Index
Mountain Meadows Massacre
Comprehensive History of the Church - B.H. Roberts
Responsibility for the Mountain Meadows Massacre
Comprehensive History of the Church - B.H. Roberts
Refutation of falsehoods appearing in the Illustrated American, January 9, 1891
Messages of the First Presidency - President Wilford Woodruff
A Great Tragedy - Emigrant trains in Utah & the Mountain Meadows Massacre
The Restored Church - William E. Berrett
HERE, in these chapters dealing with calamitous events of the period of
1851-7, may as well be considered that event which is the most
lamentable episode in Utah history, and in the history of the church. I
refer to the Mountain Meadows Massacre. The writer recognizes it as the
most difficult of all the many subjects with which he has to deal in
this History. Difficult because it is well-nigh impossible to sift out
the absolute truth of the matter from the mass of conflicting statements
made by witnesses and near witnesses of the affair; and equally
difficult to reconcile the differences of contending partisans.
Anti-"Mormon" writers have been determined to fasten the crime upon the
Church of the Latter-day Saints, or at least upon her leaders; and also,
as a rule, holding that in some way "Mormon" doctrine and "Mormon"
church polity was responsible for the crime. On the other hand, church
people who in all good conscience, and justly, resent this imputation
against their church and its leaders, have been naturally slow to admit
all the facts that history may insist upon as inevitable.
One of the most pathetic things connected with the case is that none of
the Arkansas company of emigrants survived who were competent to relate
the events as they saw them take place, since all were killed who could
have had any certain memory of the circumstances, and it follows that
the emigrants' story must be pieced together from the admissions and
confessions of their murderers, Indians and white men, told at different
times and under varying circumstances; prompted sometimes by
self-interest, admissions and confessions alike, made in the hope of
escaping censure, sometimes in the hope of avoiding the just
consequences of participation in the crime; sometimes told in despair;
and then again in the bitterness of revenge against some fellow
participant who had betrayed the deed of blood; sometimes told
haltingly, to shield those who may have been unwillingly brought into
the wretched affair. And then some of these admissions, confessions, and
relations have reached us only through second and third parties who
have, in all probability, colored them to their own interested or biased
views of the subject.
But at this point it is necessary to present, in outline, at least, the
main facts in the case, before proceeding to the discussion of them.
THE CHARACTER OF THE EMIGRANT PARTY KILLED AT MOUNTAIN MEADOWS
The emigrants attacked at Mountain Meadows were a company made up
chiefly of people from the state of Arkansas, and a few from Missouri,
numbering in all about one hundred and forty souls, men, women, and
children. They were reported to have been an exceptionally well-to-do
company; with plenty of cattle, and horses and mules for teams, besides a
number of loose cattle not subject to the yoke. Stenhouse, who
describes the company from information supplied by a close gentleman
friend [1] of his who traveled with them from Fort Bridger to Salt Lake
City, speaks of them in highest praise. He declares that they were
wealthy; [2] that in addition to the ordinary emigrant wagons they had
several riding carriages; that in the main they were a collection of
families closely related by the ties of consanguinity; that one of their
number was a Methodist preacher, and that they were close observers of
religious services night and morning, as well as upon the Christian
Sabbath. This authority, and for their character we have no other that
speaks directly for them, states that there was a company of Missourians
traveling in proximity with the Arkansas company, who were "a
rough-and-ready set of men, regular frontier Pioneers; the other [the
Arkansas party] a picked company." [3] The Missouri contingent called
themselves "Missouri Wildcats." [4] Bancroft dismisses the theory that
there were two distinct companies by saying that "the truth appears to
be that there were a few Missourians in the Arkansas party, as stated in
Hutchings California Magazine." [5] It must have been that the
"Missouri Wildcats" dominated the company as it made its way through
southern Utah, and gave to it the general character it bears in Utah
annals, which, as we shall see, is the very opposite to that given to it
by Stenhouse and Kelsey.
JOURNEY OF THE ARKANSAS EMIGRANTS THROUGH UTAH
This mixed company of Arkansas and Missouri emigrants arrived in Salt
Lake City about the last of July and camped on the Jordan. It would
appear that their arrival in the valley created no special interest as
no mention of it appears in the Deseret News of the period, and Brigham
Young declared that he only heard of its arrival by rumor. [6] The
emigrants were encamped for some time on the Jordan, west of Salt Lake
City, and were advised by Elder Charles C. Rich to take the route around
the north end of Salt Lake, as being preferable to the southern road.
The company was so far impressed with his advice that they went as far
north as Bear river, then changed their minds and concluded to take the
southern route. [7] In their journey the company passed through Provo,
Springville, Payson, Fillmore and the smaller intervening settlements.
No complaint is made against their deportment as emigrants until they
reach Fillmore—a distance of about 150 miles south of Salt Lake City—and
at Corn Creek, in Millard county—about 15 miles south of Fillmore. At
the former place "they threatened the destruction of the town," says
George A. Smith, "and boasted of their participation in the murders and
other outrages that were inflicted upon the 'Mormons' in Missouri and
Illinois." [8] At the latter place, Corn Creek, "they poisoned the
springs and the body of an ox which had died. The carcass was eaten by a
band of Pieds from the desert who were on a visit to the Pahvantes"—the
local tribe of Indians. "I was informed by the people living at Meadow
Creek, the nearest settlers to Corn Creek," continues our authority,
"that ten Indians died from this poisoned meat, and that a considerable
number of cattle also died from the poisoning of the water. Some of
these cattle were fat, and the owners 'tried them up,' to save the
tallow. A son of Mr. Robison of Fillmore, was poisoned from the handling
of the meat, and died. Among the cattle that died of poison were
several belonging to the Hon. John A. Ray. He, being at the time in
Europe, Mrs. Ray attended to saving the tallow, and was so poisoned as
to endanger her life and permanently injure her hand. * * * While
passing through the lower settlements the emigrants boasted of their
participation in the expulsion of the 'Mormons' from Missouri, and
threatened to stop at some convenient point, and fatten their stock,
that when the United States troops should arrive, the emigrants would
have plenty of beef to feed them with, and would then help to kill every
'Mormon' that there was in the mountains. This course of conduct on
their part, coupled with the rumor which they spread, that some four or
five hundred dragoons were expected through on the Fremont trail (i.e.
from California), whom they would join, caused them to be regarded by
the settlers with a feeling of distrust." [9]
THE ALLEGED POLICY OF "NON-INTERCOURSE" WITH THE ARKANSAS EMIGRANTS
It is alleged that these emigrants could not purchase provisions in Salt
Lake City, nor in the settlements through which they passed; that they
were ordered by Brigham Young to leave Salt Lake City; that a courier
preceded them, through the southern settlements, with written
instructions for the settlers to have no dealings or intercourse with
them. [10] This is contradicted, however, as we shall see later by the
sworn statements of men who sold grain to the emigrants until they were
satisfied and would purchase no more. Attention has already been called
to the partial famine in Utah in 1855-56, and the necessity it enjoined
upon the people of Utah, in their peculiar situation, to husband their
food supplies, especially their grain. [11] In addition to the
possibility of the recurrence of drought and grasshoppers, there was now
an army approaching the territory, with no very clearly defined
purpose, with no official notification of its purpose at all, or the
fact of its having started, served upon the civil authorities of the
territory; and in what it might eventuate no one knew, except that on
the part of the Latter-day Saints there was a strong determination not
to submit to oppression, even though that should involve them in another
exodus from their homes; and as a preliminary step to such a possible
eventuality, word was sent throughout the settlements to the people to
carefully husband their grain; to feed none to their own stock, to sell
none to passing companies of emigrants for that purpose, and for food
supplies only sufficient to see them through to where they could
purchase of other communities. [12]
Elder George A. Smith who had been at the national capital and in the
eastern states for about a year, urging the claims of Utah for admission
into the Union, returned to Salt Lake City in the summer of 1857, and
as some members of his family lived at Parowan, and he had property
interests in the southern settlements—it will be remembered that he was
prominent in the founding of these settlements—he paid a visit to the
south part of the territory. In his capacity of an elder in the church,
and a member of the council of the twelve apostles, he gave counsel to
the saints respecting the care of their grain, and the necessity of
being prepared for possible emergencies. But in as much as Elder Smith
went south in advance of the Arkansas emigrant company, he is the
"courier" of the anti-"Mormon" writers; the one who went to instruct the
southern settlements in the policy of non-intercourse with the
emigrants, and refusal to sell them food supplies, [13] both of which
charges Elder Smith by affidavit specifically denies, as he also denies
that he knew even of the existence of the Arkansas company until he was
returning from his journey to the south, and met them at Corn Creek,
fifteen miles south of Fillmore. [14] President Young denied that the
Arkansas emigrants had been ordered away from Salt Lake either by
himself or any one in authority under him; or that any order had been
given by him not to sell grain or to trade with the emigrant trains
passing through Utah at the time. "Counsel and advice," President Young
explains, "were given to the citizens not to sell grain to the emigrants
to feed their stock, but to let them have sufficient for themselves if
they were out. The simple reason for this was that for several years our
crops had been short, and the prospect was at that time that we might
have trouble with the United States army, then en route for this place,
and we wanted to preserve the grain for food. The citizens of the
territory were counseled not to feed grain to their own stock. No person
was ever punished or called in question for furnishing supplies to the
emigrants, within my knowledge." [15]
At Lee's first trial, July, 1875, Jesse N. Smith, for a number of years a
member of the Utah territorial legislature, a prominent Pioneer in the
southern settlements of Utah and later in Arizona, where he was elected a
member of that territorial legislature, and was president of the
Snowflake stake of Zion—Mr. Smith testified that he lived in Parowan in
1857, that he came to Utah ten years before. Saw the [Arkansas] emigrant
train at the town above named [Parowan], sold them flour and salt, had
flour to spare and asked if they wanted more; they wanted vegetables,
but witness had none to spare. Saw George A. Smith in Parowan August
8th; he came in from the north, went down among the settlements, witness
accompanying him. A meeting was held in every settlement. Witness
attended them all. He [George A. Smith] deprecated selling grain and
breadstuffs to feed to horses and mules. Never heard him in his public
addresses allude to this train." [16]
Silas S. Smith, brother to the above witness, corroborated, in the main
the statements given by Jesse N. Smith. "Heard nothing said to
discourage the sale of provisions to emigrant trains for food;" and
heard nothing said by George A. Smith "against allowing emigrant trains
to pass through the country." [17]
Accompanying Geo. A. Smith northward their party met the Arkansas
emigrants at Corn Creek where they were encamped, and where the Smith
party camped also. Some of the emigrants visited the Smith party and
made inquiries. Some one asked if the Indians would be likely to eat the
flesh of an ox that laid dead near the camp, and was answered that most
likely they would. [18] From Cedar Springs in Millard county, Silas S.
