant attitude. The revelation inherent in His declaration, ‘I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life’ can yet dawn in greater degree upon suffering mankind, we hope and pray, through the extension of religious liberty, and with it, peace and freedom. We must never cease to proclaim His message as Prince of Peace, of Peace on Earth, Good Will Toward Men — to all men everywhere.
We pray for the day when international cooperation will have reached the point that this message, voluntarily offered, may be available for the voluntary acceptance of any who desire it in honesty of heart.”
Fri., 20 Aug. 1965:
“9:00 to 10:30 a.m.
Attended a meeting of the First Presidency at which time we took up many matters of general Church importance, some of these were:
Right-to-Work — Statement in Wall Street Journal by President Hugh B. Brown
Mention was made of a clip sheet of an article published in the Wall Street Journal regarding the Church and making particular reference to the Church’s attitude recently expressed regarding the proposed repeal of Section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Law. The article expressed the view that the Church had modified its original statement on this subject. I asked President Brown regarding the statement attributed to him in the article to the effect that ‘Congressmen have the right to tell us we can jump in the Lake.’ President Brown said that he had made no such statement.
Right-to-Work–Conscientious Objection Amendment
A letter was read from Senator Wallace F. Bennett enclosing a copy of an amendment to the Taft-Hartley Act repealer, which amendment is a conscientious objection amendment. Senator Bennett suggests that the First Presidency may wish to refer this item to legal counsel to determine whether membership in the LDS Church would qualify an individual to claim the right given under the amendment. It was decided to tell Senator Bennett that we do not wish to become involved in this matter.
Wed., 8 Sept. 1965:
“1:00 p.m.
Left for Huntsville where Sister McKay, our children, and grand children, and I were guests of my four sisters (Jeannette, Anne, Lizzie, and Kitts) at a birthday dinner. Prior to the dinner, representatives of Channel 5 and Channel 2 of Salt Lake City, and Channel 4 of Ogden, came to interview me and take pictures of the family gathering.
While we were eating dinner, word came from my secretary, Clare, in Salt Lake City that President Lyndon B. Johnson was trying to reach me by telephone. As there is no telephone at the old home, I sent word to her that I would be at the new cottage at 4:30 p.m., at which time she could place the call to President Johnson.
We had a glorious time at the old home. How I loved this hallowed place with its thick walls, high ceilings, the fire place wide and deep and the chimney as tall as poplar trees that surround it. Somehow I feel better while I am in Huntsville Valley. I know each mountain peak, each canyon and stream. I have roamed over every farm and meadow since early childhood. Here is where I was born. Here is where I grew to early manhood. Here is where I had my first teaching position. It is little wonder I love this valley so dearly.
And now, today, this old place rang out with laughter and music as members of the family gathered to celebrate my birthday. What a joy it is to be here! (See Llewelyn McKay’s account of the gathering at Huntsville.
Telegram from the President of the United States
At 4:30 p.m., when I returned to the new cottage, I received a telephone call from President Lyndon B. Johnson from The White House, Washington, D.C. He extended his greetings and best wishes, and we reminisced for several minutes. He wanted especially to be remembeed to Sister McKay, who was by my side when he called.
Just prior to his telephone call, he sent the following telegram to my office in Salt Lake:
‘As I returned to my White House office, my calendar reminded me of the birthday of a long-time cherished friend. Lady Bird joins me in expressing our warmest good wishes to you for happiness and joy which you have earned through a lifetime of service and achievement. I have been trying to reach you by telephone, but in case I fail, I send my highest regards. (Signed Lyndon B. Johnson.)’
Soon after the telephone call, we left for Salt Lake. We spent a quiet evening at home, watching the television. What a glorious day this has been!”
Tues., 23 Nov. 1965:
Brigham Young University and the Peace Corps of the United States
Brother Isaacson reported that President Milan Smith of the Washington Stake had called him this morning early and seemed very much concerned because of his understanding that letters are going out from Brigham Young University opposing solicitation by the Peace Corps on the BYU campus. President Milan Smith thought this was a very serious matter because the Government is authorized to place the Peace Corps representatives in every country in the world, and he wondered what it might do to our missionary system if we oppose the government in permitting the Peace Corps representatives to solicit on the BYU campus. He stated that the BYU is the only university in the United States that is objecting to this program. President Tanner mentioned that this question had been brought up in a meeting of the Board of Education on two occasions and the Board had voted it down each time and said they did not want it. He mentioned that Brother Lee and Brother Romney and other members of the Board were very much opposed to it, stating that they estimated that our missionary system is doing much more for peace than the Peace Corps.
I said that we do not want to be sanctioning something that will cause us trouble with the Government. President Isaacson was requested to confer with President Wilkinson and ascertain if the letter that he was preparing has been sent and if not to hold it and have it brought to the First Presidency. President Isaacson was assigned to look into the matter.
Thurs., 3 Feb. 1966:
“Governor Calvin L. Rampton – Desire to have President Tanner Serve on Legislative Study Committee
President Tanner mentioned authorization heretofore given for him at Governor Rampton’s request to serve on a commission to study the legislative functions of government. The Governor and some others had called on President Tanner stating that they would like him to be chairman of the commission. President Tanner said he did not think it would be wise for him to accept this position because of his position in the First Presidency.
I said that the Presidency are pleased to give consent to President Tanner serving on the committee, but I think it would not be wise for him to be the chairman.”
Tues., 26 Apr. 1966:
“Government – Church Opposed to Ward Farms Signing for Soil Banks
A letter was read from William E. Robinson of Pasco, Washington, stating that the Pasco Ward farm has signed up with the government soil bank, from which it will received $1,100. He asks what the Church policy on this is. It was decided to write the President of the Stake about this matter. We indicated our opposition to such a project.
Utah-Idaho Sugar Company – Proposed Cooperative with Welch Company (Grape Juice)
President Tanner mentioned that a man by the name of J.M. Kaplan, who is spearheading the forming of cooperatives for the Welch Grape Juice people, wants to form a cooperative sugar industry, and asks if we would be interested in doing this with the Utah-Idaho Sugar Company. He argues that if they had a cooperative the growers would have a great advantage because the cooperative would not pay the kind of taxes the company now pays the government.
We are not interested in this proposal.
Fri., 13 May 1966:
“Political Gatherings – Statement Issued by President McKay
The Deseret News carried President McKay’s statement urging Utahns to participate in voting district mass meetings May 23, 1966. ‘These meetings should be of utmost importance to every Utahn of voting age. The neighborhood grass-roots political gatherings’ was described ‘as the citizen’s most important opportunity until the actual election day this fall to assure honorable government.’
President McKay said further, ‘It is the responsibility of every citizen to be interested in good government and to insure its continuance by the election of honorable and capable men and women to public office. Good government is assured only when both major political parties place on their respective tickets the type of nominees who are honorably and unselfishly devoted to securing and maintaining the highest standards of leadership…’ (See newspaper clipping following.)”
Wednesday, August 31, 1966
September 2, 1966
To Presidents of Stakes and Presidents of Missions
Dear Brethren:
The citizens of this great country are in the midst of a political campaign for the purpose of selecting candidates for office in local and state positions.
We reiterate the advice given by the leaders of the Church from time to time that it is the duty of every citizen to exercise the voting franchise in accordance with his or her convictions. We have not in the past, nor do we now seek to bring coercion or compulsion upon the membership of the Church as to their political actions. On the contrary, we have urged and do now urge that all citizens, men and women, vote according to their honest convictions. The voter should study this government and make up his mind as to what he wishes his government to be, and them, if he is so minded, vote for the one he believes will most nearly carry out his ideas about our government and its free institutions.
The General Authorities of the Church as such do not favor one political party over another; the Church has no candidate or candidates for political office; we do not undertake to tell people how to vote. We do, however, most earnestly urge every citizen of our beloved country to take advantage of the privilege and opportunity to participate in the local primaries where representatives of both political parties will be selected, and that they exercise their God-given franchise to make their wishes known at the election polls.
It is contrary to our counsel and advice that ward, branch or stake premises, chapels or other Church facilities be used in any way for political campaign purposes, whether it be for speech-making, distribution of literature, or class discussions. Needless to say, we are unalterably opposed to the use of our Sacrament or other Church meetings for any such purposes, and those who attempt to use the Church facilities to further their political ambitions are injuring their cause and doing the Church a disservice.
We appeal to all candidates for public office to take notice of this instruction and conduct their campaigns in such manner as strictly to comply with this requirement pertaining to the use of our Church buildings.
Again we urge every member of the Church who is qualified to vote to exercise his God-given franchise.
Sincerely yours,
The First Presidency
David O. McKay
Hugh B. Brown
N. Eldon Tanner
Joseph Fielding Smith”
Mon., 12 Sept. 1966:
“10:30 a.m.
Visit of Vice-President Hubert H. Humphrey
In the office of the First Presidency, with a bevy of newspaper reporters and photographers, Sister McKay and I received Vice-President Hubert H. Humphrey and Mrs. Humphrey. Congressman David King of Utah and national and local representatives of the Democratic Party were present. President Hugh B. Brown and Nathan Eldon Tanner were also present.
I told Mr. and Mrs. Humphrey how happy Mrs. McKay and I are to greet them; that it had been a long time, because of my health that I had come to the Administration Building, but that I was very happy to be able to be there this morning with Mrs. McKay to pay my respects. I said, ‘This is the first time our paths have crossed,’ and Mr. Humphrey said, ‘Yes, this is my first meeting with you.’ He then stated that President Johnson had asked him to convey his greetings and best wishes, and I said, ‘You take my greetings back to President Johnson; I value his friendship, and esteem him highly.’ Mr. Humphrey said ‘the President appreciates your thoughts and your prayers in these difficult days.’
Vice-President Humphrey then said that President Johnson is a God-fearing and hard working man; that he works too hard all the time.’ I said, ‘It is not so easy to be the President of the United States.’
I mentioned that I was pleased to see Mr. Humphrey looking so well, and he said that he is in good health.
President Brown then announced that Mr. Humphrey had kindly consented to go out on the steps of the Church Administration Building to have his picture taken with the Polynesian dancers who are in the city giving performances at the Highland High School, and he asked me if I would like to join them. The photographers and newspaper reporters started toward the front door, and I said, ‘Hold on, why not have the Polynesians come in here, and pictures can be taken here. So, they were asked to come into the First Presidency’s office. They soon entered the room, and what a colorful scene they made in all their brightly colored costumes and flower and feather leis. They swarmed around us, and placed leis and beads around our necks, and then commenced singing to us. Tears were shed by the Humphreys and Sister McKay and me, and the others in the room, as we listened to their singing and received their leis and affectionate greetings.
They then took their leave, and the Humphreys stood up to go, Mr. Humphrey explaining that he had a speaking appointment to fill. I promised to send to the Vice-President a brochure on the Church, which he said he would be pleased to have as a memento of this occasion. (See following minutes of this meeting and newspaper clippings.)
Also, see following copy of letter from Edwin Brown Firmage, Assistant Professor of Law, who was present during the above interview. He has been assisting Mr. Humphrey in his office during the past year. Brother Firmage said, ‘It was a thrill of a lifetime to be able to introduce Vice-President Humphrey to you, and to be present while you talked with the Vice-President.’
Monday, September 12, 1966
Monday, September 12, 1966
Visit of Vice President Hubert H. Humphrey
At 10:30 this morning Vice President Hubert H. Humphrey and Mrs. Humphrey, in accordance with previous appointment, called on President and Sister McKay in the office of the First Presidency and paid their compliments to them. Accompanying the Vice President was Congressman David King and other associates, among them Edwin Firmage, a grandson of President Hugh B. Brown. The Vice President mentioned that Brother Firmage, who has been assisting him in his office for the past year and had been a real strength to him, had presented him with a beautifully bound copy of the Book of Mormon which the Vice President has in his office.
President McKay mentioned to Mr. Humphrey that this is the first time that he had come to his office in a long time because of the condition of his health; that, however, notwithstanding his physical condition he was glad to welcome the Vice President. The President said he was especially proud to have his wife, Sister McKay, with him.
Mr. Humphrey said that President Johnson had told him that in the event he had the privilege of meeting President McKay he wanted him to convey to the President his warm greetings and his best wishes for his health and happiness.
President McKay told Mr. Humphrey to take his best regards back to President Johnson. Mr. Humphrey said that he would do so, that the President said ‘he appreciates your thoughts and your prayers in these very difficult days.’ President McKay then commented that he esteemed President Johnson very highly, and Mr. Humphrey responded that the President is a good man, that it is difficult to be president of anything, and it is doubly difficult to be President of the United States. He also stated that the President is a God-fearing man and a hard working man, that as a matter of fact he works too hard all the time. President McKay said ‘It is not so easy to be the President of the United States.’ President McKay said he was glad to see Mr. Humphrey looking so well, and the Vice President assured the President that he is in good health.
The group of Polynesian people who are in the city presenting their program at the Highland High School had called at the Church Office Building and were waiting for Vice President Humphrey to come out of the front door so that they could give him a reception. President McKay was asked to join the Vice President in this reception, whereupon the President asked that the Polynesians be invited into the First Presidency’s Office. They accepted the invitation and came in their various South Sea Island costumes and paid respect to Mr. Humphrey and adoration to President McKay. Some of the Polynesian young ladies placed leis upon the shoulders of President and Sister McKay and Mr. and Mrs. Humphrey in the Polynesian customary way of kissing the recipient when so doing. The Polynesian group also sang very beautifully a couple of South Sea Island songs. Mr. and Mrs. Humphrey were greatly touched by this wonderful reception, and tears of emotion came to their eyes. The group then separated and Mr. and Mrs. Humphrey excused themselves to meet another appointment. As they left the building the singers had assembled on the stairs at the front entrance of the building and sang another number for Vice President and Mrs. Humphrey.”
Wed., 14 Sept. 1966:
“2:00 p.m.
At my request, my secretary Clare came over. She brought letters and reported requests for appointments.
She says that Ray Townsend of the Republican Headquarters here in Salt Lake City had called and stated that Richard Nixon will be in Salt Lake City on Friday, and would like to make a brief call on me. I told Clare that I should be pleased to meet him, and for her to make the appointment. Arrangements were made for Mr. Nixon to call at 11:30 a.m.”
Fri., 16 Sept. 1966:
“11:45 a.m.
Courtesy Visit of Former Vice-President Richard M. Nixon
Former Vice-President Richard M. Nixon, who is in Salt Lake for a speaking appointment at the Republican Rally to be held in the Terrace Room of the Prudential Building at 12:30 p.m., called on Sister McKay and me at the apartment in the Hotel. He was accompanied by Congressional candidate Sherman P. Lloyd, State Chairman Richard Richards, National Committeeman Ken Garff, and Mrs. Janice Romney, State Vice-Chairwoman. My son, Lawrence McKay, and my secretary, Clare Middlemiss, and a number of newspaper reporters and photographers were also present.
Mr. Nixon greeted me by saying, ‘I called on you six years ago, and you are still looking strong and vigorous.’ I said, ‘Why shouldn’t I? I was glad to see you then, and I am even happier to meet you now.’
Mr. Nixon said that reminded him of an incident of Winston Churchill when one of the photographers taking his picture on his Eightieth Birthday said, ‘You know, Mr. Churchill, I hope I shall have the opportunity of taking your picture on your Ninetieth Birthday.’ Churchill answered, ‘Well, young man, you look healthy enough to live that long!’ ‘So, President McKay,’ continued Mr. Nixon, ‘I think we can all say that to you.’
Then Mr. Nixon said, ‘You have a very outstanding Church all over the world, and your young missionaries and other members are a great group. Your missionaries in a sense are the non-governmental Peace Corps to the world.’
‘I should like to ask you for a little advice, President McKay. I am a golf sport fan. I met Billy Casper in San Diego when he won the United States Open Championship, and I found out that he had joined the Church not long before that. Do you think if I become a Mormon I will be better in golf?’
I said, ‘Yes, I do.’ And Sister McKay spoke right up and said, ‘Of course you will.’
Mr. Nixon was then told by one in the group that Billy Casper had passed up a national tournament in Great Britain in order to come to Salt Lake to participate in the Church’s golf tournament; that Billy Casper is doing a wonderful job for the Church, speaking to young people wherever he goes.
At this point, Mr. Nixon arose to go saying that he had to leave to keep a speaking appointment, and I told him that his visit was too brief, and he said, ‘I’ll be back; I promise you.’
He did not talk politics, and said that that was not his purpose for visiting me.
I was very pleasantly surprised to meet him, and was pleased to note that he had matured in looks and in his thinking. Sister McKay and I both enjoyed meeting with him.”
Sat., 22 Oct. 1966:
“1:20 p.m.
Proposed Visit to Salt Lake of President Lyndon B. Johnson
President Hugh B. Brown had Brother Darcey U. Wright, acting as chauffeur, bring him and secretary Joseph Anderson up to Huntsville. His purpose in coming was to tell me that he had received word from Senator Frank E. Moss that President Lyndon B. Johnson had expressed a desire to stop off in Salt Lake City on his return from his Asian tour to see me and also to attend a Mormon service. It is proposed that he will arrive in Salt Lake City on Saturday evening, November 5, and remain over until noon on Sunday, November 6, 1966.
Mention was made of the fact that the Ensign Stake is holding a Stake Conference in the Assembly Hall on Sunday, but President Brown said that he would like to have the University Stake, because of the number of young University students that attend that Stake, hold their Conference in the Tabernacle and let President Johnson attend a Tabernacle Choir broadcast and then remain to attend the University Stake Conference.
We discussed this matter at some length and then President Brown asked me if I would like him to proceed in going ahead and getting things in order. I told him to see what arrangements could be made and then talk to me later about the matter. (For details see copy of minutes following.)
Saturday, October 22, 1966
Minutes of the Meeting of the First Presidency
Held Saturday, October 22, 1966, at 1:20 P.M.
President Lyndon B. Johnson’s visit
President Brown met with President McKay today at the President’s home in Huntsville and presented the following matter to him: He stated that a call had come this morning from the office of President Johnson in Washington stating that on President Johnson’s return from his trip to Australia, New Zealand, Manila, etc., he would land in Los Angeles Saturday night, November 5th, and would then fly home Sunday, that he had expressed a desire to stop off in Salt Lake City and see President McKay on Sunday, November 6th, and had indicated that while here he would like to attend some Mormon service. President Brown said that if this met with the approval of President McKay, President Johnson’s representatives will come here next week and make definite arrangements for the President’s visit.
President Brown asked President McKay if he would like to see the President of the United States, and President McKay said that he would. President Brown then said that President Johnson is anxious to see President McKay.
The second question presented by President Brown was: Should we arrange for President Johnson to attend a Mormon service, and if so, where? He said that President Tanner, President Smith and he, President Brown, had considered this matter. They understand that President Johnson wants to hear the Tabernacle Choir and he will be here at about 11:00 Sunday morning. The Tabernacle Choir broadcast concludes at 10:00 and they usually have a Choir practice following the broadcast. President Brown said that one thought is that we could call a meeting in the Tabernacle, have special speakers and have the Choir, and the President could attend this meeting. Another thought is, President Johnson wants to see a typical Mormon service but if it becomes known that he is coming we cannot control the crowd that would be present at the service. He mentioned that if we do not have it in the Tabernacle we might have it in the Assembly Hall. President Brown said that on Sunday the 6th there will be a stake conference meeting in the Assembly Hall and President Johnson could be taken to that meeting. He said that a conference he would personally like to have President Johnson see would be the University Stake Conference because that pertains to the young people, students, etc. at the University, and that they usually hold their Sunday morning conference meeting in the Assembly Hall. President Wilford W. Kirton is the president of the stake.
Another suggestion, President Brown said, is that perhaps President Johnson could attend a service in one of our stake houses, Bonneville Stake, the big auditorium in the University Stake, or perhaps some other building.
President Brown asked President McKay if we should arrange for President Johnson to attend a Mormon meeting, and he said yes.
President Brown’s next question was where the meeting should be held, and it was agreed that it should be a typical Mormon service in the Tabernacle and that the Tabernacle Choir could be invited to sing on that occasion. President Brown had talked with President Kirton of the University Stake, President James Faust of the Cottonwood Stake, and also with President Tanner, and they all feel that there is only one way that we could handle the crowd and that would be in the Tabernacle, and that a program could be arranged that would be a typical Mormon service, that perhaps we could have someone of the stake presidency speak. After some discussion of the matter it was decided that the University Stake should hold their stake conference morning session commencing at 10:00 in the Tabernacle with President Kirton in charge, and that President Kirton should be one of the speakers at the service, that the first hour of the service should go forward in the regular manner as a quarterly conference service.
The question was raised as to whether President Johnson should be invited to sit on the stand. It was mentioned that normally when he attends a Church service on Sundays he sits in a pew in the audience. President McKay said that we would have him sit on the stand and say something to those present. President Brown asked the President if he would like him to proceed to get things in order for this proposed visit, and President McKay said that he should do so right away so that we will have everything ready, and keep it as near as possible without a lot of publicity. It was agreed that when President Johnson comes, inasmuch as he is to sit on the stand, he should enter the Tabernacle through the General Authorities entrance at the west end of the Tabernacle.
In answer to President Brown’s question as to whether President McKay would be there, the President said that he would, and Sister McKay said that she too would try to be there. President Brown suggested that whoever might speak would do so right after the President arrives, and that there might be one or two short speeches and one or two Choir numbers, and then the service might conclude with what President Johnson would like to say. Sister McKay suggested that it might be well to have Sister Spafford of the Relief Society be one of the speakers. It was mentioned that Sister Spafford is out of the state but that she might be back by that time. It was thought that this was a good suggestion to have one of our women speak representing the women of the Church. President McKay said that the stake president should speak on that occasion. Authorization was given for President Brown to go forward with the arrangements as mentioned.
Mon., 24 Oct. 1966:
“Visit of Hubert H. Humphrey to the Brigham Young University
I then met with President Ernest L. Wilkinson of the BYU, who reported to me the circumstances under which Vice-President Hubert Humphrey was invited to speak at the BYU (See following minutes of this meeting by President Wilkinson.)
Sister McKay and I then asked President Wilkinson to stay for lunch, and we had a nice visit with him.
Monday, October 24, 1966
MEMORANDUM OF CONFERENCE WITH PRESIDENT DAVID O. MCKAY AT HIS HUNTSVILLE HOME ON OCTOBER 24, 1966, MONDAY AT APPROX. 11:30 a.m.
In the morning, after I had arrived from San Francisco, I reported to Clare Middlemiss by telephone in connection with the Humphrey address given to the student body at Brigham Young University. She suggested that since the B.Y.U. Homecoming queen and her attendants were going to see President McKay that I should also go and tell him what happened.
I responded to her suggestion. The following is a resume of the conversation.
1. I explained to President McKay that we had originally invited Vice President Humphrey, that he had declined, but that on October 17, President Brown told me that the Vice President wanted to come. I reported to President Brown that that was most unusual because he had declined. Whereupon President Brown told me he had a telephone call from Senator Moss asking that the Vice President come. I also explained to President McKay that President Brown told me that he had cleared his coming with President Tanner and with President McKay and asked me to arrange for the meeting, that I had done so and that the meeting would be held October 21.
I told President McKay that after the Vice President came, I learned that President Brown’s grandson, Ed Firmage, had been on the campus the preceeding week arranging for a panel, etc., and had told those involved that I was not to be informed of it until after President Brown had informed me of the same, or otherwise I might cancel it.
President McKay’s response to this was ‘Pay no attention to what they say.’
2. I told President McKay that I was going ahead and arranging then for a Republican meeting. He gave enthusiastic approval for this.
3. I asked him whether since President Brown had introduced Humphrey we could have a General Authority introduce whom we obtain for the Republican rally. He authorized me to ask Elder Hunter in his behalf, to make this introduction.
E.L. Wilkinson
ELW/jmc”
Tues., 25 Oct. 1966:
“8:50 a.m.
Met with Presidents Brown, Tanner, and Smith in the office at the apartment. Some of the items discussed were:
President Lyndon B. Johnson’s Proposed Visit
President Brown discussed again with me the matter of President Johnson’s proposed visit to Salt Lake City. He said that it is expected that President Johnson will send a wire to me direct expressing a desire to see me individually, and to attend a Mormon service, and that when I answer the President’s wire the matter could then be made known to the press. President Brown said he personally felt that the matter must be kept as non-political as possible, and to that end he would suggest that he be authorized to tell Senator Frank E. Moss and Representative David King to stay in the background; that they could sit in the audience if they wanted. He said that there would undoubtedly be some political reactions to this occasion, that some people would say that it is a political trick for him to come here just before the election.
I said that if we try to soften it we shall only make it worse; that, therefore, we should not say anything to Moss and King as to what they should do.
President Brown said he thought, and he still thinks, that it should be handled through me as the President of the Church with President Johnson; that this would be preferable to handling it politically. President Brown mentioned that President Johnson’s personal representatives will be here to make preliminary arrangements; that their principal purpose in coming now would be for security reasons.
President Brown asked me if I would like President Johnson to sit on the stand, and if I would like him to say something, and I said that we would have to ask him to speak.
President Brown said President Kirton had agreed to advance his conference one week — that is the University Stake Conference — and hold it on the sixth rather than a week later, and that he should go forward with the conference starting at 10:00 a.m., and then be prepared for President Johnson’s entrance at 11:00 a.m. or shortly thereafter. It was mentioned that nothing had been said as yet in anticipation of President Johnson’s visit. It was agreed that President Brown would meet President Johnson’s representatives today and find out from them just what they have in mind.
Wed., 2 Nov. 1966:
10:30 a.m.
Visit of President Lyndon B. Johnson to Salt Lake City
By appointment I met Senator Frank E. Moss, members of his staff, and also Secret Service men and members of President Johnson’s staff. They are in the city to arrange for the proposed visit of the President.
Senator Moss explained that President Johnson will be in Salt Lake City at 6:30 o’clock Saturday evening instead of 11:00 p.m., as was previously planned; that if he can do so (which they will find out definitely upon his return to Washington, D.C. Thursday evening), they would like to have a meeting in the Tabernacle Saturday evening to which the public will be invited, and at which President Johnson would deliver a major address on his Asian tour to the Nation, and then Sunday morning attend services in the Tabernacle at which time the Tabernacle Choir will sing some of President Johnson’s favorite songs. I said, ‘It looks like it is in the hands of the Democrats; the President of the United States has always been welcome to speak in the Tabernacle, but keep politics out of it, if you can.’ They all laughed at this latter remark.
Mr. Sinclair, a member of Johnson’s staff, said that President Johnson will probably arrive in Washington Friday morning, spend one day in Washington, and then leave for Salt Lake Saturday. He said that he did not know for sure whether President Johnson will make the trip to Salt Lake or not; that he may be too exhausted to make the trip. Mr. Sinclair asked if I would like to send a telegram to President Johnson inviting him to come, and I said that I thought that that was not necessary. I said that, of course, President Johnson will be welcome to come to Salt Lake, but that this is a matter he will have to decide.
After discussing a few other plans regarding President Johnson’s attending a Mormon Church service while in Salt Lake, the group then took their leave.
Thurs., 3 Nov. 1966:
3:30 p.m.
Visit of President Lyndon B. Johnson to Salt Lake City
My secretary Clare telephoned and reported that Mr. Owens of Senator Frank Moss’ office had notified her that President Johnson’s staff, temporarily located in the Hotel Utah, had been notified by President Johnson that he is not coming to Utah; that the doctors are advising that he go immediately to his ranch in Texas for a rest, following which he will undergo minor surgery on his throat, and also for a small hernia which has formed on the incision which was made when he was operated upon for his gall bladder.
Clare said that members of Johnson’s staff would like to call on him and express President Johnson’s regrets that he cannot come to Utah. I told Clare to have them come right over.
4:00 p.m.
Received at the apartment at the Hotel Utah members of President Johnson’s staff who conveyed President Johnson’s greetings and his regrets that he cannot come to Utah. I told them to take my greetings and warmest regards to President Johnson; that I am sorry I shall not see him.
They were very gracious, and I was pleased to visit with them for the few moments they were present.”
Sun., 13 Nov. 1966:
“9:00 a.m.
President Ernest L. Wilkinson of the Brigham Young University called at the apartment.
We discussed matters pertaining to the outcome of the recent election, and to the fact that Ralph Harding, who went against the statement of the First Presidency on the Right-to-Work Law had run for the Senate from Idaho and had lost again. I was surprised to learn that President John L. Clarke, President of Ricks College at Rexburg, had openly endorsed Harding over the radio during his recent campaign. I told President Wilkinson to inform Elder Harold B. Lee of this since he is a member of the Church Board of Education.
Sunday, November 13, 1966
MEMORANDUM OF CONFERENCE WITH PRESIDENT DAVID O. MCKAY ON NOVEMBER 13, 1966 AT HOTEL UTAH AT 9:00 AM
1. The election, etc.:
At the outset of the conference I asked President McKay what he thought of the election. He said he thought the people were beginning to recover their senses again. He was particularly happy over the defeat of David King and Ralph Harding. He said he had given encouragement to David King at one time but King had been a great disappointment to him. He recalled that Ralph Harding had openly attacked Benson from the floor of the House of Representatives.
During the course of the conversation I expressed disappointment that after the First Presidency had spoken on The Right to Work Law and Ralph Harding had disobeyed the counsel of the Brethren, that President John Clark, of Rexburg, had openly endorsed Harding over the radio in Idaho. The President expressed great surprise at this, and said he thought I ought to take it up with the Board of Education. I pointed out that I was no longer in charge of Ricks College; whereupon he asked me to inform Brother Lee thereof. I asked him if he had anything particularly in mind. He said, ‘No, just put it in Brother Lee’s mind, so that he can consider what to do.’
During the course of this conversation also we discussed the election of two years ago when public sentiment was in the opposite direction. I pointed out to him that one of my difficulties in that election had been that I had been very unsuccessful in raising finances for the campaign, but before I decided to run for office Joseph Rosenblatt had promised to raise the funds for me, and then after I announced, he reneged on his promise. Recalling that Rosenblatt had been one of the main parties sponsoring a dinner a few years ago for President McKay, and that later I had even proposed that he be given an Honorary Doctorate Degree at the BYU, I now found that he had a reputation for being dishonorable in business dealings, and that I suppose the President knew that he was now threatening to sue the Tribune and the Deseret News in an anti-trust suit because his newspaper had failed. The President expressed surprise at this, saying he did not know, but thanked me for telling him. It was agreed that the President would be on his guard in the event Rosenblatt attempted to see him.
Tues., 15 Nov. 1966:
“8:30 a.m.
Held a meeting of the First Presidency. Presidents Brown and Smith and I were present. President Tanner is in Hawaii, and President Isaacson is still absent because of illness. Some of the matters discussed were:
George Romney – Candidacy for President of United States
Consideration was given to a circular letter signed by Raymond A. Hatch which is being sent to Presidents of Stakes in behalf of a movement in favor of Governor George Romney of Michigan for President of the United States. This letter had come to the First Presidency from President Francis B. Winkel of the Hayward Stake, stating that it appeared to him that this project should be stopped. Brother Hatch indicates that he is gathering Stake directories so that he may make his appeal to Latter-day Saint leaders throughout the Church.
We agreed with President Winkel that a movement of the kind proposed by Brother Hatch would hurt Brother Romney’s chances for nomination rather than help him. It was decided to write Brother Hatch to this effect.
Tuesday, November 15, 1966
Mr. Thrapp’s Account of Interview with Pres. McKay
BUT FULL CHURCH BACKING IS ASSURED
MORMONS SEE ROMNEY IN RACE ON HIS OWN
BY DAN L. THRAPP
TIMES RELIGION EDITOR
SALT LAKE CITY – If Michigan Gov. George Romney, a Mormon, wins the Republican nomination for President, he will have the full backing of his church but will be his own man, David O. McKay, President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, told The Times.
‘I hope he gets it!’ boomed Dr. McKay, 93.
‘He would make a good President. Very good! He is an independent thinker. He will go his own way – and that usually is a very good way.’
Romney’s emergence as the frontrunner for the GOP nomination marks a milestone for the Mormon Church in the long road from the violent persecution it faced in the 19th century to the point where one of its members is in the race for the nation’s highest office.
Dr. McKay, who has been White House guest and admired friend of at least three Presidents – Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson – admits to some excitement at the thought that Romney might be next, though questions concerning the church and its effect on Romney have been raised in some quarters.
One is whether a Mormon President would be his own man, or the church’s man. Another is the extent of right-wing extremism in the church. A third is the Mormon attitude toward Negroes.
President McKay, who rarely gives interviews, when asked about the first question, answered emphatically:
‘Romney, if elected, would be his own man, all right. One thing the church does not do, is try to enforce its will on its members who hold national office.
‘Naturally, however, he would be influenced by the virtues and principles of the Gospel, as he has been taught them, and as he understands them.’
The state of President McKay’s health precluded discussion with him of the other two questions, but they were taken up with knowledgeable members of the church.
‘We have a right wing, and a left wing, in our church,’ said one of these. ‘But the LDS church is in the middle, and will stay that way.’
The extreme right wing has often…. (page missing)
Tues., 13 Dec. 1966:
‘8:30 a.m.
Held a meeting of the First Presidency. Presidents Brown and Smith were present; President Tanner is in Los Angeles, and President Isaacson is absent on account of illness.
Benson, Ezra Taft – Movement to Draft Him for President
President Brown called attention to a publication entitled ‘Tri-States News Advertiser’ of December 8, 1966, which is published weekly at Hurricane, Utah, and of which Myrlon G. Brown is editor and publisher. The front page of the paper bears a headline, ‘America Offered Leadership’, and reproduces a picture of Elder Benson. The lead article states, ‘1967 committee heads patriot’s name Ezra Taft Benson for President. Church President David O. McKay gives approval.’ The editorial on the front page contains the following statement, which is attributed to the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: ‘…many prominent Americans in a movement to draft Ezra Taft Benson for the Presidency. It appears that this is gaining momentum and is definitely crystallizing into a formal draft movement. Elder Benson has discussed this with me, and to whatever extent he may wish to become receptive to this move, his doing so has my full approval.’
President Brown was disturbed about this, and asked as to whether or not Elder Benson’s proposed candidacy has my approval, and not remembering at the moment that I had given full permission for Elder Benson to stand ready to enter into this movement should circumstances permit, and said that I had not approved; but later recalled the whole matter and that Elder Benson had talked to me about the whole matter, and that I had given him permission to participate in this movement should it come to a point where he was drafted into it. (See Diary of April 16, 1966.)
I therefore instructed Clare to tell Brother Anderson to strike out of the above minutes the statement that I did not approve, and state that I did not recall at the time that I had given Elder Benson permission and had indeed dictated and signed the letter giving my approval to the matter.”
Wed., 28 Dec. 1966:
“9:30 a.m.
Joseph Rosenblatt Interview – Alleged Suit Against Newspaper Agency Corporation
Mr. Joseph Rosenblatt met with us at our invitation. It was explained that we had learned the other day that there was some question of dissatisfaction on the part of Mr. Rosenblatt and the possibility of a suit pending against the NAC and probably the Deseret News, and that when I heard of this, I thought I would like to chat with Mr. Rosenblatt about it. Accordingly, at my request, President Tanner had arranged for Mr. Rosenblatt to come in this morning. Preisdent Tanner explained that the situation as we see it and as we go back over the history of the thing is that the Deseret News and the Tribune were losing a tremendous amount of money, each of them, and in order for both to stay a business, they arranged to organize the NAC, with a definite understanding that they would have two separate editorial and news gathering facilities, the NAC to do the printing. It was the feeling that it was very important that we have two editorial positions so that the people would have that advantage. Accordingly, there was no joining of the papers other than in the two fields, one the printing of the paper, including the advertisements which appear in both papers, some advertising the Deseret News does not carry, and the other the editorial department.
Mr. Rosenblatt said that he would like to say first that there is no intention of any suit, that there never has been, and as long as anything that might be done would involve him or any of the interests he controlled in entering into a controversy, no matter how the equities might lie, with an organization representing the Church or that the Church had large holdings in, there would be no suit. Mr. Rosenblatt said that the boys decided that the continuance of the paper they were operating was no longer economically sound. He said that his position as a father is that he is deeply concerned in seeing that his boys are gainfully employed, that he did not want to find himself closing his eyes to their living off an income and not doing anything that should be done. In other words, he was anxious to help them get into something. He said that his boys were trained a little in writing and he thought that if they wanted to try to get out a paper, to go ahead; that after it had operated for about three years it was apparent that it was not economically sound. He therefore told them to discontinue it. It was their contention, he said, that one of the reasons that made the paper so difficult was that there was a combination which made the advertising problem quite serious. Accordingly Mr. Rosenblatt talked to Mr. Jack Gallivan of the Tribune and told him that he was interested in making the community the kind of place that it should be and that it must be, that we must have the best government in the country, not just the best law obedience; that we ought not to have a poor government in the city, the county, or the state; that the people who are here in the majority have ben taught things that are contrary to the way these political institutions are run, that we do not have here now the kind of code of ethics we should have in public office. He said he had talked to Mr. Gallivan about this many times.
Mr. Rosenblatt referred to the proposed Salt Palace and told Mr. Gallivan about how he was trying to bring to the city of Salt Lake, as an attraction, sports events that are going to bring to Salt Lake all the things that are contrary to what we in this community expect. He said the thing that brings the tourists are the Temple, the Church, and all that the Church has done in erecting beautiful buildings, that it is the understanding throughout the land that the Church stands for cultural things, for a tradition which leads men to do always better things, and he told Mr. Gallivan that, because he wants to bring in a sports arena just for business reasons. Mr. Rosenblatt said people are not going to come to Utah because they can get whiskey; that they can buy it all over the United States, they are going to come to Utah because of the things that we know are here and have attracted them in the past, and that we should have here, particularly next to the Temple grounds, as fine a cultural center as exists in the United States. It should be of the best architecture and it should have gardens and it should match what is going to be across the street, that we have to make sure that what comes here will encourage people to believe that this is the way men and women conduct themselves in this area, and we will not find ourselves attracting an undesirable element of population of which we have too much in the United States. Mr. Rosenblatt said that he thinks Mr. Gallivan feels that business should be ahead of every other thing; that he, Mr. Rosenblatt, does not feel that way. He said he feels the chief obligation we should have in this city is to make it as beautiful a place, as peaceful a place, as fine a community where men and women live as we can bring together and maintain a cultural level that is not equaled anywhere else. He said that we have a background and tradition here that men and women have sacrificed themselves for in this community for over one-hundred years, and we must not change it. Mr. Rosenblatt said that he told Mr. Gallivan that if he was not going to do anything about such things, he was going to sue him, and he said it has moved from that to one rumor after another, but he said he wanted to say to me, and to those present, that there has never at any time been any thought in his mind that they would institute a suit for violation of anti-trust laws or whatever it is against the Deseret News and the Church of the NAC. He said if the News were not a member of the NAC and it was Mr. Gallivan alone, then it would become
a cold business matter and would change the situation altogether, but as it is now, he said, no suit was even thought of.
We expressed our appreciation of the attitude expressed by Mr. Rosenblatt. President Tanner said that word had come through our lawyer, Wilford Kirton, that another lawyer had told him that he had been retained to consider suit against the NAC and that for that reason I wanted to talked with him. Mr. Rosenblatt said that so far as Mr. Gallivan is concerned, there is only one position for his paper and that is to be a good advertising medium. He said that they have no other position to justify their existence. President Tanner assured him that we have other reasons.
I expressed myself as being very happy to hear what Mr. Rosenblatt had said. Mr. Rosenblatt said he had a very serious feeling about this whole situation in the city and he wanted me and each of the Brethren to let him know if there was anything more he could do. President Tanner stated to Mr. Rosenblatt that if he had any suggestions as to how we could improve the Deseret News, we should be glad to receive them; that we are trying to do two things: to keep people advised of the news and to encourage higher moral standards, and this is mostly done through our Church Section weekly, but all the time we try to have a standard upheld through our editorials.
Mr. Rosenblatt said that the thing that he had tried to say to Earl Hawkes is that while we have to be informed as to the news on the local and national scene, the great opportunity we have is here in the city and the state and there is so much that can be done here; that men must understand when they accept public office that there is an obligation here which is beyond what it is elsewhere; they must be absolutely above criticism and they must so conduct themselves as to serve the public in a way that is beyond corruption, and that it is not so much corruption as it is the slovenly way in which men do things; that we must have the disposition and willingness to sacrifice. He said he did not think that we had quite understood that there comes a time when we have to be more concerned about our obligations and our responsibilities than about our troubles, and we need to have those who serve the city, county, and state understand that when they accept a job it has to be a full-time job, it has to be a full-time devotion, and if they are not willing to do it at the price the job pays, they ought not to take it.
I responded that we join with Mr. Rosenblatt in desiring the best government in the United States. As Mr. Rosenblatt left he shook our hands, and in shaking hands with me he said, ‘God bless you, sir, President McKay.’
I feel that Mr. Rosenblatt is a true friend, and really a great man!”
Tues., 3 Jan. 1967:
“Anniversary Congratulations from the Vice-President of the United States
At 7:00 p.m. this evening, my secretary Clare informed me that Vice-President Hubert H. Humphrey was calling from The White House, Washington, D.C. I told her to have the operator put him right on.
Mr. Humphrey’s voice was very clear. He stated that he had received word through the Associated Press and other news media that Mrs. McKay and I had celebrated our Sixty-sixth Wedding Anniversary yesterday, and that he was calling now to extend his personal greetings and congratulations to Mrs. McKay and me.
I thanked him and said that I would convey his message to Mrs. McKay, and that we appreciate very much his graciousness in calling us personally.
The Vice-President then referred to his visit to Salt Lake City last summer, and said he would never forget the cordial reception he received in the office of the First Presidency. He said, ‘You treated us so cordial and made us feel so welcome that it shall always remain a highlight in our lives. I told him that it had been a great pleasure to have Mrs. Humphrey and him call on us.
I again thanked Mr. Humphrey and said that Mrs. McKay joins me in saying ‘Thank You’, and in extending greetings to him and Mrs. Humphrey.”
Fri., 6 Jan. 1967:
9:30 a.m.
Elder Ezra Taft Benson came in and reported the progress of the ‘1976 Committee.’ He said that they are having a meeting in Chicago on the tenth of this month; that they are in real earnest trying to get the people of the country to return to the fundamentals of the Constitution and to draft him to become a candidate for the Presidency of the United States, and Strom Thurmond as Vice-President. He said they now have automobile bumper stickers with ‘Benson for President’ and ‘Thurmond for Vice-President – 1968’.
I said to Elder Benson, as I said before, these matters will have to take their own course, and we shall see what comes of it; that Elder Benson is not to take an active part in this campaign until and unless he is drafted!”
Fri., 27 Jan. 1967:
“Sunday Closing Law
In discussing the legislation that has been introduced in the State House of Representatives regarding Sunday Closing, we felt that the First Presidency should not make a public statement; however, permission was given for President Tanner, since he said that he had had several phone calls about the matter, to talk to two or three of the senators and indicate to them how the Church feels about the matter; that we feel that they should endeavor to pass legislation that would require the closing of all business houses, markets, etc. on Sunday.”
Wed., 15 Feb. 1967:
“8:30 a.m.
Met with Presidents Brown, Tanner, and Smith in a regular meeting of the First Presidency. Among matters discussed were:
Ezra Taft Benson – Nomination for Presidency of United States
A letter was read from Ernest Cook of Ogden, referring to a reference in a letter to the Deseret News to a statement by President McKay that he had given his approval to the movement to sponsor Elder Ezra Taft Benson for nomination and election as President of the United States. Brother Cook asks if this is true, and if so, if he may obtain a statement of such endorsement. In discussing this matter, President Tanner mentioned that the policy has been as he understood it that no one of the General Authorities should seek a political nomination without the approval of the President of the Church. He stated that the President’s approval is always obtained before the Brethren accept various Church assignments such as visiting missions, etc. President Tanner stated that for instance he is leaving today for Great Britain under assignment to attend the Manchester Stake Conference and reorganize the Presidency, that he would not, of course, do this without consulting me and receiving my approval. I said that this was the proper thing to do.
In discussing the matter of Brother Benson, the sentiment was expressed that while I had given Brother Benson permission to become receptive to the nomination, it had not yet come to the point where any draft movement had been made and that we would meet that when it came.
Mon. 20 Feb. 1967:
“9:30 a.m.
My secretary, Clare, came in to make preliminary arrangements for the visit of Governor and Sister George Romney and their party this morning. Her nephew, Robert William Wright, a young local attorney, had come by appointment to greet me. I invited him to stay and meet Governor Romney and his party. I told Robert, whom I have known since his childhood, that I am always happy to see him, and chided him for not coming to see me more often.
10:00 a.m.
Visit of Governor and Mrs. George Romney of Michigan
According to appointment previously arranged, received in our apartment in the Hotel Utah Governor and Mrs. George Romney of Michigan. They were accompanied by Governor Romney’s brother, G. Maurice Romney of Salt Lake City, Mrs. Connie Scowcroft of Ogden and Mrs. Ruth Hayward of Logan, sisters of Mrs. Romney, Miss Anne Davies, fiancee of Mitt Romney, youngest son of Governor and Mrs. Romney, who is serving a mission for the Church in France, and a bevy of national and local television, radio, and newspaper photographers and reporters. Others present during the interview were: President and Sister Joseph Fielding Smith, our son David Lawrence and his wife Mildred, local Republic representatives, Gerald G. Smith, Ted Jacobsen, Ken Garff, Carl Hilbert, and Robert Wright, local attorney, and my secretary, Clare Middlemiss.
Governor and Sister Romney and party were ushered into the living room where Sister McKay and I were waiting to receive them. Governor Romney and his wife Lenore came over to us, and I told them that I felt honored that they would come to see me; that we are always glad to have them call on us. Governor Romney spoke up and said, ‘It is Lenore and I who are honored by being invited.’ Sister Romney kissed both Sister McKay and me on the cheek, declaring, ‘You have blessed us personally in our home more than you could ever know.’ Then Governor Romney recalled our visit to Michigan in June 1959 when we went to Michigan to dedicate the beautiful new Detroit Stake House. We stayed at the Romney home at that time. Brother Romney said that one of their young sons was scared to death, and said that he didn’t know that I could smile until I told some stories and he heard me laugh, and then he said, ‘He knows more funny stories than anyone!’ ‘After that’, Governor Romney said, ‘he felt very comfortable about being around you.’
Brother Romney then said that they had arrived by airplane last night from Anchorage, Alaska, where they attended a Quarterly Conference yesterday (Sunday). They attended the morning service and Governor Romney said he had a chance to speak to 1500 to 1600 people. Said that the new building there in Anchorage is beautiful, and that the people are wonderful.
At this point, Sister Romney said, ‘My sisters want to meet you, President McKay.’ She then introduced them to Sister McKay and me, and Governor Romney introduced his brother, Maurice, who is one of the workers in the Salt Lake Temple.
Governor Romney then looked up at the press representatives who filled half the room, and said, ‘I want you people and everyone to know that President and Sister McKay are a great example of what the ideal sweethearts, parents, and homebuilders should be like in America — we need more of their kind of living in America. President McKay is a great example of what we need. He is one of the most eloquent speakers on family life — the strengthening of the family life has been one of his special callings — he shows the way and frequently speaks out on the great need for solidarity in family life — it is a subject of timeliness.’
I then asked where ‘Joseph’ (President Joseph Fielding Smith) was, and told him to come over near us where he could be seen. Governor Romney then introduced President and Sister Smith to the press, telling them that President Smith is the senior member of the Quorum of the Twelve; that he is a direct descendant of Hyrum Smith who was martyred with his brother, the Prophet Joseph Smith; that President Joseph F. Smith, the son of Hyrum Smith, was the father of Joseph Fielding Smith. He then referred to Sister Smith, and asked her how long she had sung with the Tabernacle Choir, and she said she wouldn’t mention the number of years, but that she had been with them since 1918.
Brother Romney then conversed quietly with me for a few moments. I thanked him again for coming, and told him that my prayers are with him in the responsibilities that are his.
At this point, Governor Romney said that reluctantly they must leave; that they have an appointment at the State Capitol where he will speak to the Legislature now in session. Governor and Sister Romney then took our hands and with tears in their eyes took their leave of us. Others in the party came up and shook hands and said good-bye to us.
It was a very pleasant visit, and Sister McKay and I were very pleased and honored that they had taken the time out of their busy schedule to call on us.
A brother Ted Galovan of Ogden, who was present during the interview (with no one knowing how he got in or who invited him to come), stayed until after the Romney delegation had gone. He had told Sister Joseph Fielding Smith about his conversion to the Church, and then asked if he might tell it to me. There was nothing else to do, but to let him tell his story. He said that his father and mother got out of Russia some sixty years ago, and went to Poland. Brother Galovan (whose real name is Russian) was born in Cascade, Winnepeg, Canada. He said he was brought up a Roman Catholic. He later was a member of the Jehovah Witness Church. He related a dream or vision he had when he saw Jesus at His Second Coming to the earth. Soon after that he met the missionaries of our Church and was converted.
I listened to his story, but made no comment other than to thank him for telling me about it.
Wed., 1 Mar. 1967:
“Church Properties – Possible Taxation of
There was read at the request of President Brown a proposed letter to be sent to our congressional delegation in Washington — Senators Wallace F. Bennett and Frank E. Moss, and Representatives Laurence W. Burton and Sherman P. Lloyd — this letter having been prepared in behalf of the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The letter solicits assistance in insuring that churches are exempted from the provisions of bills H.R. 15942 and H.R. 15943 which were proposed to but not considered by the second session, 89th Congress. The explanation is made that these bills seek to impose the tax on the ‘unrelated debt-financed income’ of all tax exempt organizations, and, if enacted, would, for the first time in our country’s history, subject churches to the filing of federal income tax returns and the payment of federal income tax. I authorized my signature to be attached to these letters.
Wednesday, March 1, 1967
Mailed Letter to:
Senator Wallace F.M. Bennett
Representatives Sherman P. Lloyd
and Lawrence W. Burton
February 24, 1967
Honorable Frank E. Moss
United States Senate
4107 New Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
Re: H.R. 15942 and H.R. 15943
Dear Senator Moss:
The purpose of this correspondence is to solicit your assistance in insuring that churches are exempted from the provisions of the above-referenced identical bills which were proposed to, but not considered by, the 2nd Session, 89th Congress. These bills seek to impose a tax on the ‘unrelated debt-financed income’ of all tax exempt organizations. Hence, if enacted, the measures would, for the first time in our country’s history, subject churches to the filing of federal income tax returns and to the payment of federal income tax.