Smith separated from his cousin, Geo. A. Smith, and returned southward
to his home in Paragoona. When so returning he overtook the Arkansas
emigrants at Indian Creek near Beaver, camped with and had supper with
them. And heard the captain of the company called "Mr. Fancher." [19]
The Arkansas company passed through the "Mormon" settlements of Cedar
and Pinto in the latter part of the first week in September and encamped
at Mountain Meadows. [20]
LOCATION OF THE MOUNTAIN MEADOWS
The Mountain Meadows are situated about three hundred and twenty miles
south and a little west of Salt Iake City. They are on the plateau which
forms the rim of the basin, the watershed separating the streams that
flow to the Colorado river, and those flowing northward to lose
themselves in the semi-desert of the Escalante valley. The "Meadows" are
really a narrow valley about five miles in length by one mile in width,
narrowing down to a few rods in width at the southern end, through
which the old emigrant road passed. Near the south end of the Meadows is
a large spring, a short distance north of which the Arkansas emigrants
went into encampment, expecting, according to reported outgivings of
theirs, to remain there some time for the purpose of resting their
cattle before commencing their journey through the desert and
semi-desert country between them and southern California.
THE MESSAGE OF INQUIRY SENT TO BRIGHAM YOUNG—JAMES HASLEM
Meantime the effect of the bad conduct of this emigrant company while
passing through the southern "Mormon" settlements and the adjacent
Indian tribes had culminated in a great excitement among the latter, and
of anger and resentment among the former. It was customary for the
local leading men at Cedar and from the smaller settlements in its
vicinity to gather in a council meeting after the close of the regular
Sunday services of the church, to consider questions of local community
interest. At such a meeting on the 6th of September the question
concerning the conduct of, and what ought to be done with, the Arkansas
emigrants was brought up and debated. Some in the council were in favor
of destroying them, and others were not. Finally, and largely through
the influence of Mr. Laban Morrill, it was "unanimously decided" in that
council to suspend all hostile action relative to the emigrants until a
message could be sent to Brigham Young to learn what would be the best
course to pursue. [21] The next day James Haslem, a resident of Cedar at
the time, was sent as such messenger to Governor Young. Word had come
to Cedar before this express started for Salt Lake City that the Indians
had the Arkansas emigrants surrounded at Mountain Meadows and John D.
Lee (farmer to the Indians in southern Utah) wanted to know what should
be done. [22] Haslem testifies that this was the substance of the
message handed to him. [23] Haslem arrived in Salt Lake City in the
forenoon of Thursday, the 10th of September. Governor Young after
reading the message asked Haslem if he could stand the return trip;
Haslem answered in the affirmative, and was then directed by the
governor to take a few hours rest and then return with the answer that
would be prepared. After several hours rest, Haslem presented himself to
the governor and received a written message, unsealed, the governor
saying to him as he prepared to ride away:—
GOVERNOR BRIGHAM YOUNG'S VERBAL ANSWER
"Go with all speed, spare no horse flesh. The emigrants must not be
meddled with, if it takes all Iron county to prevent it. They must go
free and unmolested." [24]
PRESIDENT YOUNG'S LETTER TO ISAAC C. HAIGHT
"President's Office,
G. S. L. City, Sept. 10th, 1857.
Elder Isaac C. Haight,
Dear Brother: Your note of the 7th inst. is to hand. Captain Van Vliet,
acting commissary is here, having come in advance of the army to procure
necessaries for them. We do not expect that any part of the army will
be able to reach here this fall. There are only about 850 men coming,
they are now at or near Laramie. A few of the freight trains are this
side of that place, the advance of which are now on Green river. They
will not be able to come much, if any farther, on account of their poor
stock. They cannot get here this season without we help them. So you see
that the Lord has answered our prayers and again averted the blow
designed for our heads.
In regard to emigration trains passing through our settlements we must
not interfere with them until they are first notified to keep away. You
must not meddle with them. The Indians we expect will do as they please,
but you should try and preserve good feelings with them. There are no
other trains going south that I know of if those who are there will
leave let them go in peace. While we should be on the alert, on hand and
always ready we should always possess ourselves in patience, preserving
ourselves and property, ever remembering that God rules. He has
overruled for our deliverance this once again, and he will always do so
if we live our religion, be united in our faith and good works. All is
well with us. May the Lord bless you and all saints forever.
I remain as ever your brother in the Gospel of Christ
-BRIGHAM YOUNG." [25]
Haslem returned by relay of horses, arriving at Cedar on Sunday the 13th
of September, and delivered his message from Governor Young to Isaac C.
Haight, who as he read it, burst into tears and said:
"Too late, too late!"
"The massacre," adds Haslem, "was all over before I got home." [26]
Not only was a messenger sent to President Young in pursuance of the
agreement of the council held at Cedar on the 6th of September, but
messengers were also sent to leading men at Pinto, a small settlement
within five or six miles of the Mountain Meadows, directing that the
Indians be held in check until word could be received from Brigham Young
with reference to the emigrants, and giving the information that a
messenger was then starting for Salt Lake City. [27]
OPENING ATTACK ON THE EMIGRANTS
Meantime several hundred Indians had gathered at Mountain Meadows, and
at break of day on Monday or Tuesday morning—began an attack upon the
emigrant camp, [28] killing—it was afterwards learned—seven and wounding
sixteen at the first volley. Though taken unawares the emigrants fought
bravely and repulsed the Indians, killing several braves and mortally
wounding two of their chiefs. This checked the attack, and afforded the
emigrants an opportunity to draw their wagons into a close circle, sink
the wheels to the hubs, and in the center of the enclosure dig a rifle
pit large enough to afford protection to the whole party. They were in a
state of siege.
Meantime the Indians sent runners into the surrounding country to gather
more tribesmen, [29] and one to John D. Lee, urging him to come to the
place of the conflict and lead them to victory. Lee crossed the
mountains from his home at the settlement of Harmony, and arrived among
the Indians, whom he reports as in a frenzy of excitement and demanded
that he lead them in an attack upon the now intrenched camp, threatening
if he did not do it they would declare war upon the "Mormons" and kill
every one in the settlements.
Unfortunately for these statements we only have the word of Lee to
support them, as he was the only white man up to this stage of the
proceedings with the Indians, and he can never be accepted as a reliable
witness. But according to his statements he induced the Indians to
allow him to leave the vicinity of the Meadows to bring up more Indians
from the south. Sixteen miles southward he met about one hundred Indians
and a number of white settlers from the Santa Clara valley. The Indians
proceeded forthwith to join their friends at the scene of conflict, the
whites camped together with Lee that night, and moved on to the Meadows
the next day. From the encampment which these whites formed near
Hamblin's ranch, and at no great distance from the emigrant train, word
was sent to Cedar detailing the situation. But whether that was a
message asking for help to protect and save the emigrants and pacify the
Indians, as claimed by Lee; [30] or a call for reinforcements to help
effect their destruction; or a call for a gathering of more settlers for
consultation to determine what could be done, and what it would be best
to do, may not be determined, as Lee's statement cannot be trusted. The
call, however, whatever its purport, brought to Mountain Meadows a
number of white settlers from Cedar, on Thursday, the 10th of September,
enough to swell the number of whites now there to between fifty and
sixty, many of whom were but very young men.
That night and the following morning the fate of the emigrants was
debated among the leaders of the settlers. One incident which may have
been a large determining factor in the subsequent tragedy was the
killing, the night before, of one of the emigrants by white men some
distance from the emigrant camp. It appears that two men of the emigrant
company on Wednesday left their camp in the Meadows, evaded the
watchfulness of the Indians and were making their way to Cedar for help;
at or near the settlement of Pinto they met three white men to whom
they told their errand, but were immediately attacked and one of them
was killed. The other escaped and returned to the emigrant camp, with
his news, of course, that the white settlers were doubtless in league
with the Indians for their destruction, since his companion had been
killed by white men. Should any of the emigrants escape with that story
to California, in the then excited state of mind towards the "Mormons,"
the likelihood would be that a military force would soon be moving upon
them from the west as well as the one now invading the territory from
the east. This is not said by way of palliation for the crime of the
massacre which followed, but is mentioned as one of the important facts
of the tragedy, and as one of the contributing causes, doubtless, to the
decision arrived at that all of the emigrants should be killed who
would be likely to retain any memory of what had occurred, or was likely
to occur. [31]
MOTIVES PROMPTING THE MASSACRE
This gives fear a large place among the motives that led to the crime of
the Mountain Meadows. It has already been stated that the course of the
emigrants in passing through the southern settlements had awakened the
resentment of the people. Though much of their boasting about
participation in the Missouri and Illinois "Mormon" troubles may have
been the mere bravado of the "Missouri Wildcats;" and their threats
against the then presiding "Mormon" leaders, and their expressed
intention to return in force and destroy the Latter-day Saint
settlements, may have been but the vain ranting of the reckless spirits
of the camp, yet it was suicidal to indulge in that bravado and such
ranting. It would have been so in any community who had suffered such
injustice as the Latter-day Saints had suffered; with which suffering
they were now taunted, and of which there was now—as the settlers viewed
it—a threatened repetition, and in which repetition the reckless part
of this company of emigrants expressed determination to participate.
Such procedure even under normal conditions would have aroused
resentments and led to trouble, and most likely to some acts of
violence. But to make these boasts, and to indulge in these threats at a
time when great excitement prevailed in the "Mormon" settlements, and
the war spirit of the people was aroused by reports of the approach of
an invading army whose purpose the saints were left to suspect by their
cruel experiences with state troops in both Missouri and Illinois—for
the Arkansas emigrants to indulge in boastings of past achievements with
armed movements against the saints, to swagger and threaten a
repetition of these things was, under all the circumstances, to invite
calamity. And now that one of their number had been shot down by white
men, and they had evidence that white settlers of Utah were leagued with
the Indians, it doubtless made it easy for some of the leaders to
persuade the white settlers gathered at Mountain Meadows to conclude
that the emigrants if allowed to escape would be able to carry out their
threat of returning from California with the necessary force to destroy
the "Mormon" settlements. And so I say this fear became a weighty
argument in determining the fate of the emigrant company. [32]
The fate of the emigrants was debated among the leaders of the white
settlers at the Meadows; we need not attempt to trace the discussion in
detail where there is so much that is unreliable on account of the
character of the witnesses, and so much that is contradictory. Nor is it
possible to know the distress and suffering of the besieged emigrants.