The ostensible purpose of the proposed legislation is to deter ‘boot-strap’ purchases of businesses by tax-exempt organizations. Treasury officials have asserted that tax-exempt organizations, by ‘trading on their tax exemption’, are purchasing substantial businesses and other income-producing properties without any expenditure of the organizations’ funds. This is accomplished by making the down payment out of the purchased business’ assets and by paying the remainder of the purchase price out of the business earnings. Since none of the tax-exempt organizations income is taxable, it can pay a higher price and retire the purchase price at a faster rate than could nonexempt purchasers. These factors provide an impetus for sellers to sell such properties to tax-exempt organizations, thus reducing our nation’s tax base. Recently, the United States Supreme Court gave its sanction to the legality and nontaxibility of such transactions in the case of Commissioner v. Clay Brown, et. al.
Although legislation may be needed to prevent the ‘bootstrap’ acquisition of businesses by tax-exempt organizations, we feel strongly that the proposed legislation goes far beyond the evils sought to be corrected. If enacted, the legislation would impose a tax on the income derived from all unrelated debt-financed property regardless of how the property is acquired. If a person contributed rental property to the Church as a gift or as tithing in kind and the aforesaid property was subject to an outstanding mortgage or other security interest, the Church would be taxed on a portion of the income derived from the property. By imposing a tax on donated property to a church, the proposed legislation far exceeds the avowed purpose of preventing the ‘bootstrap’ acquisition of a business.
The Church has been very careful to refrain from the practices the proposed legislation seeks to deter. For example, although under present law the Church could obtain tax exemption on its investment properties, it has chosen to title such properties in Zions Securities and to voluntarily pay a tax on the investment income. Nor has any evidence been presented to indicate that churches generally are engaging in the questioned practices. In the hearings held last August by the House Ways and Means Committee on the proposed legislation, evidence was introduced to demonstrate that many exempt organizations are trading on their tax exemption. However, absolutely no evidence was presented indicating that churches are engaging in this practice. Additionally, in 1950 when the administration proposed and Congress enacted legislation taxing exempt organizations on their unrelated business income, churches were specifically excepted from payment of the tax. At the hearings held on this legislation, administration representatives were questioned regarding the exclusion of churches from the tax. They defended the exclusion by asserting that churches were not trading on their tax exemption. For example, the Honorable John W. Snyder, Secretary of The Treasury, in response to Rep. Mason’s query as to why the administration did not propose to tax religious institutions on their business operations, stated: ‘That is a very minor affair.’
Again, when Rep. Robert L. Daughton asked whether the administration sought to tax only educational and charitable organizations, Secretary Snyder replied:
‘Those are the only ones we have found that are abusing their tax exemption privilege by operating businesses.’
Further, when Rep. Kean of New Jersey asked why the administration did not seek to tax the unrelated business income of churches, Mr. Kirby, Tax Legislative Counsel for the Treasury Department, responded:
‘We do not feel that there has been abuse by the religious organizations as such in this field.’
Traditionally, churches in our country have not been subjected to federal income taxation. The framers of the Constitution intended that government be free of church domination and that churches correspondingly be free of governmental regulation. By means of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, the framers intended to create ‘a wall of separation between church and state’. Enactment of the foregoing bills would subject the churches’ activities to governmental scrutiny and possibly eventually to control. The bills would empower the Commissioner of Internal Revenue to determine which activities are ‘related’ to a church’s purposes and which activities are ‘unrelated’. We do not deem it desirable to empower the Commissioner to determine for churches the permissible scope of their religious activities with taxation as a sanction for non-compliance with that determination.
Although the Church does not feel that it should be taxed on donated debt-financed property, it is also deeply concerned about the long range implications and consequences of the proposed legislation.
Any assistance you can render in insuring that churches are exempted from the provisions of the proposed bills will be greatly appreciated.
Yours very truly,
FIRST PRESIDENCY OF THE CHURCH OF
JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS
______________________________
David O. McKay
Wednesday, March 1, 1967
March 7, 1967
The First Presidency
The Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-day Saints
47 East South Temple
Salt Lake City, Utah
Dear Brethren:
Your letter of February 24 just reached my desk today. In response to it, I am enclosing a copy of the hearings on H.R. 15942 and H.R. 15943 which were heard in August of last year. I am also enclosing a copy of the press release written after the hearings.
As you know, since these bills were not passed by both houses of Congress before the end of 1966, they are both dead and must be reintroduced and reheard before any action can be taken on them. These bills were originally introduced at the request of the Administration. No similar action has been taken at the new session, so Congress has no proposals of a similar nature before it at the present time. Should any appear, I will notify you promptly and try and keep track of developments.
Sincerely,
Wallace F. Bennett
WFB/maa
Enclosures
Tues., 23 May 1967:
President Johnson’s Commission on Crime, Report on
President Tanner mentioned a talk given by Senator Wallace F. Bennett in Congress entitled, ‘Is the Great Society a Guidepost to Perdition?’ The Senator’s statement contains 178 pages and deals with recommendations made by the President’s Commission on Crime, which calls for modification or abolishment of present laws dealing with gambling, prostitution, drunkenness, etc. President Tanner said that there is an overtone throughout the report which seems to condone these practices and concludes that most society problems should be left to society agencies and are not the affair of the public at large.
President Tanner said he was wondering if this is not the kind of thing that the First Presidency should make some statement about. He said that if there is anything in our society that is damnable today, it is this trend. He considerd it a moral issue and suggested that the First Presidency prepare an open letter or editorial on the matter.
I agreed that we should not let it pass without condemning it. It was decided to ask Elder Mark E. Petersen to draft something and submit it to us for approval.
Thur., 16 Nov., 1967:
Clare then brought up the following requests for appointments:
(1) Anti-ballistic Missile Sentinel System in Salt Lake City
Said that Mayor J. Bracken Lee’s office had called and asked that I send a representative to a meeting to be held in the Governor’s Board Room, State Capitol, Monday, November 20, at which time the site location for the Sentinel System, anti-Ballistic missile system (a $5 billion project) to protect the country against Communist Chinese missiles, will be discussed. Salt Lake City, and nine other areas are being considered. Colonel Frank Petruzel, representing the U. S. Army Air Defese Command, has called for this meeting.
I instructed Clare to call Elder Mark E. Petersen and ask him to attend this meeting.
Note by CM
Elder Petersen was called, and he gladly accepted the appointment from President McKay.
(See letter from Brother Petersen and President McKay’s reply thereto regarding the meeting; also see newspaper clippings regarding the choosing of Salt Lake City as the site for establishment of Sentinel System following.)”
“November 21, 1967
President David O. McKay
Building
Dear President McKay:
At your request, I attended the briefing by the United States Army given to representative Salt Lake City people at the Governor’s office Monday morning of this week.
You remember that this had to do with the building of an anti-missile site in this area.
The Army officers explained to the group that the experts who had studied the defense of the United States had decided to put ten anti-missile sites in various strategical locations in the United States. These sites are to be so located that they overlap each other and in order to bring about this proper overlapping to give full defense to the whole country, one of these sites, they said, would have to be built in the immediate vicinity of Salt Lake City.
They recognize that this will make Salt Lake City a target for missiles fired by an enemy country and that it would endanger our area here. Nevertheless, they felt that it was essential for the defense of the country that a missile site be established in our immediate region.
They have three places in mind and will select one of the three. The three areas are West Jordan, Magna, and Kearns.
They would occupy about three hundred acres. They would construct a fifty million dollar complex, exclusive of the technical machinery that would be put in it.
They would bring in a payroll of about two to three and a half million dollars per year to the area. It will require about twelve months to design the site and it will require about twenty-four months to construct it.
This site will not give any particular protection to our immediate community. It is merely one part of an over-all defense system to protect the whole United States so that instead of it being a protection to our immediate area, it will probably be a reason for making this a target for enemy missiles. However, they notified the Governor and others who were there that the decision had been made and that there was nothing for the people of this area to do but to cooperate.
Details of this proposal have been published in the newspapers and I am sure that you have seen them, but I felt that I should make this brief report to you.
Yours sincerely,
Mark E. Petersen.”
“November 29, 1967
Elder Mark E. Petersen
Council of the Twelve
Building
Dear Brother Petersen:
Thank you for your report on the assignment I gave you to attend the meeting in the Governor’s office on Monday, November 20, 1967, pertaining to the selection of the anti-missile site.
I appreciate your response to my request and your report of the meeting held. It is frightening to contemplate what the establishment of this site might mean for Utah; however, on the other hand, as you say, it is necessary for the full defense of the whole country.
I am very grateful for your willingness to fill any and all assignments given to you, and commend you on your able and forthright leadership.
Affectionately,
David O. McKay
President”
Thur., 7 Dec., 1967:
Church Information Service – Possibility of Libel Suits by the Church
Elder Mark E. Petersen said that the Church Information Service would appreciate some help on a matter that may give some concern. He said that with George Romney entering the political campaign for President, many anti-Church articles will be published in magazines and newspapers. He said that already efforts have been made to discredit him by trying to discredit the Church, and using it as a means of embarrassing him. He said we cannot stop all these articles, that everything is being done that possibly can be done to put the proper information out before the people. He said he was wondering if in a case where an article is published that is particularly slanderous and libelous, a libel suit would be a good thing. He felt that the editors and some of the writers in these magazines and columns think they can get away with almost anything in slandering the Church, and doing it on the basis of politics. He wondered what the Brethren would think if there were a case where there was clear evidence of falsehood and slander if a suit against some such publication were filed, whether it would slow down some of the other publications.
President Brown expressed the sentiment that it would be better if Elder Petersen were to present a specific case that he thought would stand up in court. He thought we should hold the matter over until such a case might be presented, and then consideration could be given to the matter.
Elder Lee mentioned the statement in Section 71 of the Doctrine and Covenants where the Lord says that “there is no weapon that is formed against you shall prosper; and if any man lift his voice against you he shall be confounded in mine own due time.”
It was agreed that nothing should be done until a specific case might present itself which it is thought would stand up in court, at which time the Brethren would give it consideration.”
Thur., 8 Feb., 1968:
“8:00 p.m.
Telephone Call to CM
Elder Ezra Taft Benson called regarding the desire of Governor George C. Wallace, formerly Governor of Alabama, who has just announced that he is a candidate for President of the United States to run on a third party ticket, to see President McKay Friday or Saturday. Brother Benson will talk to President McKay about this tomorrow. He mentioned how wonderful it was to have President McKay at the Council Meeting today; that he conducted and took part in the discussions held. “He was wonderful — there is no one like him.”
Tues., 13 Feb., 1968:
“Convalescing at home from an illness under doctors’ orders.
With Dr. MacFarlane’s consent, I gave permission for Elder Alvin R. Dyer (since my secretary is ill at home) to come over to deliver a letter personally addressed to me from George C. Wallace, formerly Governor of Alabama, who has announced his candidacy for the Presidency of the United States on a third party ticket. (See newspaper clipping following.)
3:00 p.m.
Elder Alvin R. Dyer came to see me, having received permission from Dr. MacFarlane.
(See following report by Elder Dyer.)”
“February 12, 1968
President David O. McKay
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
Church Offices
47 E. So. Temple Street
Salt Lake City, Utah
Dear President McKay:
On Thursday, February 8, 1968, I announced my intention to become a candidate for President of the United States.
This decision was made in the belief that our Nation must have a new and vital leadership based on a governmental philosophy which finds its foundation on the basic precepts of the Constitution of the United States. The founding fathers would be astonished to observe the current trends which have subverted our constitutional system.
It is my belief that countless millions of the citizens of this country are concerned about these trends and wish to have their voice heard. Further, it is apparent to me that neither of the existing political parties will offer a position which will in fact reverse these trends.
I am aware that I propose the unorthodox, but my personal and political life has been devoted to doing whatever may be necessary to perpetuate the greatest governmental system on earth. There is nothing wrong in being unorthodox if you are right. I have long ago determined that I will simply be dedicated to principle and will do what I believe to be right and, therefore, will be satisfied in the future that I have fulfilled my destiny.
I am enclosing certain background information which discloses my position and which may be of interest to you.
I respectfully address this letter to you, not only as a leader among churchmen in our country, but as one of the known and respected patriots of our Nation. I specifically direct your attention to the Honorable Ezra Taft Benson.
I request that you grant your permission and blessings to Mr. Benson to become a candidate for Vice President of the United States on a ticket which would include my name and that of Mr. Benson.
Mr. Benson has spent many devoted years in the service of the church and his Nation. His philosophy and stature are recognized throughout the world. It is my belief that if a cause is right, then it calls forward those who have the capability of serving. Ezra Taft Benson is such a man. He, too, is a patriot.
My philosophy and that of Mr. Benson are consistent and compatible. His service could only lend dignity to a concerted effort to offer the American people a basic choice in 1968.
I request the service of Mr. Benson and your indulgence in granting him a leave of absence.
If you feel it to be necessary and appropriate, I will be pleased to visit with you and discuss this very serious request. Due to the illness of my wife I am directing this letter to you in lieu of the more appropriate request for a personal appointment with you.
With very kind regards, I am
Sincerely yours,
George C. Wallace”
“February 14, 1968
Hon. George C. Wallace
P. O. Box 1968
Montgomery, Alabama
Dear Mr. Wallace:
I have read your letter of February 12, 1968 with keen interest, and have given it thoughtful and careful consideration.
You no doubt have received word from Ezra Taft Benson as to my decision regarding his being placed on a ticket to become a candidate for Vice President of the United States with you as candidate for President.
Please be assured that my decision is not political in essence, but one that involves Mr. Benson’s calling as a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles of the Church.
I am informed that you will be coming to Salt Lake City at some later time, and want you to know that I should be most pleased to visit with you when and if you do so.
Please accept my greetings, and my prayerful wishes that Mrs. Wallace is improving in health each day.
Sincerely yours,
David O. McKay
President”
“(President McKay Meets with Elders Alvin R Dyer and Ezra Taft Benson)
JOURNAL RECORD OF ALVIN R. DYER
TUESDAY, February 13, 1968
(Proposed Wallace – Benson Ticket)
At 6:30 A.M. I received a phone call from Elder Ezra Taft Benson at my home. He asked if I would come to his office as soon as I reached the Church Office Building. This I did arriving at his office at 7:30 A. M. (On the telephone he spoke of an important matter that he should see President McKay about.)
When I arrived at the office, Reed Benson was with his father. I soon learned the purpose of Elder Benson’s anxiety. A Press Conference was held in Washington D. C. a short while ago for former Governor Wallace of Alabama, at which time he announced his candidacy for the Presidency of the United States. This he had vowed to do if either of the parties failed to evidence a trend toward getting the country back on the principles that the founding fathers had established it upon.
As I learned, this Press Conference was attended by Reed Benson, who afterward spent some time with Governor Wallace. It was evidently during this conversation that the possibility of Ezra Taft Benson running with Governor Wallace as Vice President was given some concern.
Brother Benson related to me that Governor Wallace subsequently called him concerning the possibility of occupying the ticket, which would be a third party, with him. Brother Benson said he had never really met the man and consequently would want to meet with him for a conference before pursuing it further.
Elder Benson advised of his Stake Conference assignment on February 10-11, 1968, in Milwaukee, had arranged a meeting with Governor Wallace in Chicago on Sunday afternoon. This seemed agreeable. However the meeting there did not materialize due to the illness of Mrs. Wallace, who has been operated on three times for cancer and is now undergoing cobalt treatments; instead, by telephone arrangement from Chicago, Elder Benson, having picked up his son Reed in Washington, flew to Montgomery, Alabama.
(Conference Held In Governor’s Mansion)
The Conference between Eldel Benson and Governor Wallace took place in the Governor’s Mansion on Monday, February 12, 1968. Reed Benson was also present. The Conference lasted approximately 3 1/2 hours, during which time Elder Benson reports he became satisfied with Governor Wallace’s concepts and determinations concerning the operation of the Federal Government.
(Note: A listing of the areas of political and governmental pursuits sought for by Governor Wallace, which he will be committed to if elected President, as prepared by Elder Benson, is made part of this Journal Record. )
(His Willingness To Run Dependant Upon President McKay’s Decision.)
It appears that Elder Benson informed Governor Wallace that he would respond to his request only if President McKay would give permission so to do. It was determined that the Governor would make a request for that permission by direct and personal letter to President McKay.
I was informed that Reed had the letter in his possession, and they were now soliciting my help to get the matter before President McKay. The request was also made of me by Elder Benson that I be present when the matter was presented .
(The President’s Illness)
Before proceeding with the Journal which will relate how the meeting with the President was held, it is important to refer to the fact that since the meeting which President McKay attended with the Quorum of the Twelve in the Temple on the past Thursday, he has been ailing somewhat physically. The doctor, seeking to arrest this setback, had ordered no further meetings with the President until he felt better. No meetings had been held by The First Presidency.
This complicated the whole affair, but through discussion with Dr. Macfarlane, Elder Benson was able to get approval for this one appointment after the doctor checked the President’s condition about noon-time. The appointment was set for 3 P. M. for Elder Benson and me to meet with the President.
(Reason For Urgency)
The urgency for Elder Benson to see the President on this particular day stemmed from the need of Governor Wallace to name his running mate in seeking the names quota in the State of Pennsylvania in order to be placed upon the ballot. This being required in that State.
It was known by me that Governor Wallace had obtained petition quotas in a number of states including California.
(Circulation of Non-Authenticated Statement of the Prophet Joseph in California)
In the discussion which I had with Elder Benson and Reed on this morning I was told that Wallace would seek the Presidency on The American Independent Party, a name very similar to that which the Prophet Joseph Smith is alleged to have said would rise up in America at a time when the Republican and Democratic Parties would be at war with each other. The name of the party which the Prophet is supposed to have used is the Independent American Party.
It developed that a group in California, calling themselves “Mormons for Wallace”, used the supposed prophecy to get members of the Church to sign the petition in that State.
(Comment: With regard to the alleged prophecy, the article published in California and other printed material including the quotation from Duane Crowther’s book and the Hancock article – the source, is made part of this Journal Record. Sufficeth it to say, there is a very real doubt as to whether the Prophet ever made this statement.)
(My Own Anxiety Over The Whole Matter)
My own concern in this matter at this point was to make sure in my own thinking that my mind remained open. I did not want to become set against Elder Benson’s acceptance of the Wallace offer, neither did I want to indicate to them that I favored it. The important thing was to go to President McKay with the facts both positive and negative, and in no way attempt to influence him in the decision which Elder Benson sought. I determined also that Elder Benson should present his case and not I.
Elder Benson had prepared a paper listing the things that Governor Wallace stood for and which he too supported. In addition to these was the supposed Joseph Smith prophecy which I advised Elder Benson should not be used. But we discussed all of the points most of which seemed to me well taken. (This paper is also part of this Journal.) To satisfy myself on several points I asked Elder Benson a number of questions:
(1) What had happened to the “76” group who had announced his candidacy for the Presidency on a party emanating from this group, and upon which he had obtained a letter of permission to run, which letter had been publicized.
He stated that this group had more or less faded.
(2) I asked what part the John Birch Society would take in a Wallace – Benson ticket, and if Welch, the leader of the John Birch Society, was in support of Wallace.
Reed Benson answered this, but not too conclusively. He said he did not know of any open support indicated by Welch. I was not completely satisfied with this phase of the situation, but felt to let it pass.
(3) I asked Brother Benson — in light of the “76” situation and now this, if it were simply his desire to get back into public life. He answered that it was not — only if he could serve his country in helping to turn the trend away from Socialism. To me it seemed that Elder Benson is completely sincere in his desire to serve his country.
At this point I expressed the thought that perhaps Reed and I should see the President first, and then have Elder Benson come in, but prompted by the feelings of Clare Middlemiss, the President’s personal secretary, whose counsel I sought and who has had much experience in these matters, it was determined that I would see the President first at 3 P. M. and Elder Benson would follow about 10 minutes later.
I am not completely sure that Elder Benson was in full accord with this procedure, but I explained to him that from my own experience in seeking counsel from the President it had proved beneficial to have one person outline the problem and the issues to be decided upon without any slants or recommendation; that the President could then reach his decision in the matter. Whether or not this registered with Elder Benson I do not truly know. At any rate this is the way the President was approached.
COMMENT:
During the time before the appointment, Reed Benson came to rny office with the personal letter from Governor Wallace to President McKay, and also a copy of Elder Benson’s paper on the policies of Governor Wallace. It was at this time that Reed injected the thought that if the ticket of Wallace and Benson were elected and anything happened to Wallace, Elder Benson would be President. He also stressed how important he thought a decision made by President McKay, a prophet of God, was, and that it should be his own decision. I heartily agreed with this, but told Reed how necessary it was to such a decision for the President to have the facts and understand the problem.
The nurse called me by telephone and asked that the appointment with the President be changed to 3:30 P.M. I informed Elder Benson of the change.
At 3:30 P.M. I was at the President’s apartment and by the side of the President. He said how glad he was to see me, and while he did not look too good, he said he felt he was getting better. He held onto my hand for quite some time.
I told the President of the reason for my visit with him before Elder Benson joined us; for I felt that he should have the facts and issues involved stated beforehand. He completely agreed with this.
With his permission I took Governor Wallace’s letter from the envelope. He asked me to read it, which I did very slowly. (Letter made part of Journal Record.) I then mentioned that Governor Wallace was seeking the office of President of the United States on a 3rd party ticket, and that if Elder Benson ran with him it would be on a 3rd party effort. The President almost immediately said he opposed a 3rd party setup.
I also mentioned to the President several of the issues involved. Such as the Negro situation, the use of a non-authenticated prophecy of Joseph Smith concerning a 3rd party by the California contingency of “Mormons for Wallace”, and the possibility of that erroneous usage on a widespread basis.
I also mentioned the fact of George Ronmey seeking the Republican nomination for President, and what effect having a member of the Quorum of the Twelve with apparent Church approval, who would be in national opposition, might have upon the Church.
At no time in my preliminary visit with President McKay did I make any recommendation one way or another, nor did I slant what I said about the issues involved.
(Elder Benson Arrives)
Elder Benson arrived about 10 or 12 minutes after I did. He sat next to President McKay, having exchanged mutual greetings and well wishes. I stated to Elder Benson that Governor Wallace’s letter to President McKay requesting his permission and blessing for Elder Benson to become a candidate for the Vice President of the United States on a ticket with Governor Wallace as candidate for President had been read.
Elder Benson then related to the President the story of his involvement in the situation. (Note: This part I have already covered.) Elder Benson spoke of his great desire to serve his country, and that he felt after meeting with George C. Wallace and questioning him and receiving his views concerning the needs of the Country, he would be willing to accept the invitation of Governor Wallace to run with him — but only if it met with President McKay’s approval and blessing.
Elder Benson read from the paper he had prepared, already referred to, and with many of the points the President seemed in agreement — especially reference to the Socialistic trends in the Country. However the alleged prophecy of Joseph Smith concerning a 3rd party — as used in California — was spoken against by the President most positively. He also stated that his name should not be used in the Wallace campaign.
Elder Benson told the President that had it not been for the illness of his wife, George C. Wallace would have come to see the President personally. The President manifested a concern for her health.
(The President Gives His Answer)
At this point President McKay picked up the letter which was on the desk in front of him and for the next 10 or so minutes perused its two pages, while Elder Benson and I sat in complete silence. Finally he let the letter and his hand fall to his lap. Elder Benson said, “President, what is your decision?” The President very clearly uttered, “You should turn the offer down.” There was no question in his mind. His answer was precise.
Elder Benson indicating his willingness to follow the counsel of the President said, “If that is your answer I will abide by it.” The President then said for the second time that he should not accept the invitation.
Elder Benson then asked if it would be all right for him to call Governor Wallace personally to give him the answer. The President said it would, and to advise him that a letter would follow. He asked me to prepare the letter which I did, and it was sent to Governor Wallace on February 14, 1968. (Note: The letter from George C. Wallace to President McKay and the President’s reply are made part of this Journal Record.)
After the decision had been made, we sat there together. I told the President of my high regard for Elder Benson, and that I felt he had an important destiny to fulfill for our Country, but that this no doubt was not the time for it. President McKay responded quite alertly to this thought saying that he felt it was right.
Elder Benson then said how pleased he was that I was there with him, and to this the President said, “Yes, and you could have no one any better.”
We both had a lingering handshake with the President as we said goodby, hoping and praying for his complete recovery from his current physical setback.
Elder Benson and I walked back to the Church Office Building together. We both were aware of and appreciated the experience of the past 30 or 40 minutes wherein we had listened to the counseling direction of a prophet of God.
I said to Elder Benson, “Well, you have your answer.” “Yes” he replied, “And without any recommendation to him.” He then said thoughtfully, “You did not make any recommendation did you?” I assured him completely that I did not. The decision was solely the President’s.”
“(This is the paper prepared by Elder Ezra Taft Benson concerning the political viewpoints of George C. Wallace.)
1. No trade with the enemy – Russia and her satellites.
2. No aid to nations helping the enemy.
3. Crime in the streets – he will enforce the laws and protect the people.
4. Overt actions of treason must be punished promptly such as stopping troop trains; sending food and clothes to the Vietcong. Peaceful dissent is okay but treasonable acts must be punished.
5. Domestic conditions must be returned to the states; especially schools. Control at the state and local level is best.
6. Property rights – there are no human rights without property rights.
7. Opposed to open housing – people should be free to sell, buy and use their property as they wish.
8. No aid to illegitimate children or their parents.
9. Big government must be curtailed, especially government controls. Local people are wise enough to make local decisions.
10. Support of the Constitution as written and conceived by the founding fathers. Opposed to decisions of the court on prayer in the schools, communists working in defense plants etc.
11. States should be permitted to reapportion their own legislators and determine their own voting requirements.
Two Party System – There is nothing in our constitution or in the federalist papers to control or suggest the number or the nature of political parties. The Republican Party itself was started under Abraham Lincoln as a third party. There is nothing in our experience to prove or even indicate that the two-party system is in any way superior to the multi-party system of European Parliamentary governments. It is reported that the Prophet Joseph Smith predicted that following the establishment of the two present parties that an Independent American Party would arise.
With the leadership of both major parties increasingly embracing more socialist philosophies, patriots in both of these parties are looking for a means where their views can be properly represented. The communists who have great influence in both present parties will oppose any effort to rally the patriots through an independent organization and many gullible Americans will accept such nonsense by atheistic traitors.
Differences –
(1) trading with the enemy by us and our allies;
(2) open housing and property rights;
(3) civil rights legislation;
(4) vigorous law enforcement and punishment of crime;
(5) no liquor served at Governor’s mansion – residence
Mr. Wallace thinks very highly of the Church and its leadership.
Man of high moral standards.”
Tues., 20 Feb., 1968:
Clare took up a few letters. She read to me a letter to President Lyndon B. Johnson, prepared by the First Presidency’s office, inviting him to attend one or more concerts of the Tabernacle Choir at the San Antonio HemisFair in July of 1968. I asked Clare to rewrite the letter, changing it so that we would not be asking the President to attend one or more concerts.
(See copy of letter following.)
Thur., 21 Mar., 1968:
“8:30 a.m.
Held a brief meeting with the First Presidency. We discussed general matters.
President Brown — Visit in the East — Greetings from Dean Rusk and Vice-President Hubert H. Humphrey
President Brown reported that while in Washington, D. C., during the past few days, he met with Secretary of State Dean Rusk, who he considered a very capable and honorable fine man, who is very much interested in affairs generally, and who had asked President Brown to express his warmest greetings to me. He also said that Vice-President Hubert H. Humphrey made the same request several times. President Brawn said that he was in Washington attending a panel or conference for non-political discussion of international affairs, and that the conference was very revealing. They rehearsed the history behind the country’s involvement in Vietnam, when we first went there and why, and what could be done to get out.
President Brown asked me if I wanted to see any of the national politicians who may be coming through Salt Lake City this year. He said that some had raised this question and he had answered that he had no idea whether or not I would be able to see anyone, but his feeling was that I probably would not.
President Brown said he thought perhaps I would not want to see any of them except Johnson and some few others should they come. He mentioned that Senator Kennedy is coming to Salt Lake City next week, and he has asked for an interview with me.
I said that I would be glad to see any of them if they wished to call on me.
Fri., 22 Mar., 1968:
“Held no meeting of the First Presidency today. President Tanner telephoned and asked for a meeting, but I informed him that I had nothing to take up with him.
11:00 a.m.
My secretary, Clare came over and presented to me the request which has come from Senator Robert F. Kennedy of New York to use the Tabernacle to give a major address on Wednesday, March 27, 1968. I told her that we should abide by the ruling on this matter — that only a party nominee for the Presidency of the United States would be given permission to speak in the Tabernacle. Otherwise, we should have to give the same privilege to others who may request it. Brother Alvin R. Dyer was present during this interview.
Clare also stated that Wayne Owens, who is conducting Senator Kennedy’s campaign in Utah, stated that Senator Kennedy has requested an audience with me during his visit to Salt Lake City. I stated that I shall see him as I have seen the others as they have come through.
(See Diary of Wednesday, March 27, 1968, for visit of Senator Kennedy.)”
Wed., 27 Mar., 1968:
6:25 p. m.
Courtesy Visit From Senator Robert F. Kennedy of New York
Senator Robert F. Kennedy, with whom I had set up an appointment for 2:30 o’clock this afternoon, arrived at the apartment. A telephone message had been received that the Senator’s schedule had been delayed, and arrangements had been made for 5:30 p.m. However, it was 6:25 o’clock before the Senator finally arrived. He was accompanied by Elder Alvin R. Dyer, Brother Wayne Owens, his campaign manager, and the following representatives of the press, radio, and television: Frank Jensen of Time Magazine; Herb Laughner of the United Press; Henry Smith, Church Press Agent; Paul Smith and Gail Boon, and Gobe Novel from KSL; Mickey Gallivan, KUTV News; and Claudell Johnson of the Deseret News. Also present were my secretary Clare Middlemiss and her secretary Lola Gygi.
We had a very interesting and pleasant time together. All present were especially interested in seeing the large volume containing many pictures and items concerning the visits President John F. Kennedy had made to my office and later at the apartment when he was President of the United States. His brother, Robert, showed much interest in the book, and when he saw the record of the last speech President Kennedy had made at the Tabernacle in September 1963, and items concerning the breakfast Sister McKay and I had given him on Friday, September 26, 1963, Senator Kennedy remarked: “My brother enjoyed the breakfast with you and Mrs. McKay, and admired all of the fine things you and your Church stand for, and it is a great honor for me to meet you.” He then said that he thought the speech President Kennedy delivered in the Tabernacle that September of 1963 was “one of the best speeches he had ever given.” He said that President Kennedy had played a tape of his speech for his mother and father.
(See memoranda of conversation following)
Following a very delightful visit, I told the Senator that I was glad to see him “person-to -person”, and that I am glad that we had this close contact.
The Senator then arose and thanked me for taking the time to receive him, and I told him that it was an honor for me to meet him.
The Senator, after shaking hands with everyone present, left the apartment. His manager, and representatives of the press etc., after expressing their farewells, followed him out the door.
“Visit of Senator Robert F. Kennedy of New York
This evening at 6:25 p.m., I was pleased to receive a courtesy visit from Senator Robert F. Kennedy of New York, who is aspiring to the Democratic Nomination for President of the United States. Senator Kennedy was accompanied to my apartment by Brother Wayne Owens, his campaign manager in Utah.
Elder Alvin R. Dyer, who was also present, introduced Senator Kennedy to me, after which Senator Kennedy sat next to me on the sofa.
Senator Kennedy said, “President McKay, this is the first time I have met you, but I heard my brother (President John F. Kennedy) talk about you. He was a great admirer of yours. He thought you had done so much good for so many people, and talked about your accomplishments. He greatly enjoyed his visit with you in 1963, and enjoyed the breakfast with you and Mrs. McKay, and admired all of the fine things you and your Church stand for. It is a great honor for me to meet you.”
President McKay expressed his appreciation for this courtesy visit.
Clare Middlemiss (secretary to President McKay) said, “Senator Kennedy, we have just been reviewing the visits of President Kennedy. During the years 1957 to 1963, he visited with President McKay six times. We have a whole volume on your brother and his visits with President McKay.” She then handed the scrapbook to Senator Kennedy.
While glancing through the scrapbook and noting articles on President Kennedy, Senator Kennedy commented, “I thought one of the best speeches he (President Kennedy) ever gave was when he spoke in the Tabernacle in September of 1963. When he returned home, he played a tape of his speech for my mother and father. Don’t you think that was a good speech, President McKay?”
President McKay: “Yes, it was very good!”
Senator Kennedy, still looking at the scrapbook, exclaimed, “Here is the transcript of his speech given in the Tabernacle.” Then, turning to Clare Middlemiss, he said, “You will have to put a page in (the scrapbook) on me now.” (laughter)
She responded, “I certainly will.”
She then commented, “President Kennedy received a wonderful reception here. You can see in the photographs the crowds that were here.”
At this point, Henry Smith, Church Press Agent, asked the Senator if he could sit a little closer to President McKay so the photographers could get a better picture.
Senator Kennedy: “It is all right with me, if it is all right with the President”, then turning to President McKay he asked, “What do you think?”
President McKay motioned for him to come closer.
Alvin R. Dyer stated, “Senator, you may be interested to know that Miss Middlemiss has compiled many scrapbooks of this nature on President McKay. She has been President McKay’s secretary for — is it 37 years, Clare?”
Clare: “Not that many years, but I shall admit to 25.” (laughter)
As Senator Kennedy finished looking through the book, he returned it to Clare.
President McKay thanked Clare for the interest and pleasure that the book had given to all present.
Wayne Owens told President McKay that he and Robert Kennedy had flown over the Church Vault in Little Cottonwood Canyon this afternoon, but that they didn’t have a chance to go in.
Senator Kennedy then commented, “President, I was out here with my family last year, and took them then.”
Clare called President McKay’s attention to the fact that Senator and Mrs. Kennedy are the parents of ten children, to which President McKay looked surprised. Senator Kennedy confirmed the fact that he has ten children, and said, “Mrs. Kennedy and I came out here on our honeymoon, and we must have learned something from the Mormons.” (Laughter. ) “I brought about five of the children when we were out here about a year ago, at which time we went around Temple Square and saw the historical points there.”
President McKay said, “I am happy you did that.”
Senator Kennedy: “The children got a chance to see the Tabernacle and the museum. I say very sincerely that President Kennedy was a great admirer of yours, President McKay, and all the good things your Church does.”
President McKay: “Thank you.”
Senator Kennedy: “Thank you for receiving me. It was very nice for you to take the time. It was a great thrill and a great honor.”
President McKay: “I am glad to see you person-to-person. From this hour we will be paying close attention to your campaign. I am very glad we had this close contact.”
Senator Kennedy responded, “It is a great honor for me.”
President McKay then assured the Senator, “It is a great honor for me to have met you.”
Senator Kennedy then arose and took leave of President McKay. He commented to Miss Middlemiss: “Are you going to start one little pamphlet on me now?”
She responded, “Of course.”
He thanked her for bringing out the scrapbook for him to see. He shook hands with those present, and then departed.
It was mentioned to President McKay after Senator Kennedy’s departure that today at the BYU 12,000 students came to hear Senator Kennedy; and at the Weber State College this morning 7,000 students were present.
Senator Kennedy and party departed at 6:36 p.m.”
“JOURNAL RECORD ALVIN R. DYER
WEDNESDAY, March 27, 1968
(Meeting of The First Presidency)
A meeting of the First Presidency was held with President McKay. I attended. All were present.
(Visit of Senator Robert Kennedy with President McKay)
President McKay had expressed a willingness to receive Senator Robert Kennedy, and arrangements were made through Wayne Owens, for the meeting to take place at 2:30 p.m. on this day. Later, because of delays in Kennedy’s schedule, the time was set at 5:30 p. m., finally taking place at 6:30 p.m.
I welcomed Senator Kennedy at the door of the President’s apartment. Wayne Owens was with him and introduced him to me. He looked much younger than I had imagined him to be. I introduced him to President McKay. Clare Middlemiss was there, contributing much to the brief meeting by displaying a bound scrapbook of Senator Kennedy’s brother John F. Kennedy, former President of the United States, and his visits with President McKay. The scrap book, a handsomely bound black volume with the initials J. F. K., contains photographs and articles of the former President’s contacts with President McKay. Robert Kennedy was delighted with it, thumbing through many of its pages. When he left he expressed the hope that just a tiny one would be started for him with President McKay.
Senator Kennedy thanked President McKay for receiving him, and stated that his brother thought very highly of President McKay and the good that he accomplished. He commented that the last talk his brother gave in the tabernacle, which was on September 26, 1963, he regarded as the best speech his brother ever made, and that he had recently listened to a tape of it with his mother.
President McKay was very gracious and said how delighted he was for their meeting. The Senator did not stay long. It appeared that he was pleased with his visit.
Others present, consisted of the press, radio, and television representatives. These were: Claudell Johnson, Deseret News; Frank Jensen, Time Magazine; Mickey Gallivan, KUTV News; Herb Laughner, UPI; Henry Smith, Church Press Agent; Paul Smith, KSL; Gail Boon, KSL; and Gabe Novell, KSL. Also present was Lola Gygi, Assistant to Clare Middlemiss.
Fri., 29 Mar., 1968:
“8:00 a. m.
At my desk. I feel fairly well this morning, after a good night’s rest.
9:00 a.m.
Held a meeting of the First Presidency. Presidents Brown, Tanner, and Smith, and Elder Alvin R. Dyer were present.
Some of the Matters Discussed:
“Visit of Senator Charles A. Percy and Party
At 10 o’clock this morning, by appointment previously arranged by my son David Lawrence McKay, I received a courtesy visit from the following:
Senator Charles A. Percy of Illinois, and Mrs. Percy, and their son Roger whom Senator Percy introduced to me saying, “This is our eldest son Roger who is attending the University at Menlowe, California.
Others who accompanied Senator Percy were: Senator Wallace F. Bennett, and Mrs. Bennett; Senator Bennett’s Assistant; and David Lawrence McKay.
Senator Bennett states that they are looking forward to be at the Brigham Young University, where Senator Percy will address the students.
Senator Percy said that he is very proud to participate in the dinner to be given in Senator Bennet’s honor at the Terrace Ballroom this evening. He then paid high tribute to Senator Bennett, telling of his admiration for him and for his accomplishments in the Senate. He also read to me excerpts from a mother who had just buried her son in the Arlington Cemetary who said that she not only wept for her son, but also wept for her country, and the lack of support that is being given by many of our young men by participating in riots and not living up to their responsibilities to their country.
Senator Bennett then told of Senator Percy’s activity as a life-time trustee of the Christian Science Church. Senator Percy said that he had noticed a great many similarities in some of our beliefs with those of their church. He also said that he wants to appeal to the youth of the country to stand up for the principles for which we stand.
After a very informative and pleasant half-hour visit, Senator Percy and party left the apartment.”
Tues., 16 Apr., 1968:
“8:30 a.m.
Met with Presidents Brown, Tanner, Smith, and Dyer in a meeting of the First Presidency in my office in the Hotel Utah Apartment.
Among official items discussed were the following:
Liquor — Proposed Liquor By the Drink Referendum
President Tanner mentioned that Jack Gallivan, Max Rich, and Gus Backman had called on him about the proposed liquor by the drink referendum. They explained that they had prepared a proposed bill which they have titled “An Act For the Endorcement of Liquor Control”.
President Tanner said that he is meeting with Elders Marion G. Romney, Gordon B. Hinckley, and Howard W. Hunter today for the purpose of discussing this matter.
I expressed concern with the measure, and stated that we should pursue the matter of seeing to it that our people are informed on the policy of the Church concerning this important matter.
Elder Dyer suggested that, to the extent that we were able to do so, we should enlist influential non-members to work on an overall committee to defeat the measure; that we should capitalize on the experience that the Church had of single-handedly attempting to persuade the members to oppose the repeal of the Prohibition Law some years back, and despite the appeal of President Heber J. Grant, Utah, predominantly Mormon, voted for repeal — ironically being the State which helped to reach the majority vote for repeal. Brother Dyer said that as he recalled this experience, it was the apparent issue of making a challenge by the Church which caused so many inactive members to go along with non-members in voting for the repeal.
Brother Dyer suggested that Weston E. Hamilton would be a good man to help with non-members of influence to work for the defeat of the referendum to be placed before the voting public later this year .
I agreed with this, as did President Tanner, and said that we should seek all the outside halp we can get to help in defeating the measure. (See Friday, May 10, 1968 for Public Statement by President McKay.)
The brethren then departed from the office.
Thur., 18 Apr., 1968:
“Did not hold a meeting of the First Presidency today.
9:40 a. m.
Left the Hotel for the Salt Lake Temple.
10 to 1:30 p.m.
I was very happy to be present this morning, and commenced the meeting promptly at 10:00 a.m. I presided and conducted and directed the reports and discussion on the various matters discussed by the brethren. Although I did not intend to do so, I remained the full 3-1/2 hours of the meeting. Many important matters were discussed during that time, and I wanted to consider them carefully.
One or Two of the Matters Discussed:
Liquor — Referendum on Liquor By the Drink
A discussion was held concerning the results of a certain group of men to have placed upon the Fall ballot a referendum for a change of the presently State-controlled liquor law to that of a legalized State-controlled bill for liquor by the drink. President Tanner told of a visit to his office by Jack Gallivan, Max Rich, and Gus Backman in the interest of a good law to properly control liquor by the drink, since it appeared to these men that the people would no doubt support the referendum for liquor by the drink. President Tanner stated that he felt that their efforts represented a clever and insidious method to gain support for the referendum. He said the only way we can defeat it is to organize throughout the Church and throw this weight against it. Brother Gordon Hinckley said that we have three alternatives, and that we must decide on one of them, and then work accordingly. He said one is to do nothing, and as surely as we do nothing there will be liquor by the drink after the first of the year. He said we have a copy of their bill which clearly provides that. Two, we can try to defeat their referendum by trying to encourage enough people in the state not to sign it and thereby disqualify them from getting the number of signatures they want. That, he said, he thought was impossible. Three, go forward with our proposal, which will not be a Church proposal. He said Commissioner Barker has already presented this to the City Commission, and it is possible that the Salt Lake City Commission would become the official sponsor, at least three of the commissioners, and possibly one of the other two, would go along with it.
He said he is reliably informed that these other people now have a purse of $85,000.00 at least; that they have some of the ablest men in the state working on this, and have their referendum forms all printed; that they are ready to go out into the fifteen counties of this state which they think are the most vulnerable to get the necessary signatures to have their referendum placed on the ballot; that our effort will have to be a two-stage fight: One, to get the necessary signatures in fifteen counties that we can count on to get this on the November ballot; and two, to campaign in behalf of the project so that the electorate of the state would sustain this proposal. He thought it would take at least $100,000.00, a very good organization, and an immense amount of effort.
I said that we must be prepared to revent liquor by the drink; that if we were to get liquor by the drink, we would have trouble.
President Tanner emphasized again that he was sure these men (Gus Backman, Max Rich and Jack Gallivan) would attempt to use anything that I might say to promote their own cause; that we must be sure to avoid this — that our slogan is no liquor by the drink and state control. They need not fear that I shall go along on any proposal they might have.
Elder Stapley moved that we fully support the committee and vigorously go forward in overcoming the proposed liquor law proposed by this opposite group, namely, liquor by the drink, and that we authorize our committee to take such measures as are necessary, which means spending some money in order to defeat what the liquor interests want, namely, liquor by the drink. The motion was seconded.
I then asked if the brethren were all united on the matter, which they indicated they were. The matter was then put to vote and unanimously approved. I firmly stated: “Let them know we mean something.”
Wed., 8 May, 1968:
“Held a meeting of the First Presidency in the office of my apartment in the Hotel Utah. Presidents Tanner, Smith and Dyer were present. President Brown still resting in California.
Some of the Matters discussed were:
Liquor — Sale by the Drink
President Tanner referred to the discussions that had been held in the Council meeting regarding the petition that is being circulated by certain interests for a referendum to be placed on the ballot in favor of liquor by the drink. He said this matter is being given consideration by a committee of the Twelve, that the committee has conferred with James Faust, President of the Cottonwood Stake; George L. Nelson, President of the Monument Park Stake; Wendell Ashton and others, and there is some question whether we should oppose the referendum entirely or put in an alternative for the people to vote on. He said this matter will be brought up for discussion tomorrow morning in the meeting of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve. He explained that the people who are circulating this petition must get the signatures of 10% of the voters on the petition in 15 of the counties of the State, that they will have no trouble in getting signatures in Salt Lake and perhaps in some other counties, but the question is whether we should enter into a campaign to prevent them from getting the signatures they need.
I said this matter must be decided definitely.”
Thur., 9 May, 1968:
“Did not hold a meeting of the First Presidency this morning; nor did I attend Council Meeting. Had a sleepless night. It was 4 a.m. before I closed my eyes. Sister McKay had a slight heart attack during the night which kept us awake, and I was greatly concerned.
Liquor By The Drink – Decision By Council To Defeat Referendum
In Council Meeting Elder Marion G. Romney opened the report by the Committee from the Quorum of the Twelve who had been assigned to the program of opposing the liquor by the drink referendum. Elder Romney raised the question as to whether a strong effort should not be made now to defeat the referendum in its initial form rather than to initiate an alternative bill. It was agreed by all present that our first effort should be made to defeat the referendum and that all Stake Presidents in Utah should be called and advised of this determination; they in turn to advise their Bishops, and that a strong article would be placed as an editorial in the Friday evening Deseret News.
At 2:30 p. m. – LIQUOR BY THE DRINK — Meeting of the Committee
Statement Made by President McKay for Publication in the Newspaper
(At about mid-morning President Dyer received a telephone call from Elder Marion G. Romney, member of the Committee appointed of the Quorum of the Twelve assigned to represent the Church on the Liquor by the Drink Referendum, stating that the Committee is desirous of having a statement from the First Presidency to appear in the Saturday evening Deseret News and asked him if he is in favor of it. Brother Dyer answered that he knew that President McKay was strongly opposed to this proposed liquor the drink bill, and would favor such a statement. He said that he would call Dr. Macfarlane and see if a short meeting could be arranged for the Committee to see President McKay.
President Dyer called Dr. Macfarlane and he agreed if they would stay no longer than ten or fifteen minutes, they could see him, and that he would so inform the nurse.)
Meeting on Liquor by the Drink was held with President McKay in his Hotel Utah apartment. Those present were: Elders Marion G. Romney, Gordon B. Hinckley, Wilford Kirton – Church attorney, and Joseph Anderson – secretary to the First Presidency. (See copy of Presidents Dyer’s Minutes which follow. No minutes submitted by Joseph Anderson. Also see copy of President McKay’s Statement and Newspaper clippings.)”
“(From minutes of President Alvin R. Dyer on Liquor by the Drink)
FRIDAY, May 10, 1968
There was no meeting of the First Presidency held on this day. President Tanner was out of the City and President Brown is still convalescing. President McKay had had a sleepless night and it was the feeling of Dr. Macfarlane that he should not receive anybody on this day.
(Telephone Call from Elder Marion G. Romney)
At about mid-morning I received a telephone call from Elder Marion G. Romney who is a member of the Committee appointed of the Quorum of the Twelve assigned to provide active opposition through Church channels and otherwise to the proposed bill which would authorize the sale of liquor by the drink. He stated that an editorial would appear in the Friday evening Deseret News which expressed the feelings and effort made by the Committee to call to the attention of the members of the Church the perils of this bill if enacted. He stated that the opposition was putting on a big drive to get the necessary signatures so that a referendum could be placed upon the voting ballot this fall and that they were desirous of having a statement from the First Presidency appear in the Saturday evening Deseret News and asked me if I favored such a move. I told him that I was heartily in accordance with it and I knew that President McKay was so strongly opposed to this proposed bill that he would be in favor of it but there was a problem because of his discomfiture and the doctor’s feelings that no one should see him. That would need to be surmounted if possible. I suggested that he and Brother Hinckley prepare the article and that I would see if it were not possible to see the President for a brief period on the matter.
At 2:00 p. m. on this day Elder Romney and Elder Hinckley came to my office with the proposed article. I had previously talked with the nurse and she suggested that I contact Dr. Macfarlane and I had been trying to get in touch with him but was finally able to reach him while they were here in my office. I explained to him the urgency of the matter and that it concerned something that the President was strongly in favor of and that if we could have just a few minutes with him we could settle the matter. He agreed that if we would stay no longer than ten or fifteen minutes that we could see him and he would so inform the nurse.
Brother Hinckley had gotten in touch with Wilford Kirton, the Church Attorney, so that the article could be carefully scrutinized so that there would be no legal repercussions in it. I had also spoken to Joseph Anderson so that he could accompany us to see President McKay that a proper minute could be made of the transaction.
LIQUOR BY THE DRINK — Meetin with President McKay — Statement by Pres. McKay
Thus, at about 2:30 p.m., with Elder Marion G. Romney, Elder Gordon A. Hinckley, Wilford Kirton, and Joseph Anderson, we went to the apartment of President McKay in the Hotel Utah. He was not looking too well, I suppose because of a lack of sleep, since Sister McKay had suffered a mild angina during the night and this had, of course, kept the President awake.
Nevertheless, he said that he was most pleased to see us and was always happy to see the brethren come. I briefly explained why we were there and then Brother Hinckley read to him the prepared statement which we desired to have placed in the Deseret News the following day for his approval.
(President McKay Energetically Endorses the Statement)
President McKay energetically approved of the article and said most positively that we must do everything in our power to defeat the bill that would provide liquor by the drink. He authorized that his signature be attached to the statement and placed in the Deseret News on the front page in the May 11 issue in all editions. So as not to tire the President, we left directly and returned to the Mission Office.