It is known, however, that their suffering was very great. Their corral
of wagons was some distance from the spring on the north side of which
they had camped, and they could get no water without exposing themselves
to the attacks of the Indians who watched the spring; and the same is
true as to wood, though at intervals, and usually at night, both were
obtained, but at great risk. Great and sickening must have been their
consternation when they learned from their man who had escaped from the
Pinto assault that white men as well as the Indians were arrayed against
them.
MASSACRE COLDLY DETERMINED UPON
After the discussion as to the disposition of the emigrants referred to
ended, it appears that leading spirits among the white settlers who had
assembled at Mountain Meadows determined upon the destruction of the
emigrants; and in order that it might be accomplished without risk to
themselves it was decided to decoy the emigrants from their fortified
camp, disarm them and treacherously put them to death. The conception
was diabolical; the execution of it horrible; and the responsibility for
both must rest upon those men who conceived and executed it; for
whatever of initiative may or may not have been taken by the Indians in
the first assault upon these emigrants, responsibility for this
deliberately planned massacre rests not with them.
A flag of truce was sent to the emigrant camp, carried by one William
Bateman; he was met outside the camp by a Mr. Hamilton from the emigrant
company, and an arrangement was made for John D. Lee to hold a parley
with the emigrants and explain in what way they could be delivered from
the vengeance of the surrounding Indian tribes. The terms were that the
emigrants give up their arms; that the wounded be loaded into wagons
followed by the women and larger children, the men of the company in
single file coming after them. On condition of such surrender the white
settlers were to give the emigrants safe conduct back to Cedar, where
they would be protected until they could continue the journey to
California in safety. The surrender was made by the emigrants; two
wagons were brought to their camp and the arms and the wounded loaded
into them, the procession formed, and the march toward Cedar began.
EXECUTION OF THE PLAN
Meantime the Indians, several hundred in number, had been concealed in
patches of scrub oaks and cedars behind a swell of the hillside, out of
view from the emigrant camp, but beside the road over which this forming
procession would move. A short distance from the emigrant camp the
settlers from Cedar City and the Clara valley were drawn up in double
file, and between the files the procession of wagons, women and children
and men passed. The file of settlers was then changed from double to
single order, an armed settler by this arrangement marching on the right
of each unarmed emigrant man. When the wagons and the women and
children had reached the stretch of road beside which the Indians were
in ambush, the signal agreed upon was given, and in from three to five
minutes the Mountain Meadows Massacre was made a horrible fact of
history.
Only three men escaped the first deadly assault, and these were followed
to the desert and killed. [33] Seventeen young children were all that
were saved from the slaughter. From one hundred and fifteen to one
hundred and twenty men, women and older children were slain, and then
given but an imperfect burial.
DISPOSITION OF THE VERY YOUNG CHILDREN AND THE PROPERTY
The children that were saved were distributed among the settlers, but
two years later they were gathered up by Mr. Jacob Forney, who succeeded
Brigham Young as Indian agent for the territory of Utah, and were sent
east where, as far as possible, they were given in charge of relatives
or friends of the ill-fated emigrants, congress having in the meantime
appropriated the sum of $10,000 for their recovery and restoration; [34]
but most of them were received into and cared for by a child's
orphanage in St. Louis.
The property of the emigrant company was seized upon by both Indians and
white men, some of it being sold in Cedar, at public auction, and
referred to as the "property taken at the siege of Sevastopol." [35] The
same authority mentions a report that Lee, Haight, and Klingensmith
counseled with Brigham Young "about what should be done with the
property. They took with them the ready money they got from the
surrender of the emigrants and offered it to Young. He said he would
have nothing to do with it. He told them to divide the cows and cattle
among the poor. They had taken some of the cattle to Salt Lake City when
they went up, and after the talk with Brigham they sold these to the
merchants there. Lee told Brigham that the Indians would not be
satisfied if they did not have a share of the cattle. Brigham left it to
Lee to make the distribution." [36] Of course these were merely the
rumors current in southern Utah at the time (1859) Major Carleton wrote
this letter from Mountain Meadows. In his deposition admitted in
evidence at the second Lee trial, on the subject of the distribution of
this property, President Young said:
"Eleventh Question—Did you ever give any direction concerning the
property taken from the emigrants at the Mountain Meadows massacre, or
know anything as to its disposition?
Answer—No, I never gave any directions concerning the property taken
from the company of emigrants at the Mountain Meadows massacre, nor did I
know anything of that property, or its disposal, and I do not to this
day, except from public rumor." [37]
Footnotes
1. This "gentleman friend," according to Mrs. Stenhouse, was Eli B.
Kelsey, Tell it All: The Story of a Life's Experience in Mormonism, by
Mrs. T. B. H. Stenhouse, 1878, p. 325. Mr. Kelsey was an apostate
"Mormon;" as was also Mrs. Stenhouse and her book, an anti-"Mormon"
book.
2. Mr. Jacob Forney, who succeeded Brigham Young as Indian agent for the
territory of Utah, reports that they had 600 head of cattle, 30 head of
horses and mules. In Waite's Mormon Prophet, though upon what authority
is not stated, that author puts the number of cattle at 800 head, 60
horses and mules, 40 wagons and 150 emigrants (pp. 65, 66). Forney in a
letter to the commissioner of Indian affairs at Washington dated from
Provo, March, 1859, estimated that $30,000 worth of property was
distributed, after the massacre, "among the leading church authorities;"
an estimate in the one case, and an unwarranted assumption in the
other. (Senate Documents, 36th Congress, 1st Sess., ii, No. 42).
Cradlebaugh estimated the value of the company's property at from
$60,000 to $70,000. Beadle, quoting Dr. Brewer of the United States
army, who saw this train at O'Fallon's Bluff on the Platte, on the 11th
of June confirms Stenhouse's account as to the ease and leisure with
which the company traveled, referring to it as "probably the finest
train that had ever crossed the plains," and that there seemed to be
"about forty heads of families" (Life in Utah, p. 179). Major Carleton
confirms the party being a wealthy one. "This train," he remarks, "was
undoubtedly a very rich one. It is said the emigrants had nearly 900
head of fine cattle, many horses and mules, and one fine stallion valued
at $2,000; that they had a great deal of ready money besides."
(Carleton's Report to Major W. W. Mackall from Mountain Meadows, May
25th, 1859, Hand Book of Mormonism, pp. 67-69).
3. Tell It All, Mrs. Stenhouse, p. 325.
4. The Rocky Mountain Saints, Stenhouse. Stenhouse was an apostate "Mormon" and his book anti-"Mormon."
5. Vol. lv, p. 345. See Bancroft's History of Utah, pp. 544-5, note 3.
6. Brigham Young's Deposition, read and accepted in evidence at John D. Lee's second trial, September, 1876.
7. See Mountain Meadows Massacre, p. 7, by Elder (later in the apostles'
quorum and counselor in the first presidency) Chas. W. Penrose, 1884,
p. 7; also Bancroft's History of Utah, p. 547; also Tullidge in
Millennial Star, vol. xxxix, p. 785; see also Interview with President
Brigham Young, in New York Herald of May 6th, 1877, copied into Deseret
News of May 12, 1877. The interview is a very long one, and important
for the data it contains as to conditions in Utah at the time of the
massacre.
8. This, however, may have been mere bravado, as there is no evidence
beyond their reported boasts that they were connected with those events,
though, in addition to the above statement, both Laban Morrill and Joel
White testified that the emigrants were alleged to have boasted that
they had "killed old Joe Smith." (See the testimony of Morrill and White
at second trial of John D. Lee, September, 1876). Bancroft quotes Lee
as saying that the Arkansas emigrants had publicly boasted that they
"had the very pistol with which the Prophet Joseph Smith was murdered
and had threatened to kill Brigham Young and all the apostles." Lee
represents Isaac C. Haight as charging the emigrants with even more
serious offenses such as "that they had insulted, outraged and ravished
many of the Mormon women; that they had burned fences and destroyed
growing crops; that at many points on the road they had poisoned the
water springs; that it was their intention to return from California
with soldiers as soon as possible and they would then desolate the land
and kill every G—d—ed Mormon, man, woman and child, that they could find
in Utah," etc., etc. (See Bancroft's History of Utah, p. 549, note.
Mormonism Unveiled, Lee's Confession, pp. 218-219). It should be
remembered, however, that John D. Lee in his confession was seeking
excuses for his own atrocious deeds.
9. It must be remembered by the reader that at this time—summer of
1857—a force of United States troops were en route for Utah to suppress a
supposed rebellion against federal authority in Utah; and it was the
coming of these troops the emigrants referred to, and whom they
threatened to reinforce by joining those troops that were expected from
the southwest over Fremont's trail, to form a juncture with the eastern
force in demonstration against the "Mormons."
The quotations in the text of the history are from a letter addressed to
President Brigham Young, by Geo. A. Smith, dated at Parowan, August 17,
1858, about one year after the massacre occurred, and is recorded in
the History of Brigham Young, Ms., under the entry for Sept. 9th, 1857
(pp. 481-489), with the following explanatory note: "This is the day on
which it is reported that the horrible Mountain Meadows Massacre by the
Indians occurred [in reality it took place two days later], an account
of which was written in a letter from George A. Smith to President
Brigham Young, dated nearly a year after the terrible transaction." Then
follows the letter in full. George A. Smith at this time was the
representative to the council of the territorial legislature from the
council district in which the southern settlements were located; and it
was in the capacity of council representative that he conducted his
investigations, and made his report to Brigham Young. It is a most
valuable historical document on account of its having been written
within a year of the event which, in the main, it treats; and because it
represents the view of the massacre reported to Geo. A. Smith, which
those who had engaged in it were evidently desirous should be the
accepted version; and lastly on account of the high character of the
author of the letter, George A. Smith, and his official standing in the
community—member of the apostles' quorum in the church, church
historian, and member of the legislative council of the territory.