I had contacted Earl Hawkes of the Deseret Nesvs and was advised that the article would need to be in his hands that evening or not later than 9:00 a.m. the following morning in order to meet the deadline of all of the Deseret News editions for Saturday, May 11, 1968. A short while after our return from our visit with President McKay and after Elder Hinckley had consulted with Wilford Kirton, the article was very slightly changed as to one or two words and placed in my hands. My secretary, Laura, typed it and President McKay’s signature was placed on the statement. Copies were then distributed to Joseph Anderson, Clare Middlemiss, Elder Marion G. Romney, and Elder Gordon Hinckley, and the article was dispatched to Earl Hawkes of the Deseret News.
(Article Appears in Deseret News)
The article appeared completely in the Deseret News, Saturday Edition of May 11, 1968. A copy of this, as well as the letter from President McKay, is made a part of this Journal record.
(Article in Salt Lake Tribune)
The following morning, May 12, 1968, an article appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune on the first page of Section “B”. This article is also reproduced here as part of the Journal record.”
“May 10, 1968
STATEMENT BY PRESIDENT DAVID O. MCKAY OF
THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS
Citizens of Utah are now being approached to sign petitions to place on the November election ballot a so-called “liquor-by-the-drink” proposal. It is said that this is being done in the name of creating an enforceable law.
Let no one be misled concerning the real intent.
The true purpose is to make liquor more easily available.
The complaint is made that enforcement is virtually impossible under the present law. If this is true, the prevailing deplorable condition results from methodical removal of state enforcement machinery and practical nullification of local enforcement.
This situation can be remedied through legislative action to restore enforcement provisions or otherwise modify the present statute without the broad proposal now designed to make liquor freely available in hundreds of restaurants and eating places throughout the state, and which, according to provisions of the proposed statute, would make it possible to serve drinks even without food.
We may expect specious arguments emphasizing economic benefits. A member of the First Presidency speaking in April Conference said, “Surely every mother, father, and worthy citizen can see the folly of this and what it would do to our youth. We must not sell our heritage for a mess of pottage.”
I call upon members of the Church throughout the State, and all citizens interested in safeguarding youth and avoiding the train of evils associated with alcohol, to take a stand against the proposal for “liquor by the drink. “
David O. McKay, President”
Wed., 5 Jun., 1968:
“9:00 a. m.
Met with Presidents Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer. President Isaacson still confined to his home from a stroke. Among items taken up were:
Senator Robert F. Kennedy Shot Early This Morning At The Ambassador Hotel Los Angeles, California
Sister McKay and I were shocked to learn of the tragic shooting of Senator Robert F. Kennedy while campaigning in Los Angeles as a candidate for the nominee of the Democratic Party. According to the news over Television, he had just come down from his suite in the Ambassador Hotel to speak to his supporters gathered in the Embassy Room to thank them for their support in his overwhelming victory. He said to them: “I think all these primaries have indicated it is quite clear that we can work together in the last analysis, and that what has been going on the last three years–the divisions, violence, disenchantment with society between black and white, the poor and affluent, can be healed.” Then Kennedy left the podium and was pushing his way through the crowds of hand-shaking and cheering supporters, and was headed by his guards into a corridor leading to a hotel kitchen seeking to get on a freight elevator and back up to his suite. According to a reporter, Kennedy was shaking hands with a young busboy near a row of refrigerators when the shots began ringing out. Kennedy backed up against the kitchen freezers as the gunman fired at him at pointblank range. He cringed and threw his hands up over his face. Then he fell to the floor — he had been shot twice in the head and once in the shoulder. Five others standing near him were also hit by bullets. The assassin was later identified as Sirhan Bishara Sirhan, 24, a Jordanian native of Jerusalem.
The fact that I had had a personal visit with Senator Kennedy at the apartment just a few weeks ago (March 27, 1968) made this news I especially shocking to me. It recalled vividly the assassination of President John F. Kennedy who was also shot just a few weeks after Sister McKay and I had entertained him at breakfast in our suite at the apartment in 1963.”
Mon., 10 Jun., 1968:
“Held no meetings today.
Rockefeller, Governor Nelson A. — Letter Expressing Regrets:
Today I received a letter from Governor Nelson A. Rockefeller of New York — United States presidential nominee on the Republican ticket — expressing his regrets that he did not meet with me when he visited in Salt Lake City on May 29, 1968. I asked my secretary Clare Middlemiss if she knew anything about Rockefeller’s coming to Salt Lake City, and she said that she was not informed about it; that evidently President Hugh B. Brown had been contacted and he had set up an appointment to meet the Governor. She learned that President Brown had met Governor Rockefeller in the First Presidency’s Board Room, and had asked Elder Delbert L. Stapley to be present during the interview. President Tanner was out of town, but neither President Smith nor President Dyer were invited to meet Governor Rockefeller.
Later, I sent a letter expressing my regrets at not meeting Governor Rockefeller, and stated that I hoped I would be able to meet him when next he visited Salt Lake City.”
Wed., 3 Jul., 1968:
“Did not hold a meeting of the First Presidency this morning.
Politics – Letter Re: President Brown’s Attitude Toward Third Party
Clare then presented a letter from Mark Benson in which he called attention to President Hugh B. Brown’s stand on politics in his speech at the Commencement exercises of the Brigham Young University, wherein he mentioned Governor George Wallace of Alabama and spoke against his running on a Third Party Ticket.
I instructed Clare to hand this letter to President Dyer and ask him to bring the letter and this matter before the First Presidency. (See July 19 for further discussion of this matter.)
Clare stayed just a few moments and then the nurse came in and interrupted, saying, “It’s time for your lunch”, so Clare left stating that she would come back tomorrow with the other letters needing my attention.”
Fri., 5 Jul., 1968:
“Office Closed Today for Fourth of July Holiday
11:00 a. m.
Politics – Church’s Position on Third Party
President Dyer called my attention to the fact that we are receiving a number of letters and inquiries concerning the Church’s stand relative to a Third Party and the candidacy of George Wallace of Alabama, in particular, who is now running on the American Independent ticket. He referred to a letter addressed to me personally from Clyde B. Freeman, Chairman of the American Independent Party in Utah, and also letters from Mark A. Benson of the Dallas Stake and Mr. I. D. Workman, all of whom had referred to statements made by President Brown in his Commencement address at the Brigham Young University, wherein he implied that the Church did not favor, nor was it the policy of the Church to sustain a Third Party.
Politics — Church’s Position on Third Party
I emphasized the fact that the Church takes no official stand with regard to political parties; that it has no policy in the support of, nor in opposition to any political party which would choose to place its ideas before the American people.
Later, on August 7, 1968 I went over a draft of a letter prepared at my request by President Dyer on this subject, and instructed that it be sent to Mr. Clyde B. Freeman in answer to two letters he sent to me; and also to others writing on the Church’s stand on political matters.
I stated in this letter that the Church does not take a stand in political matters such as he presented in his letter; that members of the Church, exercising their own free agency, are at liberty to support whom they will for this (Independent Party) or any other political position; also that any statement made by a member of the Church in support of a political party or a particular candidate must therefore be regarded as their own statement, and does not reflect in whatever remarks they may make the policy of the Church.
(See copies of letters following)”
“August 7, 1968
Mr. Clyde B. Freeman, Chairman
American Independent Party
206 Boston Building
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
Dear Mr. Freeman:
Your letters of June 14 and July 29, 1968, are acknowledged and have been read with interest.
In responding to your question as to whether the Church officially supports or opposes the candidacy of former Governor George Wallace of Alabama, for President of the United States, I feel to advise you that the Church does not take a stand in such political matters.
Members of the Church, exercising their own free agency, are at liberty to support whom they will for this or any other political position.
Any statement made by a member of the Church in support of a political party or a particular candidate must therefore be regarded as their own statement and does not reflect in whatever remarks they may make the policy of the Church.
I trust that this will answer your letter.
Sincerely yours,
David O. McKay
President”
Thurs., 11 Jul., 1968:
“11:30 a. m.
My secretary Clare came over. She presented the matter of Senator Eugene McCarthy’s visit to Salt Lake on Saturday and his desire to see me; and also the request from Governor Ronald Reagan to pay a courtesy visit to me tomorrow (Friday). Elder Howard Hunter called about Governor Reagan’s visit, stating that he felt it would be a good thing for the Church if I could see Reagan. His manager is a member of the Church, a High Councilman, and it is he who is requesting the appointment. Just as I was talking about these visits, my son Lawrence McKay came in. Clare had asked Elder Hunter to call Lawrence because Lawrence had told her not to make any appointments with these presidential nominees as the doctors did not want me to be put under the stress of meeting them.
I told Lawrence that I should like to meet Reagan; that I liked him and what he stood for. Furthermore I said to Lawrence, “I am not sick, and I want to meet some of these men.”
Lawrence said he felt that I should meet Governor Reagan, but that there should be no publicity — newspaper reporters, photographers, and television people — because I should then have to meet all the others who come. Clare reminded us that if I see Reagan it will be broadcast within minutes; that we could not keep this away from the reporters, and that if the others are refused there are going to be hurt feelings.
It was decided that I would see Reagan at about 6 o’clock tomorrow evening, and that Lawrence and Elder Hunter would accompany Governor Reagan.
After Lawrence left, Clare stated that because of the doctors, nurses, and family members, her hands are tied and that she cannot do things the way I want them done. I agreed with her, and said, “I do not like it; it worries me. I wish they would let you handle things. “
The nurse came in at this time and said that it was time for dinner, so Clare said that she would see me tomorrow morning and finish the business she has to take up with me.”
Fri., 12 Jul., 1968:
“Did not call a meeting of the First Presidency this morning.
11-30 a.m.
My secretary Clare came over to the office. She reminded me of my appointment with Governor Ronald Reagan this evening between 5 and 6 o’clock, which appointment was arranged by Elder Howard W. Hunter and my son Lawrence. Governor Reagan is scheduled to speak at the Utah State Republican Convention to be held in the Terrace Ballroom this evening.
Clare said that she did not know what Lawrence had done about the request for an appointment by Senator Eugene McCarthy, Democratic presidential candidate; that she had asked him to handle this matter since he had told her not to make any appointments for me with political candidates. Yesterday I told Lawrence that I wanted to meet Reagan.
Clare, noting that it was my lunch time, said that she had just come for a few moments to inquire about my appointments, and that she would go back to the office and call Elder Hunter and tell him that I am planning to meet Governor Reagan this evening.
Note by CM:
As I was leaving the apartment, I mentioned to Nurse Noyes that she should alert the 4 o’clock nurse that Governor Reagan will call on President McKay between 5 and 6 this evening. She answered, “I shall have to call Dr. MacFarlane about this.” I said, “You had better call Lawrence first, as he is the one who made the appointment.”
Evidently she called Dr. MacFarlane, as about 4 o’clock I received a call from him stating that President McKay would not be able to meet Governor Reagan; that the nurse had reported to him that at the dinner table President McKay suddenly excused himself–said he did not want anything to eat, and went to the bedroom to lie down. I said that seemed strange as he was all right just a few moments before his dinner as I was there and he seemed perfectly all right and anxious to meet Reagan. I suspect that the nurse had told President McKay that Dr. MacFarlane did not want him to meet Governor Reagan; that if he did he would have to meet the other political leaders.
I was sure this decision would be upsetting to President McKay. I immediately telephoned to Elder Hunter and told him that the doctor had just called me and said that President McKay would not be able to meet with Governor Reagan. Brother Hunter was very disappointed but arranged for President and Sister Joseph Fielding Smith, Elder Harold B. Lee, and several of the brethren to meet the Governor in the foyer of the Church Administration Building.
Governor Ronald Reagan and Senator Eugene McCarthy Visit With
General Authorities
On July 16, 1968 at a meeting of the First Presidency, President Alvin R. Dyer and President Joseph Fielding Smith reported that Governor Reagan and Robert Stephens, Senator from California, and members of Governor Reagan’s staff, called at the Church Administration Building at about 6 o’clock and met a large group of General Authorities and their wives. He shook hands with them and spoke informally to them.
As I was interested in Governor Reagan I asked the Brethren what they thought about him. At this time President Hugh B. Brown and secretary Anderson arrived, and President Brown joined in the discussion regarding Governor Reagan’s possible candidacy for the presidency of the United States on the Republican ticket. (See newspaper clipping following.)
President Dyer also reported that President Smith and he and their wives met Senator Eugene McCarthy in his room at the Hotel Utah late Saturday evening (July 13.); that no arrangement had been made for him to meet any of the Brethren and that they were called at 10 o’clock at night to meet him at the Hotel Utah. They had a pleasant chat with him.
Note by CM:
Later, on July 17, 1968 President McKay received a letter from Governor Reagan in which he expressed regret at the “circumstances which precluded” President McKay meeting with him. (See copy of letter following and President McKay’s Reply thereto.)”
Tues., 16 Jul., 1968:
“Held a meeting of the First Presidency shortly after 9 o’clock this morning.
Some of the items discussed:
Politics – Meeting Presidential Candidates
In discussing the visits of Governor Ronald Reagan and Senator Eugene McCarthy, President Brown asked me if I wished to see all the political aspirants when they visited Salt Lake City. He said that thus far he had told them that I was not able to see them. I said I did not especially want to see all of the aspirants, but I do want to see the candidates who are nominated by their respective parties. President Brown spoke up and said he thought it would be proper for me to visit with the candidates of the Democratic and Republican parties. President Dyer hastened to add: “Or any other party where the candidate has been nominated by his Convention or otherwise legally placed on the ballot as a Presidential candidate,” referring to Governor Wallace and the Independent Party, which he knew President Brown had spoken out against at the Brigham Young University Commencement exercises in June.
I said I should like to see all the men who actually will be on the ballot as candidates for the Presidency of the United States.
Fri., 19 Jul., 1968:
“9:30 a.m.
Held a meeting of the First Presidency with President Hugh B. Brown, President Joseph Fielding Smith, and President Alvin R. Dyer. President Tanner was absent, still being on his vacation in Canada.
The discussion for the entire time of the meeting concerned the letters that have been received relative to President Hugh B. Brown’s statements in his commencement address at the Brigham Young University on May 31, 1968. The letters made mention of portions of President Brown’ s talk in which he made statements which are contrary to remarks made by Elder Ezra Taft Benson. Special reference has been made to the following comments by President Brown:
“First, I would like you to be reassured that the leaders of both major political parties in this land are men of integrity and unquestioned patriotism. Beware of those who feel obliged to prove their own patriotism by calling into question the loyalty of others. Be skeptical of those who attempt to demonstrate their love of country by demeaning its institutions. Know that men of both major political parties who guide the nation’s executive, legislative, and judicial branches are men of unquestioned loyalty, and we should stand by and support them.
“Beware of those who are so lacking in humility that they cannot come within the framework of one of our two great parties. Our nation has avoided chaos like that which is gripping France today because men have been able to temper their own desires sufficiently to seek broad agreement within one of the major parties, rather than forming splinter groups around one radical idea. Our two party system has served us well, and should not be lightly discarded.”
(For full discussion see copies of minutes by both the secretary to the First Presidency and President Alvin R. Dyer which follow.)
Conclusion
We came to the conclusion that the Church does not oppose the candidacy of any individual; that it is the right of Church members to support whom they will; that we believe in honoring, sustaining upholding the law; and also that we should sustain and support men in governmental positions after they have been elected to office by the vote of the people, even though they may not belong to the same party that we do.
The Brethren decided that this matter should be taken to the Council of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve for their consideration and action at the next meeting of the Council in the Temple which will be held on August 22, 1968. However, President Dyer then said that it appeared to be President Brown’s wish that the matter be presented to the Quorum of the Twelve for discussion, and I quickly answered that if it were presented to the Quorum of the Twelve, then it would be the Quorum of the Twelve’s policy, and that such policy could not be sent out from the Church; that the same would have to come from the President of the Church. (President Dver stated that it was plain to see that the President recognized that only from the President of the Church could come a basic policy statement for the Church. While he may listen to the counsel and discussion of the Quorum of the Twelve, and his Counselors, yet he is the one to determine the policy.)
It was agreed before the meeting ended that this problem is twofold, and that the first phase of it produced a foregone conclusion that every member of the Church has the right to vote for whichever candidate he desires to do so without any fear of reprisal in membership standing in the Church. The second question as to whether a leader of the Church should support a third party and impugn others who run on other party tickets, and also whether he should criticise and berate the head of the existing govern- ment of the United States, the Supreme Court, and the cabinet of the President — undoubtedly this will be the last area where the discussion will develop.
President Dyer pointed out the fact that Joseph Smith, the Prophet, was a third party candidate for the Presidency of the United States; for at that time the citizens of Nauvoo felt that the only consistent step that they could take was to place their own candidate in the Field. Consequently, at a political convention held in Nauvoo January 29, 1844, Joseph Smith was nominated as a candidate for the Presidency of the United States, and that on May 17 a State Convention was held in Nauvoo where this nomination was sustained. Others who have run on a third party ticket have been: John Quincy Adams, Henry Clay, James Weaver, Theodore Roosevelt, Robert M. L.aFollett, J. Strom Thurman, Henry A. Wallace; and now, in the present elective period, George Wallace, the former Governor of the State of Alabama.
“Minutes of the meeting of the First Presidency
Held Friday, July 19, 1968, at 9:30 a. m. in President McKay’s Apartment
Present: Presidents David O. McKay, Hugh B. Brown, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer
President Brown’s BYU Commencement Address
President Brown called attention to a letter he had received signed by Frank R. Rahlf and others of Glasgow, Montana, referring to his commencement address at the Brigham Young University on May 31, 1968. The letter mentions portions of President Brown’s talk which he indicates are contrary to remarks made by Elder Ezra Taft Benson in addresses given by him. They make special reference to the following comments:
“First, I would like you to be reassured that the leaders of both major political parties in this land are men of integrity and unquestioned patriotism. Beware of those who feel obliged to prove their own patriotism by calling into question the loyalty of others. Be skeptical of those who attempt to demonstrate their love of country by demeaning its institutions. Know that men of both major political parties who guide the nation’s executive, legislative, and judicial branches are men of unquestioned loyalty, and we should stand by and support them. * * *
“Beware of those who are so lacking in humility that they cannot come within the framework of one of our two great parties. Our nation has avoided chaos like that which is gripping France today because men have been able to temper their own desires sufficiently to seek broad agreement within one of the major parties, rather than forming splinter groups around one radical idea. Our two party system has served us well, and should not be lightly discarded.”
The writers of the letter inquire whether the comments of President Brown express the attitude of the Church, or if on the other side Elder Eenson’s statements regarding the corruption of our government and creeping socialism in our country should be accepted as the Church’s position.
In this connection President Dyer mentioned that letters had been received from the presidency of the Dallas Stake, and Clyde B. Freeman, chairman of the American Independent Party, and another letter from another group of people asking if the Church is in opposition to any specific candidate for the presidency of the United States, or if we are opposed to candidates for the presidency on an independent party ticket. President Dyer said that he thought President Brown’s attitude was well taken in his remarks, but he did not believe that the Church should establish a policy of saying that we should confine our support to the two candidates of the major parties. He thought that we would be interfering with the rights of the people if we attempted to tell them how they must act in regard to politics.
The brethren agreed that the Church does not oppose the candidacy of any individual, that it is the right of Church members to support whom they will, that we believe in honoring, sustaining and in upholding the law, and also that we should sustain and support men in governmental positions after they have been elected to office by the vote of the people, even though they may not belong to the same party that we do.
It was decided that this matter should be taken to the Council of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve for their consideration and action at the next meeting of the Council in the temple, which will be held on August 22.
In the meantime, it was felt that we could answer questions that have come in regarding the attitude of the Church toward candidates for office to the effect that individuals may work for and vote for whomsoever they wish, that that is their right and privilege.
Minutes by Joseph Anderson”
“(Minutes of a Meeting with the First Presidency — Minutes by Alvin R. Dyer)
(Meeting of The First Presidency)
A meeting of the First Presidency was held in President McKay’s apartment. President Tanner was absent, being still on his vacation in Canada. There was only one matter discussed at this meeting. President McKay seemed quite well and listened intently to the discussion of this one single matter which lasted for over one hour.
President Brown had Joseph Anderson read a letter from a small group of members of the Church from Montana. The nature of the letter was asking for a clarification from the First Presidency on the apparent opposite statements of President Hugh B. Brown of the First Presidency and Elder Ezra Taft Benson of the Quorum of the Twelve. The whole matter seemed to center around the statements which President Brown had made in his Commencement Day remarks at the Brigham Young University. In this latter, President Brown called upon the students who were going forth from that school at a particularly vital time and that they should give concern to the candidates of the two major parties, implying that actions of a third party were usually of the insurrectionist type and that our nation had been served for many long years by honorable men of the two basic parties.
At this point, I referred to three other letters of a similar nature, one received from the Dallas Stake, another from Clycle B. Freeman, the Chairman of the American Independent Party, and from Ivan D. Workman, Las Vegas, Nevada, and mentioned that undoubtedly a great many other letters of a similar nature had been received. President Brown also referred to the manner in which Elder Benson is impugning and criticizing the President of the United States, the Supreme Court, and the President’s Cabinet, and that such inflammatory remarks should not be made by one holding a high position in the Church. He recalled to the President a meeting that was held in the Temple of the First Presidency and the Quroum of the Twelve (which I did not attend, having been held before my appointment) at which time the President had asked Brother Benson to desist from making such remarks.
As the discussion continued, it became apparent that President Brown wanted a statement from the Presidency of the Church nullifying the statements of Elder Benson and justifying the statements of President Hugh B. Brown.
The President did not seem to be getting the full importance of the meaning of President Brown’s remarks, so I attempted to explain and iron out the premise of the situation so that it could be understood. In doing my part in the discussion, as I understand and as I feel it now, I made the following points:
1. That if the Presidency were to prepare a policy statement on this matter, that Elder Benson should be called in and be permitted a hearing.
2. I also pointed out the fact that it was apparent to me that there were two issues at stake in the discussion:
a. As to whether or not a member of the Church has the right of freedom to vote for any candidate placed on any ticket for the Presidency of the United States or for any other elective position in the State or the Government, whether it be on the two parties as nationally recognized, or whether it be on a third party.
b. That such election to sustain either of the candidates could not possibly produce a jeopardization of the membership of that member of the Church who chose to vote on either of the candidates at any time so long as they were officially placed upon the ballot.
3. I mentioned to the President that it appeared to be President Brown’s wish that
the matter be presented to the Quorum of the Twelve for discussion. The President quickly answered that if it was presented to the Quorum of the Twelve, then it would be the Quorum of the Twelve’s policy and that such policy could not be sent out from the Church, that the same would have to come from the President of the Church. It was plain to see here that the President recognized that only from the President of the Church can come a basic policy statement for the Church. While he may listen to the counsel and discussion of the Quorum of the Twelve, and his Counselors, yet he is the one to determine the policy.
It was agreed before the meeting ended that this problem was two-fold and that the first phase of it produced a foregone conclusion that every member of the Church has the right to vote for whichever candidate they desire to do so without any fear of reprisal in membership standing of the Church. The second question as to whether a leader of the Church should support a third party and impugn others who run on other party tickets and also whether he should criticize and berate the head of the existing Government of the United States, the Supreme Court, and the Cabinet of the President–undoubtedly it will be in the last area where the discussion will develop.
President Brown was quick to agree that every man had a right to vote for any candidate that he so desired, stating that he thought he had made that clear in his remarks at the Commencement Exercises at the Brigham Young University. I commented that while this may have been in his mind, that his remarks seemed to imply that no Latter-day Saint should sustain or support a third party and this is the reason why the letters have been coming concerning the same. It was apparent that this is how President Brown feels and yet he cannot help but recognize that in order for a member to have his complete freedom within the Church he would have the right as a member of sustaining the heads of a third party should one develop in this particular elective period.
I pointed out, and read to the Brethren, the fact that Joseph Smith himself was a third party candidate for the President of the United States, for at that time the citizens of Nauvoo felt that the only consistent step that they could take was to place their own candidate in the field. Consequently, at a political convention held in Nauvoo January 29, 1844, Joseph Smith was nominated as a candidate for the Presidency of the United States and that on May 17 a State Convention was held in Nauvoo where this nomination was sustained. There evidently was no thought on the part of President Joseph Smith or the Saints that he would be elected, but it gave to them an opportunity to express their feelings and to sustain a candidate who would advocate their rights against oppression. I also stated that we could not erase from our memories the great patriots of our Country who had at different times stood out against the tyranny of men who held office.
(Com ment:)
In connection with this, it is interesting to note, and I would like to make this a part of my Journal Record mostly for the basis of information, for while I implied this in my remarks in the meeting with the President, I did not refer to these names, but I did so by saying that there were many great patriots who had either attempted through a third party to remove the tyrannies of action of the other two parties, or who had stood against certain actions and policies of the main two parties. Therefore, I add to the Prophet Joseph Smith’s name as a third party candidate those of John Quincy Adams, Henry Clay, James Weaver, Theodore Roosevelt, Robert M. LaFollett, J. Strom Thurman, Henry A. Wallace, and now, in the present elective period, George Wallace, the former Governor of the State of Alabama.
(Meeting with the Presiding Bishopric)
Following the meeting of the First Presidency, which concluded at about 10:30 a. m., a meeting was held with the Presiding Bishopric. Bishop Vandenberg and Bishop Brown were present, Bishop Simpson was absent.
A number of routine matters were discussed among which were the following which seem to have a nature of importance:
1. The question came up as to whether the Tabernacle and Assembly Hall could be reserved by Presidential candidates. President Brown mentioned that as heretofore these buildings were available only to the convention candidates, meaning when the party conventions are held and they nominate a man to represent them for the President of the United States, that such an individual would be granted to use the Tabernacle or Assembly Hall. President Brown mentioned that he felt that either candidate of the two leading parties should be given that permission and I said, wait just a minute, we also want to remember that the candidate of a third party, should there be one, should have just as much right to use the Tabernacle or Assembly Hall as the other if would. President Brown then said, “Al, you must be for George Wallace.” I said, “Now, President Brown, what I said does not imply that. What I am talking about is the principle of the thing.” It was agreed therefore that should Governor Wallace seek use of the Tabernacle as a candidate on a third party, that he would be given this permission, after the Convention was held of that party so nominating him.
(The Third Party)
See the attached “Memo to File”.”
“Memorandum
July 19, 1968
To: File
From: Alvin R. Dyer
Re: The Third Party
I quote the following excerpt from the address given by President Brown to the graduating students at the Brigham Young University on May 31, 1968:
“I have found from long experience that our two-party system is sound. Beware of those who are so lacking in humility that they cannot come within the framework of one of our two great parties. Our Nation has avoided chaos like that which is gripping France today because men have been able to temper their own desires sufficiently to seek broad agreement within one of the two major parties rather than forming splinter groups around one radical idea. Our two-party system has served us well and should not be lightly discarded.”
The above statement made by President Brown has much merit, but we must not overlook the fact that a great deal of the progress that has been made in this Country, has been by a patriot spearheading movements which have lead to reforms that have ended in the accomplishment of good for all. In this respect, we must not overlook the zealous efforts of the following men who have served a great purpose, not only in establishing of the government existing in the United States of America, but also in the preservation of its rights. Such men among the vast list could include John Quincy Adams, Henry Clay, James Weaver, Theodore Roosevelt, Robert M. LaFollett, J. Strom Thurmond, Henry A. Wallace, and now, in the present elective campaign, former Governor George Wallace of the State of Alabama.
It will be of interest to learn that the Prophet Joseph Smith himself was once a third party candidate. Quoting from “Essentials in Church History” by Joseph Fielding Smith, we have the following:
“The citizens of Nauvoo felt that the only consistent step they could take was to place their own candidate in the field. Consequently, at a political convention held in Nauvoo, January 29, 1844, Joseph Smith was nominated as a candidate for the Presidency of the United Stales and on May 17 a State Convention was held in Nauvoo where his nomination was sustained. There was no thought on the part of President Joseph Smith or the Saints that he would be elected, but it gave to them an opportunity to express their feelings and sustain a candidate who would advocate their rights against oppression.””
Thur., 25 Jul., 1968:
“Did not hold a meeting of the First Presidency this morning.
Note by Clare Middlemiss:
As I had not seen the President for several days, decided to take some letters and other matters to him that need his attention.
Nurse Noyes answered the door. She very reluctantly let me in stating, “He isn’t feeling very well; he is sleeping.” I said, “Oh, I just talked to his son Lawrence who said that his father is feeling pretty well, and had been asking to go to Huntsville.”
However, I paid no more attention to the nurse as it is a usual thing for her to tell me that he is dozing and not well. I walked passed her into the President’s office where I found him lightly dozing. As I walked in, he opened his eyes, and gave me a broad smile, and held his hand out to welcome me.
I told the President how glad I was to see him looking so well, and said that Lawrence had called at the office and said that he (his father) had stated that he wanted to return to Huntsville. President McKay said he thought he would not go today, but probably would go tomorrow. I then asked him if the altitude in Huntsville bothered him at all — it being 600 feet higher than Salt Lake City. He admitted that sometimes he noticed a difference in his breathing.
I then mentioned the 24th of July Parade, and said that I was very happy that Sister McKay and he had decided to come down from Huntsville to participate in that Parade, because I had been told by the reporter at the Deseret News, and by Mr. Oscar Drake, Chairman of the Days of ’47 Parade, that the telephone had rung constantly with people inquiring as to whether President McKay would be riding in the Parade.
President McKay answered: “Well, it was a very fine Parade”, and I said, “You have missed only one or two that I can remember during all the time I have worked for you.”
I then presented letters that had been received at the office during his absence, whlch President McKay read with interest.
I told President McKay that Vice President Hubert H. Humphrey will be in Salt Lake City this evening, and that President Brown is meeting him in the Administration Building tomorrow morning. President McKay said: “What have they told Mr. Humphrey about me, and why am I not meeting him?” I said, “I do not know as President Brown is handling the whole affair since his grandson is one of Humphrey’s campaign managers.” President McKay seemed somewhat disturbed that the news of Humphrey’s arrival had been kept away from him.
I mentioned that President Tanner is with the Tabernacle Choir on the concert tour at the HemisFair ’68, where he will meet officially for the Church the Governor of Texas; and that he will also accompany the Choir to Mexico and will officially meet the President of Mexico in behalf of the Church.
President McKay at this point frowned, and showed his worry regarding some matters that are going on.
I then presented to President McKay three petitions for cancellations of temple sealings, which President McKay considered and gave consent for the sealings to be cancelled because of infidelity and non-support on the part of the husbands.
About this time, Nurse Noyes came in and gave President McKay a drink of water, standing by his side all the time he was drinking the water. She said to him, “Aren’t you tired?” He said, “No, I am not tired.” After the nurse left the room, I said to President McKay, “Well, I suppose I had better go; I have just been told to leave; however, on second thought, I think I shall stay here a little longer and talk to you because it is better for you to talk to me than to just sit at your desk all alone and worry.” He answered, “Good for you!”
However, I stayed just a few moments longer and then got up to go, I will admit just a little dejected over the feeling created by the nurse. As I got to the door and turned to wave goodbye to President McKay, he waved and smiled, and told me to hurry back and to keep in close touch with him.”
Tues., 13 Aug., 1968:
“9:00 to 10:30 a. m.
Held a meeting with Presidents Brown, Tanner, Smith, and Dyer, together with Mark B. Garff, Fred Baker and Emil Fetzer of the Church Building Committee, in the Hotel Apartment.
Tabernacle — Use by Political Aspirants
The question arose and a discussion ensued as to which of the political parties should be given permission to use the Tabernacle should it be requested. President Brown again insisted that only the President of the United States or the Presidential nominees of the two major parties be given this privilege. President Joseph Fielding Smith concurred with him. However, President Dyer took exception to this type of policy for two reasons: First, he stated that it had already been brought up before the First Presidency and the Presiding Bishopric — in the latter case when they had requested information as to the rental of the Tabernacle for the use of it — that any candidate nominated for President of the United States, regardless of party, would be given the privilege to use the Tabernacle should they request it.
President Brown again said, “Yes, this should be limited, however, to the two parties and not be extended to any other.” President Dyer immediately stated that if this was the policy then we would have to reverse what had already been decided by the President of the Church.
Notes by President Dyer
As I took hold of President McKay’s hand as though to shake hands, thinking that the meeting was over, he asked me to state again what I thought. This I did as I held to his hand and he would not let go; first, it would be contrary to our principle of political freedom to the members and others not to allow any Presidential candidate to occupy the Tabernacle should he request it.
Third Party – President Brown’s Desire That Their Representative
President Brown again referred to the insurrectionist type of people who run on third party tickets and President Dyer quickly reminded him that this was not always the case, for we know in our own history of such men as Henry Clay, Patrick Henry, Robert LaFollett, Theodore Roosevelt, and others; and also Joseph Smith was once himself a candidate for President of the United States on a third party ticket. President Brown then said that this was different, and President Dyer replied that he could see no difference. It was a matter of principle. President Brown then said to Brother Dyer, “You must be for George Wallace.” And President Dyer replied, “Whether I am for George Wallace or not has nothing to do with this issue. It’s a matter of principle.”
I said emphatically that an candidate for the President of the United States would be given permission to use the Tabernacle.
Former Policy on Political Meetings in Church Buildings
President Brown referred to a letter advising that some Wards were permitting political meetings to be held in the Chapels and Recreation Halls. It was pointed out by the brethren present that a previous communication had gone out from the First Presidency advising that this should not be done. It was determined, therefore, that in the light of the coming political campaign, that the former statement from the First Presidency concerning the holding of political meetings in Church buildings should be reiterated .
(See former letter and the current statement in the newspaper)”
“August 22, 1962
TO PRESIDENTS OF STAKES IN THE UNITED STATES
Dear Brethren:
The citizens of this great country are in the midst of a political campaign for the purpose of selecting candidates for office in local, State, and National positions.
We reiterate the advice given by the leaders of the Church from time to time that it is the duty of every citizen to exercise the voting franchise in accordance with his or her convictions. We have not in the past, nor do we now seek to bring coercion or compulsion upon the membership of the Church as to their political actions. On the contrary, we have urged and do now urge that all citizens, men and women, vote according to their honest convictions. The voter should study this government and make up his mind as to what he wishes his government to be, and then, if he is so minded, vote for the one he believes will most nearly carry out his ideas about our government and its free institutions.
The General Authorities of the Church as such do not favor one political party over another; the Church has no candidate or candidates for political office; we do not undertake to tell people how to vote. We do, however, most earnestly urge every citizen of our beloved country to take advantage of the privilege and opportunity to participate in the local primaries where representatives of both political parties will be selected, and that they exercise their God-given franchise to make their wishes known at the election polls.
It is contrary to our counsel and advice that ward, branch or stake premises chapels or other Church facilities be used in any way for political campaign purposes, whether it be for speech-making, distribution of literature, or class discussions. Needless to say, we are unalterably opposed to the use of our Sacrament or other Church meetings for any such purposes, and those who attempt to use the Church facilities to further their political ambitions are injuring their cause and doing the Church a disservice.
We appeal to all candidates for public office to take notice of this instruction and conduct their campaigns in such manner as strictly to comply with this requirement pertaining to the use of our Church buildings.
Again we urge every member of the Church who is qualified to vote to exercise his God-given franchise.
Sincerely yours,
David O. McKay
Henry D. Moyle
Hugh B. Brown
The First Presidency”
Wed., 28 Aug., 1968:
“9:00 a.m.
Held a meeting of the First Presidency. Present were Presidents Brown, Tanner, Smith and Dyer.
Some of the matters discussed were:
Civic — Municipal and Community Improvement Work
President Brown referred to a letter submitted by Neal Maxwell relative to participation of our people in municipal and community improvement work, which letter he suggested be sent out over the signatures of the First Presidency. This letter was referred to President Brown for editing and shortening. President Brown had now gone over it and recommended that it be sent out as suggested. I indicated my approval.
(See copy of statement following. )
Politics – Non-Partisan Patriotic Meeting in Box Elder Tabernacle
A letter from a member of the Church in Ogden regarding a special meeting which had been announced to be held in the Box Elder Stake Tabernacle in Brigham City on Friday, August 30, with Elder Ezra Taft Benson as the speaker, was read. The brother concerned questioned the authenticity of such a political meeting being held in a Church building because of the statement published in the Church News under date of August 17, 1968, stating that no public political meetings were to be held in Church buildings.
I gave President Dyer the assignment to contact the authorities in the Brigham City area to see that the scheduled meeting is not held.
“[Deseret News, Saturday, 7 Sept., 1968]
First Presidency Statement
CITIZEN OBLIGATIONS
The First Presidency wish to bring to the attention of the members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints their obligations as members of the communities in which they live and as citizens of the nation.
The historic position of the Church has been one which is concerned with the quality of man’s contemporary environment as well as preparing him for eternity. In fact, as social and political conditions affect man’s behavior now, they obviously affect eternity.
The revelations in this dispensation place a sobering responsibility on us as individuals in seeking out and supporting political candidates who are “wise ” “good.” and “honest.” Likewise, the health of our cities and communities is as genuine a concern now as it was in the planning and establishment of Nauvoo or Salt Lake City.
The growing world-wide responsibilities of the Church make it, inadvisable [note that the original published form inadvertently printed “advisable” instead of “inadvisable”] for the Church to seek to respond to all the various and complex issues involved in the mounting problems of the many cities and communities in which members live. But this complexity does not absolve members as individuals from filling their responsibilities as citizens in their own communities.
We urge our members to do their civic duty and to assume their responsibilities as individual citizens in seeking solutions to the problems which beset our cities and communities.
With our wide ranging mission, so far as mankind is concerned, Church members cannot ignore the many practical problems that require solution if our families are to live in an environment conducive to spirituality.
Where solutions to these practical problems require cooperative action with those not of our faith, members should not be reticent in doing their part in joining and leading in those efforts where they can make an individual contribution to those causes which are consistent with the standards of the Church.
Individual Church members cannot, of course, represent or commit the Church, but should, nevertheless, be “anxiously engaged” in good causes, using the principles of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as their constant guide.
The First Presidency
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.”
Mon., 9 Sep., 1968:
“In Huntsville
During the early afternoon received a telephone call from President Alvin R. Dyer who asked if he might come up this afternoon on an important matter. I arranged for him to come at 4:00 o’clock this afternoon.
4 p.m.
President Dyer arrived at the appointed time and after a few words of greeting, he took up matters pertaining to the following:
Governor George Wallace – Third Party Presidential Candidate – Elder Ezra Taft Benson’ s Invitation to Run With Him As Vice-President
President Dyer referred to the pressure that has been placed upon Elder Benson by the Third Party ticket representatives, and especially George Wallace, the presidential candidate.
This matter was brought to me by Elder Benson early in the year, and at that time I told Elder Benson not to accept George Wallace’s offer because of Church responsibilities. At that time George Romney was also seeking nomination on the Republican ticket as a presidential candidate. I informed George Wallace by letter that it would be impossible for Elder Benson to accept his invitation, and Elder Benson, who said that he was not seeking this position, also wrote to Mr. Wallace and told him that he would not be able to accept his invitation. Now this matter has come up again, and they are pressing Elder Benson to accept and to run with Mr. Wallace as they feel he has a good chance to win.
I said that my decision is still the same; and that I feel that Elder Benson should not launch out on this political campaign; that it could lead to confusion and misunderstanding in the Church. I also expressed the opinion that Mr. Wallace cannot win, and then what position would that put Elder Benson in. President Dyer said that Elder Benson only wants to serve his country, but most important, to be directed by what the Prophet of the Lord says in this matter. I expressed my feelings that Elder Benson is truly a great man.
Later, Elder Dyer reported that he had contacted Elder Benson relating to him the details of his meeting with me, and of my decision concerning the Vice-Presidency. Elder Benson said: “I feel relieved and will abide by the counsel of the President.””
“Minutes of meeting in Huntsville with President McKay by President Alvin R. Dyer
Ezra Taft Benson’s Quandary Regarding Vice Presidency on the Same Ticket with George Wallace
Of late much pressure has been placed upon Elder Benson to share a Presidential ticket with George Wallace as Vice President. Several States–Idaho, Arizona, Nevada– had arbitrarily placed his name on this ticket at their State Conventions. Mr. Jackson, Executive Secretary for George Wallace, had called, stating that he was still the former Governor’s choice as a running mate. Many other national figures called or wrote to him, urging that he accept, including Dean Mannion.
(Note: This same situation came up in February of this year when George Wallace wrote a personal letter to President McKay requesting that Elder Benson be given permission to run with him. At that time I went with Elder Benson to see President McKay, who told him not to accept the offer because of his Church responsibilities. Governor Wallace was so advised by Elder Benson and a letter was also sent by President McKay in courteous response. At that time George Romney had announced himself as a Republican candidate. Both Elder Benson and I felt that this had influenced President McKay’s decision.)
Elder Benson, being advised that Mr. Wallace was scheduled to announce at a Press Conference in Washington D.C. on Tuesday, September 10, who his running mate would be, felt the need of counsel and direction from President McKay, with which I agreed.
Because of this, I went to Huntsville to discuss the matter with President McKay, an appointment being made for 4 p.m. by Clare Middlemiss.
It was thought at first, meaning the previous Friday, that Elder Benson and I would go together. I did tentatively make an appointment for us on Friday, but thought better of it at that time. Besides, President McKay was somewhat wearied because of so many visitors.
Visit with President McKay
I arrived at the Huntsville cottage at precisely 4 p m. I was greeted at the front door by the nurse (Mrs. Noyse?). I found the President in the living room, awaiting me. I noticed that Sister McKay lay asleep on the couch.
The President locked exceptionally well. I apologized for coming there with Church matters during his birthday holiday. The room was still laden with flowers from the many who had sent well wishes. The President said I was more than welcome to come any time.
Telegram from Richard W. Nixon
Just before I left Salt Lake City, Clare Middlemiss brought to my office a copy of a telegram from Richard M. Nixon, Republican candidate for President, to President David O. McKay as a birthday greeting. She asked that I take it to President McKay, which I did, and at his request read it to him. Mr. Nixon praised him for his great leadership throughout the world, and wished him well on his 95th birthday. He also stated that he was looking forward to his visit to Salt Lake City on September 18 and would see the President then.
The telegram delighted President McKay, who spoke of Mr. Nixon as a good man. It was plain to see that he favored him. The nurse mentioned that Hubert Humphrey had called the President the night before on the telephone to extend birthday greetings. (See Sept. 8, 1968 for copy)
As to Elder Benson’s Acceptance to Run as Vice President
I outlined the situation to President McKay of the pressure and requests being placed upon Elder Benson to accept the nomination to run for Vice President on a ticket with George Wallace of Alabama. I recalled to him the personal correspondence to him from Mr. Wallace under date of February 12, 1968, and of the meeting that Elder Benson and I had with him concerning the request for his services by Mr. Wallace. I pointed out at that particular time Governor George Romney was active in seeking the Republican nomination to run for President and that this may have had some bearing upon his decision, instructing Elder Benson that he should not accept the offer to run as tendered. The President seemed to remember this former incident quite well.
I reported to the President that many influential people had called and written to him encouraging his acceptance to run with Mr. Wallace, that Mr. Jackson, Executive Secretary to Mr. Wallace, called to inform him just a few days ago that he was still Mr. Wallace’s choice as a running mate. I also referred to the conventions of the Wallace Party in Idaho, Nevada, and Arizona, which had placed Elder Benson’s name in their balloting to run for Vice President.
I explained that Elder Benson was not pressing the issue. He wants only to serve his Country, but over and above all, to be directed by the Prophet of the Lord.
The President seemed quite spontaneous in his decision that he had not changed from his original feeling, that such a venture by Elder Benson in this direction, before it could prove itself, could lead to confusion and misunderstanding in the Church. The President expressed himself in saying that Mr. Wallace could not win, and where would that leave Elder Benson.
I said to the President that knowing Elder Benson as I do, a man whom I love ard respect, he would abide his desire and would feel all right about it. I said Elder Benson, I believe, is a great man. The President said, “Yes, he is, and President Dyer, you are a great man.”
Tues., 10 Sep., 1968:
“In Huntsville.
Note by CM:
Richard M. Nixon — Appearance in Tabernacle, Wednesday, September 18.
At a meeting of the First Presidency today, in referring to the visit to the city by Richard Nixon, candidate for the presidency of the United States, on Wednesday, September 18, the Nixon people are asking for permission for their party to enter the Tabernacle from the Hotel Utah through the garage door and the underground passage. They would also like to use usherettes wearing a Nixon banner to assist with the ushering. The brethren felt to grant the permission for the entrance mentioned but opposed the use of usherettes. It was felt that the Tabernacle ushers can take care of the ushering.
The Nixon people are also asking if they may have permission to fill in the Choir seats with party delegates. It was suggested that this matter be cleared with Ike Stewart, president of the Choir.
They also indicate that they would be happy to have such Church officials as may wish to do so attend the meeting. The Bishopric were asked to check and see who of the General Authorities would be in attendance and arrange seating for them.
A further question was: Is it appropriate to use the General Authority chairs to seat various members of the Nixon party who will be there. The brethren had no objection.”
Wed., 18 Sep., 1968:
“In Huntsville
RICHARD M. NIXON — REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE Arrived in Salt Lake City at about 4:30 p. m.
I had planned on coming down to Salt Lake from Huntsville in order to personally meet Mr. Nixon, who had expressed a desire to meet with me again, having called on me when he was Vice-President and later as a presidential candidate against John F. Kennedy. However, the doctors and members of the family pleaded with me not to make the trip to Salt Lake for this purpose. I gave into their pleas and told Lawrence to express to Mr. Nixon my greetings and also regrets that I shall not see him this time.
Previously, at the request of Isaac Stewart Presldent of the Tabernacle Choir, I had given permission for the Choir to sing at the meeting in the Tabernacle this evening when Mr. Nixon will give a major address.
At 5:10 p. m. – Visit of Richard M. Nixon to Church Administration Building
Clare later reported that Richard M. Nixon was received in the offices of the First Presidency by a group of the General Authorities; viz., President Tanner; Elders Howard W. Hunter, Gordon B. Hinckley, Thomas S. Monson, Henry D. Taylor, Franklin D. Richards, and several of the secretaries.
Governor and Mrs. George Romney of Michigan accompanied Mr. Nixon, and as Governor Romney entered the First Presidency’s Office he held his hand out to my secretary Clare Middlemiss and said, “I want you to meet this lady who has been with President McKay for so many years”. Mr. Nixon replied, “Yes, I know. I have met her before, and I am pleased to shake your hand again and to congratulate you for your faithful service.” Clare expressed my regrets at not being present at this meeting, and handed them a letter from me.
Then Governor Romney introduced Mr. Nixon to all the Brethren and the other secretaries.
Mr. Nixon told the group of his first visit to Utah in 1932 as a college sophomore from Whittier College to debate with BYU. “Did you win the debate?” asked one of the reporters, and Mr. Nixon said, “No; BYU beat us two to one.” “We’ll have to do better nationally today” he quipped.
Mr. Nixon later described this visit as follows: “It was a personal meeting reminiscent of my previous visits to Salt Lake City. No politics were discussed, but it was a very friendly visit. ” He remarked: “I have been to Salt Lake many times”. He has visited personally wi:h me a number of times.
7:30 p. m. — Speaker in Tabernacle
Mr. Nixon spoke to a capacity crowd of 14,000 persons; 2,000 were in the Assembly Hall hearing the talk by closed circuit television.
He received a rousing welcome and his speech on law and order, foreign policy, etc. was interrupted several times by a tremendous outburst of applause from the audience. The Tabernacle Choir sang several numbers including “The Battle Hymn of the Republic” much to the delight of the Nixons and the audience. (See newspaper clippings following. )
Letter to President McKay and Flowers to Huntsville
On October 5, 1968, Mr. Nixon sent a letter to President McKay stating what a pleasure it was for “Pat and me to be at the Mormon Tabernacle during our recent visit to Salt Lake City. You may be sure I am deeply grateful to you for making it possible for us to enjoy the beauty of your church and choir. “I was indeed sorry that we were unable to get together. However, I hope that you are now well on the road to recovery and that we will be able to meet in the not – too – distant future.”
Mr. Nixon sent a large bouquet of beautiful red roses up to Huntsville with a card stating “With respectful best wishes” signed Richard M. Nixon. (See copies of letter and note and also President McKay’s acknowledgement which follow.)”
Tues., 24 Sep., 1968:
“At 11:00 o’clock this morning my Secretary Clare came up to Huntsville. I was delighted to see her as I had not seen her for a month and I have been worried about the Conference. I said, “It is good to see you”.
She took up the following matters with me:
Visit of Vice-President Hubert Humphrey
It was reported that Hubert H. Humphrey, Vice-President of the United States, will be in Salt Lake City on Monday, September 30, and that President Brown’s daughter Zina (Mrs. Jorgensen who is temporarily working in her father’s office) said her father would like the Tabernacle Choir to attend the meeting in the Tabernacle at which Vice President Humphrey will speak and render a number of songs including “The Battle Hymn of the Republic”. President Brown’s grandson, Leslie D. Brown, is State President of Utah’s Young Democrat Clubs.
I did not entirely favor this request, but we shall have to show respect to the Vice-President of the United States.
Liquor – By- The – Drink
Read a letter addressed to Presidents of Stakes and Bishops of Wards in Utah regarding the Liquor-By-The-Drink issue.
(See copy of letter following)
“September 23, 1968
To Presidents of Stakes and Bishops of Wards in Utah
Dear Brethren:
In support of the efforts of the “Citizens for a Better Utah through Opposing Liquor-by-the-drink,” we desire that all family heads become familiar with the facts on Liquor Initiative Petition #A to be voted on in the November election.
Accordingly we suggest that on the second Sunday of October all Melchizedek Priesthood quorums and all quorums and classes of adult members of the Aaronic Priesthood discuss this issue in their regular class period.
We likewise suggest the same procedure for all ward Relief Societies in one of their meetings in the early part of October.
As a basis for this discussion class leaders may use the pamphlet, “Questions and Answers on Liquor Initiative Petition #A.” This was issued by the Citizens committee to provide information for block captains and voting district coordinators, and we are confident that a plentiful supply of these is available locally. If further copies are needed they may be obtained from the Citizens committee at 37 East First South, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111.
We also suggest that class leaders, in connection with this discussion, urge all to register so that they may be qualified to exercise their franchise as citizens.