10. Rocky Mountain Saints, pp. 432-3. Though Stenhouse here quotes an
anonymous writer, "Argus," in the Corinne Reporter, a Gentile paper,
published at the town of Corinne, about fifty miles north of Salt Lake
City, yet Stenhouse vouches for him, knows who he is and holds that the
"Open Letter" of "Argus" to Brigham Young was written by one of such
standing as to make it worthy to be admitted into a serious history,
(The Rocky Mountain Saints, p. 430, note. See also for alleged treatment
of these emigrants by settlers, letter of Jas. H. Carleton, brevet
major first dragoons, U. S. A., from Mountain Meadows encampment, May
25, 1859, Hand Book of Mormonism, pp. 67-69, anti-"Mormon," a
compilation of miscellaneous documents).
11. See chapter xcix.
12. See Deposition of Brigham Young, received as evidence in the second
trial of John D. Lee, at Beaver, Sept., 1876, Court Record of the trial;
also affidavit of Geo. A. Smith. (Ibid). These documents are also to be
found in Mormonism Unveiled, where the Court Record of the second trial
of John D. Lee is given in large part, chapters xxi, xxii, and xxiii.
13. "What had they [the Arkansas emigrants] done * * * that a courier
should be sent ahead of them bearing your [Governor Young's] written
instructions to the Mormons, on said company's line of travel to have no
dealing or intercourse with them; thus compelling [condemning (?)] them
to almost certain starvation on the deserts." ("Argus," quoted by
Stenhouse, Rocky Mountain Saints, pp. 431-2-3).
14. See Smith's affidavit, second trial of Lee. "Deponent further saith,
that as an elder in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, he
preached several times on his way south, and also on his return, and
tried to impress upon the minds of the people the necessity of great
care as to their grain crops, as all crops had been short for several
years previous to 1857, and many of the people were reduced to actual
want, and were suffering for the necessaries of life.
Deponent further saith, that he advised the people to furnish all
emigrant companies passing through the territory with what they might
actually need for breadstuff, for the support of themselves and families
while passing through the territory, and also advised the people not to
feed their grain to their own stock, nor to sell to the emigrants for
that purpose.
Deponent further saith, that he never heard or knew of any attack upon
said emigrant train until some time after his return to Salt Lake City,
and that while near Fort Bridger he heard for the first time that the
Indians had massacred an emigrant company at Mountain Meadows." (See
also, in confirmation, affidavit of Jesse N. and Silas S. Smith, Court
Record of John D. Lee's first trial, July, 1875, and Deseret News of
Aug. 4th, 1875).
15. Affidavit, Brigham Young at Lee's first and also second trial, Court
Record; also Deseret News, for 4th Aug., 1875, where the deposition is
given at length. This deposition was presented at both the first and
second trial of Lee, but was only admitted at the second trial.
16. Court Record, Lee's first trial, testimony of Jesse N. Smith, Salt
Lake Tribune report of trial, pp. 33-34. Deseret News, August 4th, 1875.
17. Ibid. Silas Smith was equally prominent, with his brother, in both
the civic life of the territory of Utah, and in the ecclesiastical life
of the church. Elected to the territorial legislature in 1859, he served
almost continuously in the house and council for twenty years, much of
which time he was bishop of Paragoonah. In 1879 he led a party of
Pioneer settlers into what is now called San Juan county, southeastern
Utah, and founded the city of Bluff and other settlements. Subsequently
he removed to San Luis valley, Conejos county, Colorado, where a number
of Latter-day Saint settlements were being organized into a stake of
Zion, of which he was made the president; and in which capacity and for
the colonists he purchased some 20,000 acres of land at public sales,
and secured titles for the people, and established them in prosperous
settlements in the state of Colorado.
18. Elisha Hoops, who was a member of the Smith party when at Corn
Creek, testified at the first Lee trial that he heard the inquiry
respecting the likelihood of the Indians eating the dead ox; and also
testified that just as the party he was with was starting out in the
morning, he saw a German doctor traveling with the Arkansas train stick a
knife into the carcass of the dead ox in question in three places and
pour something in the cuts out of a vial. (See Court Record, testimony
of Elisha Hoops; also Deseret News of Aug. 4, 1875; see also a statement
of Historian George A. Smith under the title Account of the Mountain
Meadows Massacre, History of Brigham Young, Ms., entry for 25th of Nov.,
1864, pp. 879-883). On the other hand it is alleged that the poisoning
of dead cattle resulted from their having eaten a poisonous weed that
grows in southern Utah. Jacob Forney, who succeeded Brigham Young as
Indian agent for the territory, makes this as an explanation in his
report to the government and cites the case of the ox of Mr. Ray
(referred to by Geo. A. Smith in this chapter as being killed by
drinking from the springs poisoned by the emigrants) as being so killed
while the Arkansas emigrants were in the neighborhood of Corn Creek
(Senate Documents, 36th Congress, 1st Session, ii, No. 42, p. 76.
Forney's Report was made in September, 1859). It is further asked what
motive the Arkansas party could have for thus inviting the hostility of
the Indians. The only answer, if any, would be the general contempt in
which western emigrants held the Indians, the lightness in which they
regarded the act of taking their lives, culminating in that most
wretched of all aphorisms of the mountains and the plains—"The only good
Indian is a dead one."
19. Deseret News, Aug. 4, 1875.
20. There is some conflict in dates as to the time of the arrival of the
emigrants at the Meadows, and also as to the date on which the massacre
occurred. For instance, "Argus," whom Stenhouse quotes, places the time
of the massacre on the 15th of September, instead of the 11th. (Rocky
Mountain Saints, p. 431). And Josiah F. Gibbs, author of Lights and
Shadows of Mormonism, places the first attack upon the emigrants on the
19th of September (p. 223), saying, however, that the dates "are
somewhat mixed."
21. Court Record, second trial of John D. Lee, testimony of Laban Morrill.
22. The message he was to carry was read to Haslem by Isaac C. Haight,
then sealed up. The messenger carefully concealed it upon his person and
began his journey. (Haslem's affidavit, Mountain Meadows Massacre,
Penrose, p. 86).
23. See also affidavit of Haslem given 12th of January, 1885, before
Joseph Howell, notary public at Wellsville, Utah. Mr. Howell later was
representative to congress from the state of Utah. The testimony of
Haslem is not given at length in the court proceedings in the second
trial of Lee, but a synopsis only. See the court proceedings as reported
in Mormonism Unveiled, compiled and edited by Lee's counsel, William W.
Bishop, containing Lee's alleged confession and a full account of his
second trial. Haslem's testimony as recounted there stands as follows:
"James Haslem testified that he went as a messenger from Haight to
Brigham Young, and that Brigham Young sent back word that 'those men
must be protected and allowed to go in peace.' He got back with the
message Sunday after the massacre, and reported to Haight, who said, 'It
is too late.'" (Mormonism Unveiled, pp. 322-3). In the Deseret News
daily report of the trial while in progress, the synopsis of Haslem's
testimony was more extended and contained the words to be used presently
in the text. In consequence of the detailed testimony of Mr. Haslem not
being given in full in the Court Record, an attorney, S. A. Kenner,
Esq., took his testimony in the form of questions and answers on the
aforesaid 12th day of January, 1885, as above cited. The testimony will
be found in extenso as a Supplement to The Mountain Meadows Massacre, by
Charles W. Penrose, 1884.
24. Report of Lee trial, while it was in progress, Deseret News of Sept.
20th, 1876. Also Haslem affidavit, Supplement to Penrose's Mountain
Meadows Massacre, pp. 94, 95. Haslem also said he knew the contents of
the written answer. (News report, Ibid).
25. Church Business Letter Book, No. 3, above copied from original impression.
26. Haslem's testimony, Mountain Meadows Massacre, Supplement, p. 95.
Haslem's ride stands among the foremost of such achievements. He had
ridden over six hundred miles in six days, and largely through a
wilderness country.
27. See Haslem's affidavit, Ibid, p. 102. Joel White and Philip
Klingensmith were entrusted with this message to Pinto. En route they
met, near Cedar City, and going towards it, John D. Lee. They acquainted
him with the nature of their mission and message, to which Lee
answered: "I have something to say about that." (Testimony of
Klingensmith, at Lee's first trial, July, 1875, Court Record; and
testimony of Joel White at Lee's second trial, Court Record, September,
1876).
28. Lee says the first attack was made on Tuesday morning. (Confession,
Mormonism Unveiled, p. 226). Others place it on Monday morning, Sept.
7th. See Linn's Story of the Mormons, p. 521; Bancroft's History of
Utah, p. 550).
29. The following statement is from the report of Hon. George A. Smith,
to Brigham Young, on Aug. 17, 1858: "When the attack was made on the
emigrant party, the Indians sent out runners to the various bands in
every direction, to gather additional help. The news reached the
settlement at Cedar through that means. Ahwonup, the Piede chief at
Parowan, received an invitation to join the foray against the emigrants.
He went to Colonel Dame to tell him what he was going to do, upon which
the colonel succeeded in inducing him and the most of his warriors to
abandon the project." (History of Brigham Young, Ms., entry for 9th
Sept., 1857, pp. 481-9).
30. Lee's Confession, Mormonism Unveiled, p. 229.
31. Lee's Confession, Mormonism Unveiled, p. 235; also Lee's second
trial, Court Record, testimony of Jacob Hamblin. Lee states that two men
left the camp, Hamblin reports that Lee told him that there were three,
and that two escaped. (Ibid).
32. Nearly all anti-"Mormon" writers mentions as motive for "Mormon"
bitterness, or "animus" against the Arkansas company, the murder of
Elder Parley P. Pratt in Van Buren county, Arkansas, and name revenge
for his death as a motive for the crime at Mountain Meadows, Stenhouse
viciously and wickedly saying, in this connection, that "the Indian is
not the only human being who fails to discriminate between the innocent
and the guilty." (Rocky Mountain Saints, p. 428). And even Bancroft
attributes "Mormon" "disfavor" for the Arkansas company to "the murder
of a well-beloved apostle of the Mormon church." (History of Utah, p.
545). Yet there is not a scintilla of evidence that justifies in the
remotest manner any such suggestion, much less any such conclusion.
Elder Pratt was killed on the 13th of May, near the line, between Indian
territory and the state of Arkansas, and on which side of it is not
quite certain, and while news of his death had reached Salt Lake City
before the departure southward of the Arkansas company, no particulars
of that sad event were known in Utah, as the eastern mail service
between Independence and Salt Lake City had been suspended for several
months; and there were no feelings of revenge existing in Utah against
Arkansas citizens on account of the Pratt murder. Equally vain are the
attempts to connect the Mountain Meadows tragedy with alleged threats
made by Brigham Young in his conversation with Captain Van Vliet, and
with which Bancroft's chapter on the massacre opens. In that
conversation Brigham Young said: "If the government persists in sending
an army to destroy us, in the name of the Lord, we shall conquer them.
If they dare to force the issue, I shall not hold the Indians by the
wrist any longer, for white men to shoot at them; they shall go ahead
and do as they please. If the issue comes, you may tell the government
to stop all emigration across this continent, for the Indians will kill
all who attempt it." (History of Brigham Young, Ms., entry for 9th of
September, 1857). This conversation is said by Bancroft to have occurred
upon the 9th of September, two days later the massacre, over three
hundred miles distant, took place. "In the absence of telegraph and
railroads it would be impossible," Bancroft concedes, "to execute a deed
three hundred miles away in two days." But as a matter of fact this
Young-Van Vliet interview, in which the above statement occurs, took
place on Sunday, the 13th of September, two days after the massacre at
Mountain Meadows. (See Woodruff's Journal, Ms., entry for 13th
September, 1857). Brigham Young's words to Captain Van Vliet constituted
a warning instead of a threat.
33. There is some conflict as to the number of men who escaped the first
assault. Lee says three escaped, but Indians were put upon their trail
and they overtook and killed them (Mormonism Unveiled, p. 244). Forney
reports that three escaped, but they were overtaken and killed. (Senate
Documents, 36th Congress, 1st Session, ii, No. 42, p. 89). Cradlebaugh
says two escaped and fled to the desert, but were followed and finally
overtaken and killed, one of them 150 miles from the Meadows.
(Congressional Globe, Appendix, 37th Congress, 1862-3, p. 123). Burton
condensing from official reports tells of three escaping from the first
assault, but being taken and killed. (City of the Saints, p. 340, note).
34. See Bancroft's History of Utah, pp. 557-8, and Forney's Report in
Senate Documents, 36th Congress, 1st Session, ii, No. 42, passim,
Appendix, p. 123. Relative to the charge made by some anti-"Mormon"
writers that the children were ill-cared for and poorly clad by the
people who had charge of them in Utah, it is only necessary to quote
Forney's report on this point: "It is proper to remark that when I
obtained the children they were in a better condition than children
generally in the settlements in which they lived." (Senate Documents,
36th Congress, 1st Session, ii, No. 42, pp. 87, 89). All the official
reports deny the charge that the children were left in the custody of
the Indians.
35. Letter of Major James H. Carleton to Major W. W. Mackall, assistant
adjutant general, U. S. A., San Francisco, Cal., from Mountain Meadows,
date of May 25, 1859, Hand Book of Mormonism, p. 67, et seq. "The
property of the emigrants was taken to Cedar, where it was put up at
public auction and sold." (Report of Captain R. P. Campbell to Major F.
J. Porter, Senate Documents, 36th Congress, 1st Session, vol. ii, p.
208). Hon. George A. Smith's report to Brigham Young states concerning
the conduct of the Indians in seizing upon the emigrant property that on
the arrival of Colonel Haight at the Meadows he found "the Indians were
pillaging and destroying the property, and driving off the cattle in
every direction; each one endeavoring to secure to himself the most
plunder, without respect to others. When they had secreted one back load
in the hills, they returned and got another, thus continuing with the
most unremitting energy till everything was cached." (History of Brigham
Young, Ms., 1857, pp. 481-9).
36. Carleton's Report. Also Life in Utah, Beadle, p. 184, and Stenhouse
in Rocky Mountain Saints, p. 452; and Cradlebaugh's speech,
Congressional Globe, 37th Congress, 3rd Session, Appendix, p. 123.
37. Court Record, second Lee trial, Sept., 1876, Deposition of Brigham Young.
(Source: B. H. Roberts, A Comprehensive History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Vol. 4:139-159)
RESPONSIBILITY for the Mountain Meadows Massacre is a subject of gravest
importance. About two weeks after the tragedy, being urged thereto by
Isaac C. Haight, John D. Lee visited Salt Lake City to report what had
been done at Mountain Meadows to Governor Young. According to Lee's
statement, he made a full report of all that had been done. [1]
According to Governor Young's deposition at the second trial of Lee, he
(Governor Young) refused to hear the story in detail. [2]
Wilford Woodruff was present at this interview, and at the time set down
in his most excellent daily journal what took place, and this may be
relied upon as being more accurate than anything that would be
remembered in subsequent years. Following is his record of the
interview:
"29th [September, 1857]. We have another express in this morning, saying
that the army are rapidly marching towards us, will soon be at Bridger,
and they wish men immediately sent out. Elder John D. Lee also arrived
from Harmony with an express and an awful tale of blood. A company of
California emigrants, of about 150 men, women and children, many of them
belonging to the mob in Missouri and Illinois, had been massacred. They
had many cattle and horses with them. As they traveled along south,
they went damning Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball and the heads of the
church, saying that Joseph Smith ought to have been shot a long time
before he was. They wanted to do all the evil they could, so they
poisoned beef and gave it to the Indians, and some of them died. They
poisoned the springs of water, several of the saints died. The Indians
became enraged at their conduct and they surrounded them on the prairie,
and the emigrants formed a bulwark of their wagons, and dug an
intrenchment up to the hubs of their wagons, but the Indians fought them
five days until they killed all the men, about sixty in number. They
then rushed into their corral and cut the throats of the women and
children, except some eight or ten children which they brought and sold
to the whites. They stripped the men and women naked and left them
stinking in the boiling sun. When Brother Lee found it out he took some
men and went and buried their bodies. It was a horrid, awful job. The
whole air was filled with an awful stench. Many of the men and women
were rotten with [unnameable disease] before they were hurt by the
Indians. The Indians obtained all the cattle and horses and property,
guns, etc. There was another large company of emigrants who had 1,000
head of cattle, who was also damning both the Indians and the 'Mormons.'
They were afraid of sharing the same fate, and Brother Lee had to send
interpreters with them to the Indians to help save their lives, while at
the same time they were trying to kill us. We spent most of the day in
trying to get the brethren ready to go to the mountains [i. e. brethren
going out to resist the approach of Johnston's army]. Brother Brigham
while speaking of the cutting of the throats of women and children by
the Indians down south, said that it was heart-rending; that emigration
must stop, as he had before said. Brother Lee said that he did not think
there was a drop of innocent blood in their camp, for he had two of the
children in his house, and he could not get but one to kneel down in
prayer-time, and the other would laugh at her for doing it, and they
would swear like pirates. The scene of blood has commenced, and Joseph
said that we should see so much of it that it would make our hearts
sick." [3]
From this statement of Woodruff's Journal, as also from President
Young's own deposition in which he states that he refused to hear Lee's
story in detail, it is clear that Brigham Young, unfortunately, as I
think, did not then get the full account of the great crime. Also it is
to be noted that John D. Lee most likely was not anxious to tell the
whole story of white men's presence and responsibility in the massacre,
as he had to be "urged" by Isaac C. Haight to report the affair to
Brigham Young at all, although Lee was the local Indian agent, and
Haight had no connection with that department. It is quite evident from
Woodruff's account of the interview of Lee and Governor Young that the
former did not report any white men as being connected with or
responsible for the massacre.
It appears from all the circumstances that it was the intention of the
white men engaged in the tragedy to place the responsibility for it upon
the Indians. This is emphatically the assumption of the formal report
made by George A. Smith to President Young in 1858, about one year after
the event; as will be observed from the following letter which I quote
entire because of the civil and ecclesiastical standing of its author;
for he was not only one of the apostles' quorum in the church, but also
he was a member of the legislature—to the council—from the district in
which the unfortunate affair had occurred; and his letter was in the
nature of a report from a member of such "council district."
LETTER OF GEORGE A. SMITH TO PRESIDENT BRIGHAM YOUNG
"Parowan, Aug. 17, 1858.
President Young,
Dear Sir:—I have recently canvassed the precincts in my council
district. I have been enthusiastically received, and listened to by the
people, with seeming pleasure. I have gathered some information in
relation to the difficulties between the emigrants and Indians, which
terminated in the horrible massacre at Mountain Meadows.
It appears that the emigrants, who passed over this route last fall,
conducted themselves in a hostile manner towards the Indians, as well as
the citizens. While at Fillmore they threatened the destruction of the
town, and boasted of their participation in the murders and other
outrages that were inflicted upon the 'Mormons' in Missouri and
Illinois.
While camping at the sink of Corn Creek, fifteen miles beyond Fillmore,
they poisoned the springs and the body of an ox which had died. The
carcass of the ox was eaten by a band of Piedes from the desert, who
were on a visit to the Pahvantes.
I was informed, by the people living at Meadow Creek, the nearest
settlers to Corn Creek, that ten Indians died from eating this poisoned
meat, and that a considerable number of cattle also died from the
poisoning of the water. Some of these cattle were fat and the owners
"tried them up" to save the tallow. A son of Mr. Robinson, of Fillmore,
was poisoned from the handling of the meat, and died. Among the cattle
that died of the poison, were some belonging to the Hon. John A. Ray. He
being in Europe, Mrs. Ray attended to the saving of the tallow and was
so poisoned as to endanger her life, and permanently injure her hand.
This party of emigrants consisted of some fifty or sixty men. They were
attacked in the fore part of September by Indians, near what is called
the 'Cane Spring,' about forty-five miles beyond Cedar City, which was
the most southern settlement of any importance on the way to California.
While passing through the lower settlements the emigrants boasted of
their participation in the expulsion of the 'Mormons' from Missouri, and
threatened to stop at some convenient point, and fatten their stock,
that when the United States troops should arrive, the emigrants would
have plenty [of] beef to feed them with, and would then help to kill
every 'God damned Mormon' that there was in the mountains.
This course of conduct on their part, coupled with the rumor which they
spread, that some four or five hundred Dragoons were expected through on
the Fremont trail, whom they would join, caused them to be regarded by
the settlers with a feeling of distrust.
When the attack was made upon the emigrant party, the Indians sent out
runners to the various bands in every direction, to gather additional
help. The news reached the settlement at Cedar through this means.
Ahwonup, the Piede chief at Parowan, received an invitation to join the
foray against the emigrants. He went to Colonel Dame, to tell him what
he was going to do, upon which the colonel succeeded in inducing him and
most of his warriors to abandon the project.
At this time another company of emigrants fired upon a party of
Pahvantes in the neighborhood of Beaver, some thirty-five miles north of
Parowan, and wounded one of them. This occurrence created so much
excitement among the Pahvantes of that region, that they were determined
to exterminate those emigrants, which was only prevented by a
detachment of militia sent from Parowan, by Colonel Dame, who effected a
compromise with the Indians, and guarded that company safely from that
place to the Vegas, some three hundred miles.