Sincerely your brethren,
David O. McKay
Hugh B. Brown
N. Eldon Tanner
The First Presidency”
Mon., 30 Sep., 1968:
“Note by CM:
11:00 a. m. The visit of Vice-President Hubert H. Humphrey to Salt Lake City. Because of the forthcoming General Conference the doctors advised President McKay not to meet the VicePresident.
President Brown handled all preparations to make a “big” welcome in front of the Church Administration Building including four bands from local high schools. Later, in the Building, General Authorities and officers and employees gathered to welcome Mr. Humphrey. Lawrence McKay, who was present, expressed the President’s regrets for not being able to attend. It was reported that the Vice-President looked up to the window of President McKay’s apartment and waved to Sister McKay who was watching from the window the gathering of young people who were playing in the school bands and other bystanders. President McKay was in his private office on the other side of the apartment.
12:30 p. m. Mr. Hubert H. Humphrey, the Vice-President of the United States, spoke in the Tabernacle. The Tabernacle Choir sang several songs including “The Battle Hymn of the Republic”. President Hugh B. Brown offered the invocation at the meeting.
(See newspaper clippings which follow.)”
Wed., 2 Oct., 1968:
“10:00 a. m. – 11:00 a. m.
Held a meeting with Presidents Tanner and Dyer. President Brown is at home ill, and President Smith is speaking at the Relief Society Conference.
Liquor-By-The-Drink — Statement for Conference
President Tanner handed me a letter from Elder Gordon B. Hinckley
suggesting that he hoped that I would incorporate in my Conference talk at the opening session a statement regarding the liquor-by-the-drink campaign.
I told the brethren that I had already made a statement regarding this matter in my opening address.
Note by CM:
Two weeks ago, secretary Clare Middlemiss visited President
McKay in Huntsville, at which time he went over the manuscript of his conference address. He had already made some strong statements regarding the drinking of alcohol and the proposed new law to have liquor-by-the-drink in Utah.
(See Letter from Elder Hinckley which follows)
Opening Address
I stated that I had decided to ask my son Robert to read my opening address, and that I would hand the talk to Robert a little later.
Note by CM:
Later, Robert, after having read his father’s opening talk, informed the secretary that the statement regarding liquor-by-the-drink is to be taken out of President McKay’s talk. The secretary informed Robert that this statement had been made expressly at the request of the General Authorities who had been working to defeat the bill to have liquor-by-the-drink in Utah, and that his father had made the statement, read it many times, and approved of it, and further that President McKay’s talk containing the statement on the evils of liquorby-the-drink had already been distributed to all the newspapers and other news media.
:
Later, Robert contacted the secretary and said that he had talked to his father again about the statement and that President McKay had stated that his statement regarding liquor-by-the-drink is to remain in his address.”
“October 1, 1968
President N. Eldon Tanner
Building
Dear President Tanner:
I suggested to you the possibility of asking President McKay to include somewhere in his conference messages reference to the “liquor-by-the-drink” proposal. I would think that some such thing as the following would be adequate:
“Last May I issued a statement on the proposal concerning “liquor by the drink” in Utah on which we shall vote in November. I now wish to restate what I then said and again urge members of the Church throughout the state, and all citizens interested in safeguarding youth and avoiding the train of evils associated with alcohol, to take a stand against this proposal.”
Sincerely your brother,
Gordon B. Hinckley”
Thur., 3 Oct., 1968:
“At 9 a. m. held a meeting with Presidents Brown, Tanner and Dyer.
October Conference
President Brown reported that Sister Middlemiss had given to him a copy of the outline of the Conference. He asked me if I had decided which one of my sons would read my talk in the opening session of the Conference inasmuch as there is a blank space in the program for this information. I said I was not ready to announce it. President Brown then asked me if I had any instruction as to how the counselors should proceed with respect to conducting the sessions; that is, who should conduct the various sessions. President Brown said it was felt that perhaps President Joseph Fielding Smith should conduct the session when the General Authorities are sustained. I said I would take care of that later. President Brown then inquired if it is my intention to appoint a new Assistant to the Twelve at this Conference. He mentioned that the counselors had not had an opportunity to discuss any of these matters with me and would like to know “where we are going”. I said, “We shall proceed under the right power.” President Brown then asked me if Sister Middlemiss would inform the counselors in due time, and I said yes I would either inform them directly or send word through Sister Middlemiss.
4 p.m.
After trying to see me all day, without my knowledge, my secretary Clare was finally admitted to the office at the Hotel by the nurses. Clare took up several Conference matters with me.
She read to me again the statement regarding liquor-by-the-drink in my opening address, and I said: “That is all right!” I also went over the program for the various sessions of the Conference, and told Clare that everything was in readiness and that I am greatly relieved.
Clare then left for her office in the Administration Building.”
Fri., 4 Oct., 1968:
“This is the opening day of the semi-annual Conference of the Church. Beautiful Fall weather existing throughout the Valley.
At 8:30 o’clock Presidents N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer came over to the apartment for a short meeting with me. President Brown and President Isaacson were absent because of illness.
The following matters were taken up:
American Independent Party — The Speaking in the Salt Lake Tabernacle of Governor George C . Wallace – Presidential Candidate
Read a letter addressed to me from Robert E. Dansie, legal counsel, American Independent Party of Utah, requesting the use of the Tabernacle for Governor George C. Wallace, U. S. Presidential Candidate, to give a major address at 10:00 a. m. Saturday, October 12. The letter also states that 6,000 students and faculty at the Brigham Young University have signed petitions requesting that he be invited to speak there. Mr. Dansie also states that he hopes that my schedule will permit Governor Wallace to visit with me when he comes.
President Tanner and President Dyer said that inasmuch as Governor Wallace is a candidate for the presidency of the United States, that state conventions of 50 states have placed his name on the ballot, it would seem that he should be entitled to have the consideration he requests inasmuch as the candidates for the two national parties have spoken in the Tabernacle.
I gave approval for Governor Wallace to speak in the Tabernacle and asked President Dyer to telephone Mr. Dansie telling him that his request has been approved, including his request for Governor Wallace to speak at the Brigham Young University.
(See copy of Mr. Dansie’s Letter which follows)
Note by CM:
Statements on the Evils of Alcohol and Liquor-By-The-Drink Left
Out of President McKay’s Talk
For some inexplicable reason Robert did not read his father’s statements on liquor-by-the-drink, leaving out a page and a half of President McKay’s talk. This caused much consternation and concern on the part of many of the Brethren who had depended so much on what the President would say about this matter in his major address. Following is the statement President McKay made to be read in his address:
“I am deeply concerned about the personal and community-wide problems that can be and are created by the unlimited availability of liquor. That is why, as President of the Church, I made a public statement, and urged members of the Church throughout the State, and all citizens interested in safeguarding youth and avoiding the train of evils associated with alcohol, to take a stand against the proposal for ‘liquor-by-the-drink’, which will liberalize the flow of liquor, especially to a youthful clientele. We are opposed to this, as we are to the partaking of liquor in any form whether it be ‘liquor-by-the-drink’ or ‘liquor-by-the-bottle’.
“We most earnestly urge every citizen of our beloved Country to study the issues involved in the coming election, and to know the character and intentions of the men who wish to lead and direct the affairs of national and local government, and thus exercise their God-given franchise to make their wishes known at the election polls in November.””
“Copy of Minutes by President Alvin R. Dyer Regarding Robert’s Omission of President McKay’s Statement Against The Liquor By The Drink Issue Which Has Been Placed on the Ballot for November.
Robert McKay, the son of President McKay, was asked by his father to read the talk, but for some reason the complete statement about liquor-by-the-drink was left out of the talk. The difficulty arose from the fact that copies of the talk had already been given to the United Press, the Associated Press, the Salt Lake Tribune, the Deseret News, and the translators. The copy which they received included the statement and when the statement was not read it was assumed by those who are in favor of the liquor-by-the-drink measure that President McKay had perhaps changed his mind with regard to further endorsement of the opposition against the measure. In fact, a radio announcer on Friday evening suggested this.
The Committee appointed by the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve to conduct the campaign against this measure, (Elder Marion G. Romney, Elder Gordon B. Hinckley, and Elder Howard W. Hunter), were very much concerned about the fact that this statement had been left out of the President’s talk. All three members of the Committee approached me and wondered what could be done to counteract the fact that this had been omitted. I saw Gordon Hinckley on the steps of the Church Office Building Friday and he intimated that it appeared to be up to me to get the matter straightened out with the President.
(See Saturday, October 5, 1968, for President McKayts Statement
Read at the General Priesthood Session)”
Sat. 5 Oct., 1968:
“12.15 p. m. Discussion Regarding Liquor-By-The-Drink Statement
By appointment met President Alvin R. Dyer at which time I discussed with him the situation that had developed due to the fact that the statement I had made in my opening remarks regarding the evils of alcohol and the Church’s stand regarding the proposed liquor-by-the-drink flaw, had been completely omitted by my son Robert when he read the talk at the opening session of Conference.
President Dyer explained that my talk, which included the statement, had been distributed to the news media the day before it was given, and now they cannot understand why the statements had been left out. Elders Marion G. Romney, Gordon B. Hinckley, and Howard W. Hunter appointed to take a stand against the liquor-by-the-drink measure, and others, felt that I should issue a statement to be released to the Press immediately to offset the damage that has been done.
I stated emphatically that I had not changed my mind; that I am opposed to liquor-by-the-drink, and that I feel we should release a statement immediately to the Press regarding my stand on this matter. I also granted permission for my statement to be read at the Priesthood Meeting this evening.
President Dyer suggested that rather than just read the same statement I had prepared for my opening address yesterday morning, which had been omitted, that I could repeat and reaffirm the statement I made for the press on May 11, 1968.
The secretary to the First Presidency was present, and he made a record of our discussion. I was truly concerned about the whole matter, but President Dyer assured me that the matter would be taken care of.
Earl Hawkes, Manager of the Deseret News, and Henry Smith, press representative of the First Presidency, were given copies of the statement agreed upon, and the news media given copies soon after our meeting.
(See copy of President Dyer’s minutes which follow for details of)
7:00 p. m. Priesthood Talk Read by Lawrence McKay – Liquor Statement Read by President Alvin R. Dyer
The fifth, and General Priesthood Session of Conference, was held. I watched and listened to this meeting over a direct hook-up from the Tabernacle. At my request my son Lawrence read the address I had prepared for the Priesthood members of the Church on “Priesthood Holders To Be Examples In Daily Life As Representatives Of The Most High”.
At my direction, President Dyer conducted these services, and also read the statement on Liquor-By-The-Drink. President Dyer reported in his minutes that the Liquor Committee members appreciated and were greatly relieved over the statement.
“(From Minutes of President Alvin R. Dyer)
At 7 a. m. in the morning I received a telephone call from President Tanner who suggested to me that I go to the President and find out why the statement was omitted and explain the situation to him and endeavor to obtain a re-affirmation from him in support of the opposition against the measure to counteract what our enemies are proposing and will continue to use against us because of the omission. I agreed with him to proceed in this manner.
I shortly thereafter called President McKay’s apartment and talked to the nurse. She advised me that it would be virtually impossible for me to see the President before the morning session of Conference, but that it would perhaps be an advantageous time to come immediately following the morning session. I made arrangements with Joseph Anderson, secretary to the First Presidency, for him to go with me so that a record could be made of what the President would instruct us to do.
Before the morning session I talked to Elder Marion G. Romney and he said it looked as though something had to be done, otherwise the whole program that had been carried forward would be undermined by the omission of the statement of the President. Marion said to me, “It looks to me, Alvin, like it will be up to you to save this, and I sincerely hope that you can get it worked out with the President. “
The morning session of Conference was conducted by President Hugh B. Brown and President N. Eldon Tanner of the First Presidency was the opening speaker.
Immediately following the morning session, Joseph Anderson and I went to President McKay’s apartment. By previous arrangement, I had asked Henry Smith to be on hand, close by, outside of the apartment, but requested that he not go in since it would look like we were converging upon the President. Later he was joined by Earl Hawkes, the manager of the Deseret News, and they awaited in the hall while I talked to the President concerning this matter.
The President was glad to see us, although he looked somewhat tired. I explained to him the situation as it has developed because of the omission of the statement opposing liquor by the drink from his talk on the previous morning and that the opposition was stating that he had changed his mind concerning it and expressed to him the feeling that something should be done to reaffirm his stand with regard to the matter. He asked me three separate times as to why it had been omitted. He apparently was not aware that it had been, or if something had been said about it, then there was some misunderstanding that developed between hiln and his son concerning its presentation. I explained to the President that copies of his talk with the statement included (as had been explained to Robert McKay before he delivered the talk) had been distributed and were in the hands of the various news media agencies and that they were wondering why the statement had been omitted. In order to offset this wonderment, something should be immediately released to the press and a statement made in the General Priesthood Meeting that night to offset the damage that could be done if something were not done in this respect immediately.
President McKay was emphatic in stating that he had not changed his mind; that he was opposed to the liquor-by-the-drink issue, and that he felt something should be done immediately in a release to the news media and granted permission that a statement could be read in the General Priesthood Meeting this evening.
I suggested to President McKay that rather than just read the same statement that was in his opening remarks which had been omitted, perhaps it would be better to reframe another statement sustaining that which he had said in May concerning this measure. The President agreed to this.
(Comment:) Liquor-Statement by President McKay
I had previously talked to Elder Gordon Hinckley about this and we had framed a statement which, if the President would agree to, could be read in the Priesthood Meeting that night and also released to the press, which would accomplish the purpose which the Committee had in mind and, in my judgment, would offset any misunderstanding that the press and the wews media might have obtained because of the omission. The statement, therefore, Which the President authorized be released to the press is as follows:
“I wish to reaffirm the statement I made on May 11, 1968, and urge all members of the Church in Utah, and all citizens interested in the welfare of youth, to tatce a stand against the proposal for “liquor by the drink.”
Then, thereafter, to read the principal segment of the statement which he made on May 11 and which was published on the front page of the Deseret News. As a matter of information, the May 11th message is essentially as follows:
“Let no one be misled concerning the real intent.
“The true purpose is to make liquor more easily available.
‘The complaint is made that enforcement is virtually impossible under the present law. If this is true, the prevailing deplorable condition results from methodical removal of state enforcement machinery and practical nullification of local enforcement.
“This situation can be remedied through legislative action to restore enforcement provisions or otherwise modify the present statute without the broad proposal now designed to make liquor freely available in hundreds of restaurants and eating places throughout the state, and which, according to provisions of the proposed statute, would make it possible to serve drinks even without food.
“We may expect specious arguments emphasizing economic benefits. A member of the First Presidency speaking in April Conference said, ‘Surely every mother, father, and worthy citizen can see the folly of this and what it would do to our youth. We must not sell our heritage for a mess of pottage.’
“I urge members of the Church throughout the State, and all citizens interested in safeguarding youth and avoiding the train of evils associated with alcohol, to take a stand against the proposal for ‘liquor by the drink.'”
Joseph Anderson made a record of all of this. Thereafter, we left the President, but before doing so I told him not to worry about the situation, but that we would take care of it and see that no damage would come out of the omission. The President seemed quite concerned about the whole matter and there was a complexing look upon his face. This was the reason why I assured him several times that we would take care of the matter and that he should not worry about it.
We left the President’s apartment and, immediately on the outside of his door in the hall, we found Earl Hawkes and Henry Smith and released the statement to them which the President had made. This statement appeared on the front-page of the Deseret News that afternoon.
(General Priesthood Meeting)
As stated before in the Journal, President McKay had assigned me to conduct the General Priesthood Meeting. The music was furnished most excellently by the male chorus of the Tabernacle Choir under the direction of Richard Condie. A talk had been prepared from President McKay’s former statements. This talk was read by Lawrence McKay, his son. It was a most excellent talk and Lawrence did a very excellent job in reading it to the Priesthood.
Following his talk, I read the statement which President McKay had authorized to be given in that meeting concerning the opposition that he personally has against the liquor by the drink measure.
Liquor-By-The-Drink Statement Appreciated By The Brethren
At the close of the meeting, the members of the Committee and many other brethren came forward to express appreciation of the fact that the statement by President McKay had been read, particularly Brother Romney, Brother Hunter, and Brother Hinckley, who represent the Committee.”
Mon., 7 Oct., 1968:
President Alvin R. Dyer reported the following regarding his consultation with President Brown concerning Governor Wallace’s speaking in the Tabernacle:
“I met with President Hugh B. Brown early in the morning, expressing my feelings that it would be a mistake for us not to have the choir sing for ex-Governor George Wallace since the Choir had sung for both Humphrey and Nixon. Even though we may not vote for Wallace, and this would be the case in some instances with both Nixon and Humphrey, we ought not to do anything that would have a repercussion upon the Church. Although I sensed that President Brown was opposed to it, he seemed to yield to the fact that it would be the only fair thing to do. In the meantime, Clare Middlemiss had talked to President McKay about it and he had given his approval.
“I had talked to Ike Stewart about the matter and he said that all that they needed was a letter from the President. It seemed that the Choir members were willing and anxious to perform this service. I believe that his viewpoint concerning it is most proper in that they would not be singing for George Wallace, for Nixon, or for Humphrey, but as a public service of a great institution that is known Nationally and Internationally and we could not afford to disparage or to bring any repercussion upon them or upon the Church in their failure to sing. Arrangements were made therefore for the Choir to be requested and a letter from President McKay was prepared.”
( See following letters pertaining to increased broadcasting coverage and San Diego 200th Anniversary invitation; also see October 12, 1968 for letter requesting the Choir to sing for Governor George C. Wallace.)”
Wed., 9 Oct., 1968:
“American Flag–Senator Wallace F. Bennett’s Offer
Attention was called to letters received from Senator Wallace F. Bennett expressing a willingness to contribute to the Church an American flag which was flown over the capitol in Washington on July 24 of this year.
It was decided to ask Senator Bennett to make the presentation after the November election.”
Fri., 11 Oct., 1968:
“9:00 a. m.
Meeting of the First Presidency with Elders Mark B. Garff, Emil Fetzer and Fred Baker of the Building Committee present. The matter discussed concerned a unique temple facility for persons in foreign lands and in distant areas of the United States who do not have access to the present Temples.
(For details see Minutes of the First Presidency and Minutes of
President Alvin R. Dyer which follow.)
11:00 a. m.
My secretary Clare came over to see me. She read a telegram from Governor George Wallace who desires to see me tomorrow when he will be here to speak in the Tabernacle. I felt it wise not to meet Governor Wallace due to doctors’ orders and also the fact that I was unable to see the other two presidential candidates.
I sent my greetings, and regrets to Governor Wallace that I was unable to keep my promise to him in my letter dated February 12, in which I said: “I am informed that you will be coming to Salt Lake City at some later time, and want you to know that I should be most pleased to visit with you when and if you do so.”
Tues., 5 Nov., 1968:
“8:45 a.m. Held a meeting of the First Presidency. Those present were: Presidents Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer.
Some of the items discussed were:
Politics–Went to the Polls for National and Local Voting
In company with Sister McKay, my son Lawrence took us to the polls where we cast our votes in the national and local elections.
Politics — Watched Election Returns Over TV — Richard M. Nixon
Elected 37th President of the United States
This evening over TV we watched the election returns. Nationally, way into the night, it seemed to be a deadlock between Mr. Nixon and Vice-President Humphrey.
(See following newspaper clippings containing details of election results)
Telegram of Congratulations to President-Elect Richard M. Nixon
Later, on November 7, 1968, sent the following telegram of congratulations to President-elect Nixon:
“The Honorable Richard M. Nixon
National Republican Party Headquarters
1625 Eye Street N. W., Washington, D. C. 20016
Please accept my heartiest congratulations on your election as President of the United States.
I wish to assure you that you have my earnest prayers and sincere best wishes in the heavy responsibilities that you will shortly assume.
May God bless and guide you as you serve our great and beloved Nation!
Most sincerely,
David O. McKay, President
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints”
Received letter of “thank you” dated January 14, 1969.
(See copies of telegram and letter following)
On November 8, 1968, I also sent telegrams of congratulations to Governor Calvin L. Rampton and to Senator Wallace F. Bennett.
(See Diary of November 8, 1968 for copies of telegrams)
LIQUOR-BY-THE-DRINK – Statement Regarding Defeat of Bill
The next morning at the request of Henry Smith, Church Press Representative, I expressed my feelings as follows regarding the defeat of the proposed Liquor-by-the-Drink law:
Liquor – by – the – Drink:
“I am pleased with the defeat of the proposed liquor-by-the-drink measure. I am grateful for the efforts of those, both in and out of the Church, who worked so energetically to bring about this result.
I am satisfied that what has been accomplished is in the best interests of the people of the state, particularly our youth. Now let the Legislature solve the problems of the present law.”
(See following newspaper clipping for printed statement)
Thur., 7 Nov., 1968:
“At 8:45 a. m. I met with my counselors, Presidents Brown, Tanner, and Dyer for a meeting of the First Presidency. President Smith is meeting with the Twelve in the Temple, and President Isaacson is still at home because of his stroke.
The following items were discussed at this meeting:
Liquor-By-The-Drink Problem in Utah
President Tanner referred to the successful outcome of the campaign against liquor by the drink and said that the Governor has now announced that he will get the two groups together to try to arrange some proper legislation. President Tanner said that this morning he had met with Marion G. Romney, Gordon B. Hinckley, James Faust and Wendell Ashton and it was his feeling and theirs that there should not be any compromise whatever with the other group; that our committee should go forward and get legislation ready and fight for our convictions in the matter. President Tanner said that Elders Romney and Hinckley and he, and Brother Howard W. Hunter if he is in the city, will meet with the Governor and tell him of the committee’s position in the matter, that we have a mandate from the people, and that we do not propose to compromise with the other side; that the other side claims they want enforcement and that is what we are after also. President Tanner said it is also the intention to call in Haven Barlow, president of the Senate, and a committee representing the Senate, and also to ask Frank Gunnell, Speaker of the House, to bring in his committee and let them know where we stand.
President Tanner said that Brother Barlow called on him the other day and said that they want to know what we want them to do and that Brother Gunnell had called on Brother Romney and made the same remark. President Tanner said he was quite sure that Mr. Van Winkle and Mr. Kastler will go along with us.
I made no comment.
At the Council meeting held today held in the Salt Lake Temple, according to the minutes, an open discussion was held with regard to procedures to be followed now that we have won the mandate of the people on the Liquor-by-the-drink issue in working with the Legislature and so forth.
Elder Harold B. Lee pointed out that care must be taken in endeavoring to dictate to members of the State Legislature as to what they should do in the Legislature with regard to this. He said that this is a matter that needed to be carefully handled, and Brother Dyer agreed with Brother Lee that it could be dangerous to us and put us in a bad light, but that, nevertheless, something must be done to offset the efforts now by the opposition to obtain some compromise, for example, to permit Liquor-by-the-drink in the clubs, etc. But it seems to be the determination of this body to exercise the mandate that has been won, and to see to it that the present law is strengthened, and that there be no compromise with the principle of Liquor-by-the-drink.
Thurs., 14 Nov., 1968:
“Did not hold a meeting of the First Presidency, nor, upon advice of my doctor, did I attend Council Meeting.
Items Read in Minutes of the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve Meeting Held Today
Elder Harold B. Lee expressed the thought that the legislative committee, composed of Nathan Eldon Tanner, Marion G. Romney, and Howard W. Hunter, should have a lobby representative to the legislators to avoid any direct connection that could be construed by outsiders as undue influence upon the legislators coming from the Church.
A discussion ensued including such thoughts as when the Committee is sought out by legislators that this tended to give the Church a status with regard to the position of the Church on legislation and that the legislators were anxious to know what the Church’s stand was on various matters. So long as they would come to the Committee there could be no violation of proper propriety in such matters. (From Minutes of President Alvin R. Dyer)
Wed., 4 Dec., 1968:
“Decided not to hold a meeting of the First Presidency today.
Note by CM:
Suggestion to Appoint Mr. C. Robert Yeager to the U. S. Cabinet
Elder Boyd K. Packer, Assistant to the Twelve, called at the office regarding a letter he would like President McKay to send to President elect Richard M. Nixon asking that he consider the appointment of Mr. C. Robert Yeager of Balfour Jewelry Company, Massachusetts, to his Cabinet. Elder Packer held in his hand a suggested draft of the letter he wished sent. The secretary said she was quite sure the President would be against sending such a letter to Mr. Nixon, but suggested that since he had already been to see Robert McKay about the matter, that he have Robert take the matter up with his father. It was learned that Brother Packer would like to see this appointment made because of his friendship for Mr. Yeager whom he met while presiding over the New England Mission. From the secretary’s office Elder Packer went to see President Tanner who also advised him against asking the President to obligate himself in this manner. The next day at the meeting of the First Presidency, President Dyer, who knew of the matter, brought it up, and President McKay stated firmly that he would “not sign any such letter of recommendation to President- elect Nixon.”
Fri., 10 Jan., 1969:
“Inauguration – Presidential of Richard M. Nixon
Clare also handed me the large engraved persona] invitation to the Inaugural Ceremony to be held January 20, 1969, as well as the invitation to the official balls to be held Inauguration evening. I sent word to Willard Marriott, who is in charge of the Inauguration Ceremonies, that it would be impossible for me to be in attendance; however I have given permission to President N. Eldon Tanner, at his own request, and his wife to attend, and also for Elder Ezra Taft Benson, who will be in New York attending the National Boy Scouts and other meetings at that time, to attend the Inaugural Ceremonies.