No news of the attack at the Mountain Meadows had reached Parowan except
the Indian rumor, until it was too late for Colonel Dame to take any
measures to relieve the company, which was some sixty miles distant.
On the 6th of September I understand that rumor reached Cedar that the
emigrant train had been attacked in camp by the Indians at Mountain
Meadows, that several of the emigrants and Indians had been killed and
others wounded, and that more Indians were gathering from various parts
in considerable numbers, being very much exasperated
Immediately upon the arrival of this intelligence, Major Haight
dispatched some interpreters to conciliate the Indians. The interpreters
left Cedar the same evening, and when they arrived the next day at the
scene of the difficulty, they found the Indians in a state of intense
excitement, in consequence of the killing and wounding of some of their
men. The interpreters sought to conciliate them, but they threatened
them with death if they did not either leave immediately, or turn in and
help them, accusing them of being friendly to the emigrants, or
'Mericats,' as they called them. The Indians said that if the
interpreters attempted to go to the emigrants' camp, they would kill
every one of them. Finding that their services could avail the emigrants
nothing, the interpreters returned to Cedar, after a ride of some 80
miles on the same animals, and dallying most of the day with the
Indians, and reported the condition of the camp.
On the 9th Major Haight, with a party of about 50 men, started from
Cedar City to endeavor to relieve the emigrants, and arriving at
Mountain Meadows the next morning, found the Indians had killed the
entire company, with the exception of a few small children, who were
with difficulty obtained from them. The Indians were pillaging and
destroying the property and driving off the cattle in every direction;
each one endeavoring to secure to himself the most plunder, without
respect to the others. When they had secreted one back load in the
hills, they returned and got another, thus continuing with the most
unremitting energy, till everything was cached.
Major Haight and party found the bodies of the company stripped of their
clothing, and scattered along the road for half a mile. The party
obtained a few spades from a ranch about six miles distant, and buried
the dead as well as they could, under the circumstances. The ground was
hard, and the party being destitute of picks, and having but a limited
number of spades, the pits could not be dug to a very great depth.
From the appearance of the camp ground the wagons, previous to the
attack were scattered promiscuously, but the emigrants, upon being
attacked, gathered most of them into a close circle, inside of which
they dug two rifle pits.
It appears that on the 9th the Indians withdrew from the siege; that,
towards evening, the emigrants left their camp and started back towards
Hamblin's ranch, and that after proceeding about half a mile and one
(sic!), they were again attacked and slain except the children above
mentioned.
It is reported that John D. Lee, and a few other white men were on the
ground during a portion of the combat, but for what purpose, or how they
conducted themselves, or whether, indeed, they were there at all, I
have not learned.
It is supposed that there were upwards of two hundred warriors engaged
in this massacre. A large number of the emigrants were killed with
arrows, the residue with bullets, the Indians being armed with guns, as
well as bows and arrows.
The Indians also killed some horses and a large number of cattle which
lay scattered over the plain. This was probably done in accordance with
their custom requiring a sacrifice to be sent along with their departed
warriors.
Some sixteen or eighteen children were preserved from death, and placed
in the charge of families, where they were well cared for. The prejudice
that these emigrants had themselves excited during their passage
through the territory, contributed not a little to inspire in the minds
of the people an indifference as to what the Indians might do, but
nobody dreamed of or anticipated so dreadful a result. There were not a
dozen white men living within thirty miles of the spot where this
transaction occurred; and they were scattered, two or three in a place,
herding cattle. Mr. Hamblin, the nearest settler, was in Great Salt Lake
City at the time, and the stock at his ranch was in the custody of his
children and two or three Indian boys.
It was the impression of Major Haight that the interpreters would
succeed in bringing about a compromise to enable the emigrants to buy
the Indians off. For the citizens to have attacked and killed the
Indians, in defense of the emigrants, would have been little less than
suicide, as you are well aware of the exposed condition of the southern
settlers, and the annoyance to which the Indians, who had been subjected
for many years by emigrants killing them, as they passed through the
Indian country.
I have been told that since this transaction many of the Indians who had
previously learned to labor have evinced a determination not to work,
and that the moral influence of the event upon the civilization of the
Indians has been very prejudicial.
Considerable improvements have been made in every settlement, except
Cedar, during my absence from this district. The failure of the iron
company to make iron satisfactorily has caused a large number of the
operatives in that department to seek employment elsewhere, thereby much
reducing the population of that city.
I have given you the substance of the information I have received from
various individuals during my canvass, and I regret exceedingly that
such a lamentable occurrence should have taken place, within the limits
of this territory.
Your friend and well wisher,
[Signed] "Geo. A. Smith." [4]
Three things in this semi-official communication, apart from the general
implication and assumption that the deed of which it treats was
altogether the work of the Indians, and those three things tend to
disprove the main idea in the report that the massacre was the sole work
of the Indians: These are, first, that "sixteen or eighteen children
were preserved from death." This is not customary for Indians to do in
war or in their murders; they do not spare children—especially of
uniformly young age, as in this case; that was not the act of savages.
Second, the demoralizing effect the massacre had upon the Indians:
"Since the transaction [i. e. massacre] many of the Indians who had
previously learned to labor have evinced a determination not to work; * *
* the moral influence of the event upon the civilization of the Indians
has been very prejudicial!" Inevitable consequence! For they had seen
that their white neighbors, instructors in industry, had been capable of
an act of treachery and savagery equal to their own, even if not more
treacherous and murderous. Surely there could be no more white man's
moral and spiritual influence over the red men after what the latter had
witnessed at Mountain Meadows! Third, the cautious admission that
"report" gave it out that John D. Lee and some other white men were
present at the affair: "It is reported that John D. Lee and a few other
white men were on the ground during a portion of the combat, but for
what purpose, or how they conducted, or whether indeed they were there
at all, I have not learned." This a year after the crime was
perpetrated; and is the only indication from the whole report that white
men were present at the massacre! But previous to this, and "soon
after" the event, the presence of Lee and other white men at the
massacre and even somewhat of their participation in it had been made
known in Salt Lake City.
TESTIMONY OF JACOB HAMBLIN
Jacob Hamblin, a reputable witness, testified at the second Lee trial
that "soon after it [the massacre] happened," he reported to Brigham
Young and George A. Smith what Lee had told him of the affair; of the
part that white men had taken in it; and that in greater detail than he
had given it, or was able to give in his testimony in court, because he
then more clearly remembered it; and that Brigham Young said to him that
"as soon as we can get a court of justice we will ferret this thing
out, but till then, don't say anything about it." [5] All this seems to
have been forgotten in the Smith "report."
It must be remembered that at the time of Hamblin's report everything
was in a state of chaos in Utah; an army was within the borders of the
territory on the east, the purpose of which was not clearly known; the
territory was under martial law by proclamation of the governor de
facto, Brigham Young; and the people were making preparations for the
destruction of their settlements and another flight into the wilderness.
Hamblin makes an important statement in his biography respecting the
action of Governor Young in regard to this tragedy, locating the
incident to be related as happening "soon after the United States Army
had entered Salt Lake valley;" and the army entered the valley on the
26th of June, 1858.
Following is the incident which occurred:
ATTITUDE OF GOVERNOR CUMMING ON THE MATTER OF INVESTIGATING THE MASSACRE
"It is generally known that the enemies of the Latter-day Saints have
accused them of shielding from justice the white men, who, it was
supposed, joined with the Indians in the Mountain Meadows Massacre. Mr.
Cumming succeeded President Brigham Young as governor of Utah territory
in the early spring, before the arrival of the United States army in
Salt Lake valley.
President Brigham Young requested Elder George A. Smith to have an
interview with the new governor, and learn his views concerning the
Mountain Meadows Massacre, and assure him that all possible assistance
would be rendered the United States courts to have it thoroughly
investigated.
Brother Smith took me with him, and introduced me as a man who was well
informed regarding Indian matters in southern Utah, and would impart to
him any information required that I might be in possession of. He also
urged upon Governor Cumming the propriety of an investigation of this
horrid affair, that, if there were any white men engaged in it, they
might be justly punished for their crimes.
Governor Cumming replied that President Buchanan had issued a
proclamation of amnesty and pardon to the 'Mormon' people, and he did
not wish to go behind it to search out crime.
Brother Smith urged that the crime was exclusively personal in its
character, and had nothing to do with the general officers of the
territory, and, therefore, was a fit subject for an investigation before
the United States courts.
Mr. Cumming still objected to interfering, on account of the president's proclamation.
Brother Smith replied substantially as follows: 'If the business had not
been taken out of our hands by a change of officers in the territory,
the Mountain Meadows affair is one of the first things we should have
attended to when a United States court sat in southern Utah. We would
see whether or not white men were concerned in the affair with the
Indians.'" [6]
PRESIDENT YOUNG'S OWN ANSWER TO ALLEGED DELAY OF ACTION IN THE CASE
The reasons for Brigham Young not acting more promptly and vigorously in
the matter, and the general conditions then prevailing in the territory
are thus stated by himself in his deposition admitted in evidence at
the second Lee trial:
"Twelfth Question—Why did you not, as governor, institute proceedings
forthwith to investigate that massacre, and bring the guilty authors
thereof to justice?
Answer—Because another governor had been appointed by the president of
the United States, and was then on the way to take my place, and I did
not know how soon he might arrive, and because the United States judges
were not in the territory. Soon after Governor Cumming arrived, I asked
him to take Judge Cradlebaugh, who belonged to the southern district,
with him and I would accompany them with sufficient aid to investigate
the matter and bring the offenders to justice."
PRESIDENT YOUNG'S REPORT TO THE INDIAN DEPARTMENT
It is often charged that Brigham Young made no report of this massacre
to the government; he at least made such report of it as John D. Lee, in
his capacity as farmer to the Indians in the locality where the event
occurred, sent to him in writing. Governor Young had made a report on
general conditions and current accounts to the Indian department at
Washington on Sept. the 12th, 1857. Lee supplemented his verbal report
to Governor Young—already considered,—by a written one from Harmony, his
home in Iron county, under date of November 20th, 1857, in which the
Lee version of the massacre was given.
The written report of Lee so far as it relates to the Arkansas company of emigrants is as follows:
"HARMONY, WASHINGTON CO., U. T., November 20th, 1857.