Note by President Alvin R. Dyer
President Dyer said of the attendance of President Tanner at the Inaugural: “I feel that it is a mistake for one member in the Presidency to go to such events as this. Normally, this would be the responsibility and prerogative of the President of the Church. This is also true when Temple Presidencies are released and new ones are called. It would appear to me that at least two of the Counselors should go so that the two could morc fully represent the President and also that this prominence would not be given to a single member of the Presidency. But apparently this is not the wish and desire of President Tanner, who pursues these matters and desires to go alone.”
Mon., 13 Jan., 1969:
“Minutes of the Meeting of the First Presidency
Held Monday, January 13, 1969, at 9:30 A.M., in President McKay’s Apartment
President Tanner’s Visit to Washington, D. C.
President Tanner reported that Friday evening, January l0th, he, with Brother Joseph Anderson, met with the Adult Aaronic Priesthood people and their wives in the Washington area, that there were about 500 present, and he enjoyed speaking to them and telling some of his experiences. He said that he mentioned among other things the love that President McKay and his wife have for each other, and took to them the President’s greetings and best wishes.
Saturday, January 11th, at 1:00 he met with about 65 people, presidents of stakes and presidents of missions and some others in the Washington Temple District area. He said that the Washington Stake gave a luncheon to all present in the stake center in the cultural hall, and then held a meeting in the chapel. He said there were 60 stake presidents and mission presidents and counselors, with others. President Tanner said he asked them how they felt about the proposed temple and told them that President McKay has approved it and that we now wanted to know how they felt about it. He said that every one of these brethren representing the stakes and missions said that they were very enthusiastic about it and that they would support the project in every way. President Tanner told them that we would expect then to pay l/3 of the cost. They wanted to know how much it would cost but no figure was given. They thought, however, they could raise around $3,000,000 if necessary. Willard Marriott was present at the meeting. Milan D. Smith, president of the Washington Stake, was made the overall chairman of the temple committee. President Tanner said he thought the best way to do it was to have a stake president in each region represent that region, but not to use the regional representatives in that capacity, that William Davis was chosen to represent the Niagara Region; Hugh S. West the New York and Boston region; Julian Lowe, Philadelphia; Walter Hick, Raleigh; William Nicholls, Atlanta; Henry Jenkins, Florida; Carl Hawkins, Detroit; Darold Johnson, Chicago; Roy Oscarson, St. Louis; Edwin H. White, Louisiana; and John Taylor, Cincinnati. He said this makes a very strong committee.
Wed., 15 Jan, 1969:
“8:45 a. m. Meeting of the First Presidency in the President’s Hotel Apartment. Present were N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer.
The following are among the matters presented for discussion:
Liquor Legislation
President Tanner reported that this morning he had met with Howard W. Hunter, Gordon B. Hinckley, James Faust and Wendell Ashton in regard to the proposed liquor legislation. He said that Elder Hinckley reported to the First Presidency and the Twelve on Thursday last the various items in the proposed bill, and the brethren felt that it was about as good as we could expect. It was decided in the meeting this morning that Gordon B. Hinckley, James Faust and Wendell Ashton be asked to sponsor the bill. These brethren will explain what the conditions are in the state, that the police department and enforcement officers feel this is a great improvement over the present law, and that while the Church is not happy with all parts of the bill we feel it is a realistic approach and should have their support. He said they would then meet with the legislators and explain the bill to them and go into it in some detail and let them know that as a Church we are not opposing the bill. President Tanner said it is felt that the bill is an improvement in enforcement restriction and that it makes provision that the profits will not go to the distributors but to the state.
President Tanner said he was making this report so that I will be informed.”
Mon., 27 Jan, 1969:
“No meetings were held today.
Letter from First Presidency
A letter was sent our all Presidents of Stakes and Bishops of Wards in the United States and Canada under the signature of the First Presidency stating that “on moral issues the Church and its members should take a positive stand. . . Latter-day Saints must always be alert and united in contending against any influence which tends to break down the moral and spiritual strength of the people.”
(See complete statement which follows)”
“January 27, 1969
PRESIDENTS OF STAKES AND BISHOPS OF WARDS IN THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA
Dear Brethren:
We recognize the urgent need of encouraging legislators and civic groups to use their good offices to combat the evils of drinking, gambling, immorality and other vices. While strictly political matters should properly be left in the field of politics where they rightfully belong, on moral issues the Church and its members should take a positive stand.
We urge all members of the Church to wield their influence in the matter of encouraging the introduction of proper legislation that will, when enacted into law, combat evil of the kind mentioned, and safeguard the morals of members and nonmembers alike. Latter-day Saints must always be alert and united in contending against any influence which tends to break down the moral and spiritual strength of the people.
Sincerely yours,
David O. McKay
Hugh B. Brown
N. Eldon Tanner
The First Presidency.”
Tues., 4 Feb, 1969:
“8:45 a. m. Meeting of the First Presidency held in the Hotel Apartment. Present were Presidents Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer.
The following were among the matters discussed:
My secretary Clare Middlemiss came to see me at 11:25 a. m. She presented several letters for my consideration, among which was a letter from Dr. Evan F. Evans, Chairman of the Committee for Abortion and Sterilization Reform, asking for permission to meet with some of the brethren of the Twelve to explain Senate Bills 116 and 117 on the abortion and sterilization laws of Utah that are now before the Utah Legislature. After reading over the correspondence pertaining to this matter, I decided to ask President Dyer to ask two or three of the brethren to join him in meeting with Dr. Evans to listen to his proposal regarding this matter.
I instructed Clare to call Dr. Evans in Ogden and have him call President Dyer for an appointment.
Brother Dyer arranged for a meeting to be held with Dr. Evans and some of the brethren Saturday morning, February 8.
(A copy of Dr. Evan’s letter follows. The original letter and several enclosures are in the “Abortion” file.)”
“The Utah Obstetrical and Gynecological Society
Evan F. Evans, M.D.
3755 Washington Boulevard
Suite 201
Ogden, Utah
January 27, 1969
President David O. McKay
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
Hotel Utah
Salt Lake City, Utah
Dear President McKay,
For the second time in three years, I again find it necessary to appeal to you to correct a grave mis-understanding. I am referring to the press release by the First Presidency last Thursday, January 23, 1969. Our Society agrees that abortion and sterilization laws should not be liberalized so that they be done on demand because people refuse to exercise their responsibilities as parents. In view of the comprehensive love and compassion for the needs of people that you expressed in personal communication to me three years ago; I cannot believe that you personally could have approved the press release of last Thursday!
I enclose photocopies of correspondence with President Tanner, when the Utah Obstetrical and Gynecological Society requested, and were twice denied the opportunity to discuss the now proposed Senate Bills 116 and 117 with the Council of Twelve. Our Society abided by President Tanner’s request, but we feel we have been unjustly treated by last Thursday’s press release for the press has interpreted it to mean the L.D.S. Church is opposed to the above bills. This is especially tragic when President Tanner admitted in private phone conversation that he had not read the proposed bills.
I enclose copies of the bills, and request that if you have questions our Society be granted the opportunity to discuss the problem with you and the Council of Twelve.
If there be anything in the proposed Senate Bills 116 and 117 that are contrary to the principles of good medical practice and love of our patients in need, or if it can be shown that anywhere in the proposed bills that people can be indiscriminately aborted or sterilized, our society would like advice as to how to change the proposed bills; as Utah’s present law is incompatible with the concept of Preventive Medicine.
Our hope is that your help will be forthcoming.
Respectfully,
Evan F. Evans, Chairman of the Committee for Abortion and Sterilization Reform,
The Utah Obstetrical and Gynecological Society”
Wed., 5 Feb., 1969:
“9:00 a. m. Meeting of the Eirst Presidency. Present in the President’s hotel apartment were Presidents Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer.
The following matters were discussed:
Sex Education – Reported Visit with Attorney General Vernon Romney
President Dyer reported that yesterday in accordance with approval given by me he had let in his office with Vernon Romney, the new Attorney General of the State. President Dyer explained that the committee that has been set up to study sex education and pornography materials would soon be ready to report their investigation, which committee is composed of Alma Burton, Robert Matthews, and another brother who are in the Institute program of the Church. President Dyer said before making any recommendation as to what might be done to counteract the type of sex education they are getting in the schools he wanted to get the Attorney General’s attitude on the matter. Attorney Romney said he was working with State Superintendent Bell of the schools on the seminary released time question and hoped to get that straightened out soon. He expressed a willingness and desire to work with us on this sex program, even to give any help needed with the legislators, if it should go that far, in preparing legislation that would be legal and sound. President Dyer said that it looks like it will take legislation to keep out of our schools the kind of materials that are infiltrating our school systems. Attorney Romney had said that he is the Attorney General but he is also a member of the Church and has six children and wants to keep this stuff out of the schools the same as we do.
Sat., 8 Feb, 1969:
“JOURNAL RECORD OF ALVIN R. DYER
SATURDAY, February 8, 1969
Meeting with Committee for Abortion and Sterilization Reform)
Under date of January 27, 1969, President David O. McKay received a letter from Dr. Evan F. Evans, Chairman of the Committee for Abortion and Sterilization Reform, representing the Utah Obstetrical and Gynecological Society. A copy of this letter is made part of the Journal.
It is to be noted that the same group has written to the First Presidency on several past occasions and have been advised in writing that the First Presidency did not want to become involved or associated with this group in the promotion of such legislation as this Committee is recommending. But, because of the fact that these doctors felt that they had been by-passed and were not being given an opportunity to explain their reasons for seeking legislation reform in the two areas referred to, President McKay asked that I meet with them and endeavor to have one or two members of the Quorum of Twelve meet with us that they may have the chance to give utterance to their reasons for the support of the proposed Senate bills 116 and 117.
These bills concern an act amending Section 58, Chapter 12, Utah Code Annotated, 1953, relating to the practice of medicine and surgery and the treatment of human ailments and providing for performance of therapeutic abortions under certain conditions, and secondly, an act to authorize the performance by physicians of certain voluntary operations upon the reproductive organs of certain persons, to prescribe the consent and conditions which shall be necessary for such operations, and the time at which the same may be performed, and to provide for exemptions from liability for the non-negligent performance of such operations.
Elder Mark E. Petersen was found to have a Conference at B. Y. U. on Sunday and Elder Marion G. Romney had no Conference assignment, so I invited them to join with me in listening to the statements of the doctors who met with us at 10 a. m on this day. The following is a list of doctors who met with us:
George Walter Gasser, Logan 24th Ward, East Cache Stake, on the staff of the L. D. S. Hospital at Logan.
Evan F. Evans, Ogden 70th Ward, South Ogden Stake, on the staff of the Thomas Dee Hospital in Ogden.
Leo Monte Stevenson, East Stratford Ward, Highland Stake.
Richard M. Hebertson, Holliday 22nd Ward, Mt. Olympus Stake, on the staff of the College of Medicine at the University of Utah.
Henry Arthur Teurer, Jr., Yale Second Ward, Bonneville Stake.
The meeting was held in my office and at the outset of the meeting I explained that we were not a Committee appointed by the First Presidency and Quorum of Twelve to make any decisions or to offer our opinions with regard to any phases of the two bills that are now before the legislative body of the State of Utah, but that we had been asked by President McKay to listen to the case concerning these matters which the doctors would present.
Each of the doctors had an opportunity to speak concerning their reasons why these two bills should be enacted. Though several attempts were made to exact opinions from we three brethren, in keeping with my statement at the beginning of the meeting, we did not offer any answer or opinion with regard to any particular phase of the bills under consideration.
It is well to mention at this time that the First Presidency issued a statement some time ago concerning any further expansion of the abortion and sterilization laws of the State of Utah. A copy of that statement is included herewith in the Journal. It is well to mention further, however, that there are no laws that we have been able to find with regard to sterilization in the State of Utah. The abortion law, however, is clear and distinct and the subject content of that law is also made a part of the Journal Record.
(Record of Abortions and Sterilization Operations Performed at Thomas Dee Hospital in Ogden)
In support of their case, Dr. Evans presented a paper which contained a record of therapeutic abortions and sterilizations performed at the Thomas Dee Hospital during the past six years. Accordingly, from this article, it was learned that the following acts had been performed:
Year Therapeutic Abortions Sterilizations
1963 2 20
1964 4 42
1965 14 30
l 966 – 39
1967 2 30
1968 3 26+
TOTALS: 25 l87+
The doctors stated that what was performed at the Thomas Dee Hospital was also performed at the L. D. S. Hospital in Salt Lake, in the L.D.S. Hospital in Logan, and other L.D.S. Hospitals.
Doctor Evans stated that if the First Presidency felt as they did about abortions and sterilizations, then some effort should be made to clear up the situation with regard to these two types of operations that were heing performed, possibly illegally, at L.D.S. hospitals.
In the course of our discussions, I said to Dr. Evans, “It looks to me that what you doctors are concerned with is some kind of legislation that will protect you from the penalty of the law because of illegal operation.” Dr. Evans stated that this was no joking matter and that if individuals wanted to and would pursue the matter, that many of the doctors would be found guilty and would have to serve jail sentences for what is transpiring.
One of the doctors also pointed out that abortion operations were being performed because of rubella (measles) found in the mother at the time of pregnancy, and that abortions had been performed to prevent the child from being a freak or of being deformed in some way, This was not in strict accord with the law now on the books that says that no abortion can be performed unless it is to save the life of the mother, as noted from the statement of the law that has keen made part of the Journal.
Another of the doctors pointed out that a number of vaginal hysterectomies were being performed on women and that there was no law that would cover such an operation and yet many of such operations are being performed in lieu of the recognized operation for sterilization.
We listened to these doctors for more than an hour and told them that any further statement concerning the matter would have to come from the First Presidency of the Church. As we had stated in the beginning, we were not authorized to make any statements with regard to the discussion that had been held here this day.
I believe, however, that the doctors felt relieved that they had finally been able to present their case before a representation of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve.”
Tues., 11 Feb, 1969:
“9:00 a. m. Meeting of the First Presidency held in the President’s Hotel Apartment. Present were Presidents Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner, Joseph Fielding Smith and Alvin R. Dyer.
Among the matters discussed was the following concerning abortion and sterilization:
Abortion and Sterilization Bills
President Dyer referred to a personal letter that had been sent to me by registered mail which could only be delivered to me regarding the abortion and sterilization law. President Dyer then received a telephone call from Dr. George Gasser who is on the staff of the Latter-day Saints Hospital in Logan and whom he had known ever since he was a child, stating that these doctors were going to see me about this. President Dyer said he told them that the Presidency has already issued a statement on the matter and he said that is why they wanted to see me. President Dyer thought that I would not want to see them personally since I had made a decision on the matter. I agreed and arranged for President Dyer and Elders Mark E. Petersen and Marion G. Romney to meet with them. There were five doctors: Dr. Gasser, who is on the LDS Hospital staff in Logan; Evan F. Evans, who is on the staff of the Thomas Dee Hospital in Ogden; Richard M. Hebertson of the College of Medicine, University of Utah; Leo M. Stephanson and Henry Arthur Theurer. All of them are LDS doctors and tithe payers except one. President Dyer said Brothers Petersen and Romney and he told them they would listen to their story but that the First Presidency had made a statement on the question and they would not answer any of their questions. He said they presented their case for an hour and furnished copies of the bills before the legislature on abortion and sterilization. He said that he and Elders Petersen and Romney said nothing but only listened. Dr. Evans, who is on the staff of the Dee Hospital in Ogden said that if the First Presidency were going to make the statement that they did the Church should clean up their own hospitals. President Dyer said he asked what he meant and he gave him a list of the therapeutic abortions performed at the Thomas D. Dee Hospital each year during the past six years, and the number of sterilizations that have been performed at the same hospital, and the number was quite large. President Dyer said he had talked to Clarence Wonnacott about the matter and he mentioned that they have a therapeutic committee that decides when they will perform an abortion or sterilization in the hospital, and upon the decision of the committee the doctors perform the operation without actual legal authority. The law on abortion and sterilization is not as liberal as the latitude they are taking. President Dyer told them that it seemed to him that if they did not cease doing this they would land in jail because they were violating the law. They have been performing sterilization operations in the Dee Hospital at the rate of three or four a month. President Dyer said that the only report they gave was regarding the Thomas D. Dee Hospital and that Brother Wonnacott had stated that many such operations are performed at the LDS Hospital in Salt Lake as well as in Logan. He thought that someone should look into the situation to ascertain how many operations of this nature are being performed in these hospitals. Dr. Evans said that unless legislation is obtained on this matter the doctors must cease performing these operations. Referring to the statement made by the First Presidency, these doctors had said in their letter to me that they did not think this was my desire and they thought that I would listen to them. President Dyer said that he would like to make a more complete study of the situation and find out what is being done at the various hospitals and make a report. It was suggested that the matter be brought to the attention of Bishop Vandenberg in Friday’s meeting with the Presidency and Presiding Bishopric and that Brother Kirton, our legal counsel, should also be consulted so that we would have the legal side also.
President Dyer said he had asked Vernon Romney for a copy of the law. Dr. Evans had said that according to the present law if it would mean the death of the mother unless an abortion was performed a doctor could perform it. President Dyer mentioned also that he had talked with a Dr. Dixon who is on the staff of the Thomas D. Dee Hospital, who said that there was perhaps some regulation regarding this but that these doctors had gone farther than they should. President Dyer said he hoped that he had done right by meeting with these doctors, and the brethren agreed that he had done the right thing.
(See also Saturday, February 8, 1969 for Brother Dyer’s Minutes)”
Fri., 14 Feb, 1969:
“I held no meetings today. However, the following three matters of importance were discussed at a meeting of the First Presidency with the Presiding Bishopric.
Abortion and Sterilization Law
President Dyer read to the brethren a copy of the present abortion law in the State of Utah to the effect that every person who provides supplies or administers to any pregnant woman, or in any way assists in providing means with intent to secure a miscarriage unless the same is necessary to preserve her life, is punishable by imprisonment in the State Prison of not less than two or more than ten years. President Dyer reported that he had conferred with some of the doctors in regard to this law and the proposed sterilization law befotre the legislature, that Dr. Evans, who was with the group when they met with President Dyer, Marion G. Romney and Mark E. Petersen, said that many of the doctors now operating in the hospitals could be punished according to this law if anyone wanted to make a case. He said that Dr. Evans presented a record of abortions performed in the Dee Hospital in Ogden over the past six years numbering 25, and 185 sterilizations. President Dyer explained that 14 of these abortions were cases where the mother had measles and they took the child. This, however, would not be to save the life of the mother. President Dyer said he understood that the record at the LDS Hospital is much greater than this although he had no figures. President Dyer said that he had learned that the hospital has a therapeutic abortion committee and they decide each case and he thought this should be looked into. President Dyer said that the doctors stated that if we do not get this new law the chances are that someone could make a case and some of the doctors might have to go to prison. In answer to an inquiry as to whether the hospital would be liable in such cases, Bishop Vandenberg said that it would be.
President Dyer further stated that Dr. Evans had said that many doctors in order to get around these laws, are claiming a hysterectomy problem and they perform a hysterectomy operation, which is done with the approval of the mother and the father and it amounts strictly to a sterilization. Bishop Vandenberg said they would look into the matter.”
Wed., 19 Feb, 1969:
“9:00 a. m. First Presidency Meeting held in the President’s Apartment. Present were President Hugh B. Brown, President N. Eldon Tanner, President Joseph Fielding Smith, and President Alvin R. Dyer.
Among the matters presented were:
Abortion and Sterilization Laws
President Dyer referred to his report heretofore made to the brethren regarding abortion and sterilization in the State of Utah and that a group of doctors had authored a law in regard to this matter but that it had been tabled. He mentioned that at the time some of the doctors met with him and Elders Petersen and Romney, they referred to the fact that doctors at the Thomas D. Dee Hospital were performing three to four sterilization operations a month, and he has been told that the LDS Hospital in Salt Lake City has been doing the same thing as have other hospitals. President Dyer mentioned that he had obtained a copy of the law on abortion from the Attorney General and that he had also now obtained a copy of the law regarding sterilization. This latter he stated applies only to sterilization of patients in the Utah State Hospital, the Utah State Training School or the State Industrial School, or the warden of the State Prison, and states that whenever the superintendent of the Utah State Hospital, or of the Utah State Training School or of the State Industrial School, or the warden of the state prison, shall be of the opinion that it is for the best interests of the inmates or of society that any inmate confined in the institution under his care, or of any person adjudged to be insane, an idiot, an imbecile, feeble-minded, or epileptic shall be sexually sterilized, such superintendent or warden is authorized to cause to be performed by some capable surgeon the operation of sterilization or asexualization on any such inmate or person afflicted with habitual degenerate sexual criminal tendencies, insanity, idiocy, imbecility, feeble-mindedness or epilepsy; provided, that such superintendent or warden shall have first complied with the requirements of this chapter. President Dyer said that inasmuch as these sterilizations are being performed in our hospitals they are in violation of the law. He said that the Attorney General, Vernon Romney, had suggested that we have one of the legislators petition the office of the Attorney General for his opinion on the sterilization law other than that just covered in the state institution and he would be willing to give an opinion. It was suggested that Bishop Vandenberg be asked to pursue this matter since the hospitals are under his direction. In this connection President Tanner mentioned that in a recent meeting of the First Presidency and Presiding Bishopric he asked Bishop Vandenberg to what extent the hospital would be liable in a case like this and it was pointed out that the hospital would be liable. It became the action of the brethren that Bishop Vandenberg be asked to pursue this matter.
Thurs., 8 May, 1969:
“8:30 a. m. Meeting of the First Presidency in the President’s Hotel Apartment. Present were Presidents N. Eldon Tanner and Alvin R. Dyer.
Among the matters discussed were the following:
5:30 p. m. President McKay received a courtesy call in his hotel apartment from the Vice-President of the United States Spiro T. Agnew. Mr. Ray Townsend, Republican Chairman, had made the appointment with Sister Middlemiss. Accompanying the Vice President was Senator Wallace F. Bennett and President Alvin R. Dyer who later reported the meeting in his journal.
President Dyer’s journal comments:
“About mid-afternoon Robert McKay, son of President McKay, called and asked if I could be present with President McKay when Vice-President Agnew and Senator Wallace Bennett would call upon him at 5:30 that afternoon. I advised Brother McKay that I would be most pleased to be there by President McKay’s side when this transpired.
“I arrived at the President’s office about 5:25 p. m. and found the President prepared and ready to receive the Vice-President. He arrived about 10 minutes later and thereafter followed a very informal and quiet visit with the President. Vice-President Agnew expressed his great delight in having the privilege of visiting with President McKay while he was here and told of his wonderful visit at the Brigham Young University where he described the condition of the students as that of “happy”. He said, “You know, when students participate in these other things that are going on around the country, they are simply not happy. But I found an entirely different atmosphere at the Brigham Young University where the
students are happy and enjoying their school experience. This is the way it should be. “
“The President was most gracious, as he always is, in receiving the Vice-President and was pleased that he had come. The visit lasted for only about 10 minutes and then the Vice-President and the Senator left…. “
Fri., 27 Jun, 1969:
“THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 20, 1969
Dear President McKay:
As the Young Women’s Mutual Improvement Association of your Church celebrates a century of dedication to God and to humanity, I am most pleased to extend my warm congratulations to its members.
Devoted to the proper guidance and development of young women, this highly motivated group performs a valuable service to America. We are living at a time of great challenge to our society and our way of life. Our most sacred institutions are being put to test. More than ever, we need to marshal the fullness of American talent toward the fulfillment of our hopes and goals. And much of that talent lies in the ranks of our nation’s women
I am well aware of the splendid programs of the MIA and encouraged by their constructive contributions. I hope that you will extend my warmest congratulations to all the members of this outstanding youth organization, and my admiration for the great good they do. And I join with all who have followed their enduring achievements in the hope that their second century rnay be as successful as the first.
Sincerely,
Richard Nixon”
“The Honorable Richard M. Nixon
President of the United States
The White House
Washington, D.C.
June 26, 1969
My dear Mr. President:
It was gracious and thoughtful of you to send your letter of June 20, 1969, extending to the Young Women’s Mutual Improvement Association your warmest congratulations on the One-Hundredth Anniversary of the founding of this young women’s auxiliary organization of the Church
We deeply appreciate and thank you for your words of commendation regarding the “constructive contributions” made by the programs of the MIA organizations of the Church.
I most heartily agree with you that we are “living at a time of great challenge,” that much “talent lies within the ranks of our women,” and that we need more than ever to inspire our youth and good men everywhere to stand true to their conscience, to be courageous in holding aloft the moral standard, and to stand fearlessly in defending the right.
I shall have your letter read at the Opening Session of the Annual World’s Conference of the MIA Organizations on Friday, June 27, 1969. I am confident that your message will give added encouragement and desire to the many thousands of these young men and women, who will be gathered in Salt Lake City, to put forth even more effort to uphold the standards of our God and Country .
May the inspiration of the Lord continue to be with you as you direct the affairs of this great Nation.
Sincerely,
David O. McKay”