To His Excellency Governor B. Young, Ex-Officio and Superintendent of Indian Affairs:
DEAR SIR:—My report under date, May 11th, 1857, relative to the Indians
over whom I have charge as farmer, showed a friendly relation between
them and the whites, which doubtless would have continued to increase
had not the white mans (sic!) been the first aggressor, as was the case
with Captain Fancher's company of emigrants, passing through to
California about the middle of September last, on Corn Creek, fifteen
miles south of Fillmore City, Millard county. The company there poisoned
the meat of an ox, which they gave the Pahvant Indians to eat, causing
four of them to die immediately, besides poisoning a number more. The
company also poisoned the water where they encamped, killing the cattle
of the settlers. This unguided [sic!] policy, planned in wickedness by
this company, raised the ire of the Indians, which soon spread through
the southern tribes, firing them up with revenge till blood was in their
path, and as the breach, according to their tradition was a national
one, consequently any portion of the nation was liable to atone for that
offense.
About the 22nd of September, Captain Fancher and company fell victims to
their wrath, near Mountain Meadows; their cattle and horses were shot
down in every direction, their wagons and property mostly committed to
the flames." [7]
Then in an official letter to Hon. James W. Denver, commissioner of
Indian affairs, Washington City, D. C., under date of January 6th, 1858,
Governor Young as superintendent of Indian affairs, quoted as follows
from Lee's report:
"'About the 22nd of September, Captain Fancher & Co. fell victims to
the Indians' wrath near Mountain Meadows. Their cattle and horses were
shot down in every direction; their wagons and property mostly committed
to the flames."
This quotation the governor followed by the following comments:
"Lamentable as this case truly is, it is only the natural consequence of
that fatal policy which treats the Indians like the wolves, or other
ferocious beasts. I have vainly remonstrated for years with travelers
against pursuing so suicidal a policy, and repeatedly advised the
government of its fatal tendency. It is not always upon the heads of the
individuals who commit such crimes that such condign punishment is
visited, but more frequently the next company that follows in their
fatal path become the unsuspecting victims, though peradventure
perfectly innocent." [8]
THE PASSAGE OF "DUKE'S TRAIN" THROUGH UTAH UNDER MILITIA PROTECTION
Following the ill-fated Arkansas company, came one several days later of
about the same size, captained by a man of the name of——-Duke, and
hence it was known as "Duke's Train." They had some trouble with the
Indians near Beaver. Lee's written report to Governor Young, which
mentions the Mountain Meadows affair—quoted above—states that Duke's
company "had many of their [the Indians] men shot down near Beaver City;
[9] and had it not been for the interposition of the citizens at that
place, the whole company [Duke's] would have been massacred by the
enraged Pahvantes." From this place they were protected by military
force, by order of Colonel W. H. Dame, through the territory, besides
providing the company with interpreters, to help them through to the Las
Vegas. On the Muddy, some three to five hundred Indians attacked the
company, while traveling, and drove off several hundred head of cattle,
telling the company that if they fired a single gun that they would kill
every soul. The interpreters tried to regain the stock, or a portion of
it, by presents, but in vain. The Indians told them to mind their own
business, or their lives would not be saved. "Since that occurrence no
company has been able to pass without some of our interpreters to talk
and explain matters to the Indians." [10]
Hon. George A. Smith also reports this second company:
"At this time [i. e., about the time of the massacre] another company of
emigrants fired upon a party of Pahvantes in the neighborhood of
Beaver, some thirty-five miles north of Parowan, and wounded one of
them. This occurrence created so much excitement among the Pahvantes of
that region, that they were determined to exterminate those emigrants,
which was only prevented by a detachment of militia sent from Parowan by
Colonel Dame who effected a compromise with the Indians, and guarded
that company safely from that place to the Vegas, some three hundred
miles." [11]
This company is also spoken of by Jacob Hamblin, and he it was who
selected the interpreters to go with the emigrants through the Indian
country. The Indian tribes on the Muddy, however, taxed Duke's company
heavily in cattle for the otherwise peaceful passage through their
country, taking from them four hundred and eighty head, but the company
continued its journey in safety to California, while the two
interpreters, "Brothers Knight and Leavitt," who had safely conducted
them beyond danger, returned to the Santa Clara settlements. "As soon as
possible,' says Hamblin's Narrative, "I talked with the principal
Indians engaged in this affair, and they agreed that the stock not
killed should be given up. I wrote to the owners in California, and they
sent their agent, Mr. Lane, with whom I went to the Muddy, and the
stock was delivered to him as the Indians had agreed." [12]
Still later in the autumn of 1857, Hamblin piloted safely through the
southern Indian country a company made up chiefly of merchants who had
been doing business in Salt Lake City; but who, not desiring to be
involved in the difficulties between the "Mormons" and the United
States, then pending, were now fleeing to the eastern states via
California and the Isthmus of Panama. The company carried with them a
letter from Brigham Young to Hamblin directing him to see that the
company was safely conducted to California, which was done. [13]
FORNEY'S REPORT ON WHITE MEN BEING RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MASSACRE
When the new United States judiciary for the territory of Utah, who,
with Alfred Cumming as governor of the territory, were finally installed
in their offices; [14] and when through the investigation of Indian
Agent Jacob Forney he reported that "the massacre in question was
concocted by white men and consummated by whites and Indians," it could
but follow that the judiciary would seek to bring to judgment the guilty
parties, notwithstanding the attitude assumed by Governor Cumming in
refusing to investigate the matter as represented by Jacob Hamblin, and
President Young. Accordingly Judge Cradlebaugh, to whom was assigned the
southern judicial district, and who held his first term of court at
Provo, opening on the 8th of March, 1859, called the attention of the
grand jury he impannelled to the Mountain Meadows Massacre and also to
some other homicides that had been committed at Springville, in Utah
county. "To allow these things to pass over gives a color as if they
were done by authority," said the judge significantly and accusingly;
and then added:
"The very fact of such a case as that of the Mountain Meadows shows that
there was one person high in the estimation of the people, and it was
done by that authority; and this case of the Parrishes [The Springville
homicides] shows the same; and unless you do your duty, such will be the
view that will be taken of it. You can know no law but the laws of the
United States and the laws you have here. No person can commit crimes
and say they are authorized by higher authorities, and if they have any
such notions they will have to dispel them." [15]
This was proceeding upon an unwarranted assumption, and of course gave
offense. The grand jury not moving with that alacrity in these matters
that the impatience of the judge demanded, after two weeks in session,
and while still in deliberation, they were summoned into court, roundly
lectured by his honor and summarily discharged "as an evidently useless
appendage of a court of justice." [16] The judge announced that the
court would "think of the propriety of venireing another grand jury,"
and concluded as follows:
"When this people [meaning the Mormons] come to their reason, and
manifest a disposition to punish their own high offenders, it will be
time to enforce the law also for their protection. If this court cannot
bring you to a proper sense of your duty, it can at least turn the
savages in custody loose upon you." [17]
The grand jury failing to indict according to the suggestions of the
judge of the district, the court proceeded to issue bench warrants based
upon sworn information, and the United States marshal for the territory
aided by a military posse made some arrests of parties charged with
committing the Springville homicides, and doubtless a like policy was
intended to be pursued with reference to the perpetrators of the
Mountain Meadows Massacre.
In the evident furtherance of such a project Judge Cradlebaugh, after
closing his term of court at Provo, accompanied by a small detachment of
United States troops, commanded by Captain Reuben P. Campbell, and by a
deputy marshal, visited the southern part of the territory, including
the Santa Clara valley, Mountain Meadows, Cedar City and all the
surrounding settlements. En route the judge met the Indian Agent Forney
returning from his investigations, with the surviving children of the
massacre. Forney gave to Judge Cradlebaugh the names of a number of
white men reported to be prominent in the affair at the Meadows. The
judge and his deputy marshal made inquiries among the Indian tribes of
the Santa Clara, and of the people at Cedar, and surrounding
settlements, with the result that a formidable list of the names of men
prominent in military, civil, and ecclesiastical life were enrolled as
being connected with the tragedy. [18] At this juncture, however,
Captain Campbell's command was recalled by the commanding General A. S.
Johnston, as by instruction from the war department at Washington, "the
services of the army in connection with the civil affairs of this
territory—are to be invoked only to assist in the 'execution of the
sentences of the law, or the judicial decrees of the court;' and then
only on the written application of the governor when the service of a
civil posse are found to be insufficient." [19] This put an end to the
judge's overzealous civil-military activities as associate justice of
Utah. He soon afterwards was appointed over the judicial district that
included Carson valley, where he became one of the prime movers in the
creation of the territory of Nevada from the western half of Utah, and
was twice elected delegate to congress from the new territory; and in
the national house of representatives continued his anti-"Mormon"
attacks upon the leaders of the Church of the Latter-day Saints in the
matter of the Mountain Meadows affair. [20]
Of this Cradlebaugh effort to probe into the Mountain Meadows affair,
Agent Forney, who, earlier in the summer of 1859, had been zealous in
the support of Judge Cradlebaugh, [21] in a letter to the commissioner
of Indian affairs at Washington, in August, wrote:
"I fear, and I regret to say it, that with certain parties here there is
a greater anxiety to connect Brigham Young and other church dignitaries
with every criminal offense than diligent endeavor to punish the actual
perpetrators of crime." [22]
That continued to be the sentiment of those who manifested any interest
in the matter of the Mountain Meadows affair; but fourteen years will
pass away before another official agitation of the matter occurs, and
eighteen years before the most conspicuous leader in that horrible crime
is led to the Mountain Meadows by officers of the law and the death
sentence of the court executed upon him at the scene of his great crime.
[23] Of all those who participated in the massacre he alone was brought
to execution. How meager the retribution in this world when weighed
against the repulsive perfidy practiced against those emigrants, and the
largeness of the crime!. But the end is not yet—"the murderer hath
never forgiveness:" "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, saith the Lord;"
[24] and in his own time and way he will doubtless be the minister of
his own retribution. "Some men's sins are open before hand, going before
to the judgment, and some men they follow after." [25] This much, and
only this need to be said here, both in respect of this great crime of
the Mountain Meadows and of other deeds of blood perpetrated in those
troubled, and unsettled years of Utah's history, [26]n men's worst
passions were highly wrought upon by memories of past injustice, and by
threatening portents of oppression yet to come—of all this it will be
enough to say, let the finger of accusation point at whom it may, and
the just verdict of history pronounce guilty whom it will, this much I
hold to be clear, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints bears
no stain, and carries no responsibility for bloodshed at any time or any
place. Her law was announced from the beginning, by the Son of God,
saying:
"Behold, I speak unto the church. Thou shalt not kill; and he that kills
shall not have forgiveness in this world, nor in the world to come. And
again I say, thou shalt not kill, but he that killeth shall die. * * *
And it shall come to pass, that if any person among you shall kill, he
shall be delivered up and dealt with according to the laws of the land;
for remember that he hath no forgiveness, and it shall be proven
according to the laws of the land." [27]
Such the law of the church, and whosoever has violated that law of God
or whosoever shall violate it in the future, he and not the church which
forbids his wickedness, is responsible to God and to the laws of the
land for his crime. And when Brigham Young said to Jacob Hamblin, after
he had listened to the latter's report of the part Lee and other white
men had taken in the crime, "As soon as we can get a court of justice,
we will ferret this thing out, but until then don't say anything about
it;" [28] when later Brigham Young sent Jacob Hamblin and George A.
Smith to Governor Cumming—as already detailed in this chapter, to "learn
his views concerning the Mountain Meadows Massacre, and assure him that
all possible assistance would be rendered to United States courts to
have it investigated;" [29] when Brigham Young, soon after Governor
Cumming arrived in Utah, went to him and "asked him to take Judge
Cradlebaugh, who belonged to the southern district, with him," and that
he [Brigham Young] would also "accompany them with sufficient aid to
investigate the matter and bring the offenders to justice"—when
President Young did these several things he had up to that time
fulfilled his moral obligations to the church and to the state.
In 1870, through some representations made by Elder Erastus Snow and
Bishop L. W. Roundy, who had been meantime investigating the crime of
the Mountain Meadows, President Brigham Young became convinced of the
absolute responsibility of John D. Lee in that affair. Also of Isaac C.
Haight's responsibility for failing to restrain Lee and to take prompt
action against him, since he was Lee's superior officer in the church.
These representations were made to President Brigham Young on the
occasion of his visit to the southern settlements in the aforesaid year
of 1870; and on his return to Salt Lake City the matter was taken up at
the meeting of the twelve apostles, the facts laid before them, and
"President Young himself proposed, and all present unanimously voted, to
excommunicate John D. Lee and Isaac C. Haight." "President Young gave
instructions at that time that John D. Lee should, under no
circumstances, ever be again admitted as a member of the church." [30]
Later, when some of the accused were before the secular court, and Lee
was tried and found guilty, Sumner Howard, the prosecuting attorney, in
closing his plea in the case against Lee, said:
"He had had all the assistance any United States official could ask on
earth in any case. Nothing had been kept back, and he was determined to
clear the calendar of every indictment against any and every actual
guilty participator in the massacre, but he did not intend to prosecute
any one that had been lured to the Meadows at the time, many of whom
were only young boys and knew nothing of the vile plan which Lee
originated and carried out for the destruction of the emigrants." [31]
The report of the deed, at the time it was committed, sent a thrill of
horror through the whole community of Utah, and when later developments
compelled the belief that white men had taken the leading part in the
betrayal and murder of the emigrants, sorrow, humiliation and a sense of
shame prevailed. Perhaps the best description of the attitude of mind,
and the sentiments of the Latter-day Saints towards this most
unfortunate, pitiful and disgraceful affair, was voiced by the late
President John Taylor when he said:
"I now come to the investigation of a subject that has been harped upon
for the last seventeen years, [this in 1874] viz: The Mountain Meadows
Massacre. That bloody tragedy has been the chief stock in trade for the
above named time, for penny-a-liners, the press, and pulpit, who have
gloated in turns, and by chorus, over the sickening details. Do you deny
it? No. Do you excuse it? No. There is no excuse for such a relentless,
diabolical, sanguinary deed. That outrageous infamy is looked upon with
as much abhorrence by our people as by other parties, in this nation or
in the world; and at its first announcement, its loathing recital
chilled the marrow and sent a thrill of horror through the breasts of
the listeners. It was most certainly a horrible deed; and like many
other defenseless tragedies, it is one of those things that cannot be
undone. The world is full of deeds of crime and darkness; and a question
often arises, who is responsible therefor? It is usual to blame the
perpetrators. It does not seem fair to accuse nations, states and
communities of deeds perpetrated by some of their citizens, unless they
uphold it." [32]
And this the Latter-day Saints have never done with respect of this
masacre at Mountain Meadows, or other homicides which unhappily have
been committed in their communities.
NOTE
A FANCHER INCIDENT
Elder Orson F. Whitney, author of a four volumned History of Utah also
the author of A School History of Utah, under the title The Making of a
State, very kindly prepared for the writer of this History the following
statement of a "Fancher Incident," which shows that family prejudice
even may not always blind men to truth.
STATEMENT BY ELDER ORSON F. WHITNEY
"On the 24th and 25th August, 1912, in company with Elder Joseph W.
McMurrin, I attended the Latter-day Saint Big Horn stake conference,
held at Cowley, Wyoming. During one of the meetings connected with the
conference a young man named Fancher, who I believe was clerk of the
stake, was invited to the stand to address the congregation. He was
about to resign his office, and remove to California, and this was his
farewell address to the Latter-day Saints in Big Horn, with whom he had
been identified as a member of the church for several years. He had come
from Arkansas originally, and in Davis county, Utah, had fallen in with
a 'Mormon' family who were about moving to Wyoming. He accompanied
them, and subsequently married a 'Mormon' girl, became a convert to her
faith, and rendered valuable service as a member of that stake. He was a
relative of Captain Fancher, who was killed at Mountain Meadows in
1857, and at one time had shared the bitter prejudice felt by the family
toward the 'Mormon' people. He had become convinced, however, that the
church was in no way responsible for the awful affair at the Meadows,
and that the people, excepting a few hot-headed zealots, who had joined
with the Indians, were innocent of any participation in the crime. His
conversion to the gospel was genuine. His father, on learning what he
had done, disowned him, accounted him as one dead, and would not have
his name mentioned in his hearing. Young Fancher wept at this point in
his recital, and the whole congregation was visibly affected. He went on
to say that he was not leaving because he had lost his faith; it was
stronger than ever, and he hoped to continue faithful to the end. But
his father, who now lived in California had softened toward him and had
sent for him, needing his help in the management of his property. As
none of his brothers were willing to go, he felt it his duty to rejoin
his father and be with him in his declining years. He therefore resigned
his office and parted regretfully from his many friends in that stake.
It was evident that he was held in high esteem by the authorities and
the people in general, whose good wishes, he was assured, would follow
him to his new place of residence."
Footnotes
1. Lee's Confession in Mormonims Unveiled, p. 252.
2. From the Deposition of Brigham Young, second trial of John D. Lee,
1876. Ninth Question: Did John D. Lee report to you at any time after
this massacre what had been done at that massacre, and if so, what did
you reply to him in refrence thereto?
Answer: Within some two or three months after the massacre he called at
my office and had much to say with regard to the Indians, their being
stirred up to anger and threatening the settlements of the whites, and
then commenced giving an account of the massacre. I told him to stop, as
from what I had already heard by rumor, I did not wish my feelings
harrowed up with a recital of details." (Court Record, the second Lee
trial, Sept., 1876, Deposition of Brigham Young).
3. Woodruff's Journal, Sept. 29, 1857.
4. History of Brigham Young, Ms., entry for Aug. 17, 1858, pp. 929-937.
5. Court Record, Lee's second trial, testimony of Jacob Hamblin.
6. Jacob Hamblin, A Narrative of His personal Experiences, edited by James A. Little, 1881, pp. 56-7.
7. From Lee's Report, Mormonism Unveiled, p. 255. The faulty diction of the original is followed.
8. These reports of Brigham Young are published at length in the Court
Records, second trial of John D. Lee, Sept., 1876, also in Mormonism
Unveiled, pp. 302-16; these letters also appear in House Executive
Documents, 35th Congress, 1st Session, vol. x, No. 71. For interesting
incident in connection with a member of the Fancher family, see Note end
of chapter.
9. Evidently Lee reported what rumors had brought to him of this
incident; George A. Smith reports, as will be seen by a paragraph in his
letter (ante), that the Beaver shooting resulted in only one Indian
being wounded.
10. Lee's written report to Governor Young, from Harmony, under date of Nov. 20th, 1857.
11. History of Brigham Young, Ms., entry Sept. 9, 1857, pp. 481-89.
12. Jacob Hamblin, A Narrative of his Personal Experiences, etc., p. 47.
13. Jacob Hamblin, etc., ch. vii.
14. The new judiciary were D. R. Eckles, of Indiana, chief justice;
Charles E. Sinclair and John Cradlebaugh, associate justices; Alexander
Wilson, of Iowa, was United States attorney for the territory, and Peter
K. Dotson, Marshal.
15. Judge Cradlebaugh to the Grand Jury, the charge is published in full in Deseret News of March 16th, 1859.
16. The words are from Judge Cradlebaugh's speech in the house of
representatives, February 7th, 1863, Congressional Globe, 37th Congress,
3rd Session, Appendix, p. 122. Judge Cradlebaugh subsequently to being a
judge in Utah, went to Nevada to live, from which newly made territory
he was elected to be territorial delegate, and hence his speech in
congress.
17. The remarks of Judge Cradlebaugh to the grand jury are published at
length in Deseret News of March 30, 1859, and as corrected from a
stenographic report by Mr. J. V. Long. Stenhouse says, "the grand jury
would not have listened to such language had there been no foundation
for the accusations" (Rocky Mountain Saints, p. 408). The fact is the
grand jury did not listen to the judge without protest. "A remonstrance
signed by the grand jury without a dissenting voice against Judge
Cradlebaugh's unprecedented course in peremptorily and vindictively
discharging them when about consummating the business before them," says
the editor of the News, in a note immediately following the full
statements of Judge Cradlebaugh to the jury, "was presented;" it appears
in the same impression of the News as the Editorial. (vol. ix, p. 28).
Besides Stenhouse's quotation from Judge Cradlebaugh in which he
censures the jury for not resenting, were not addressed to the grand
jury, but were the summing up of the evidence in the Springville murder
cases. (Stenhouse's Rocky Mountain Saints, p. 408; cf., Deseret News,
impression of April 6th, 1859, Court Record).
18. Judge Cradlebaugh claims that while at Cedar City he "was visited by
a number of apostate Mormons," who gave him "every assurance that they
would furnish an abundance of evidence in regard to the matter, as soon
as they were assured of military protection." "While there;" he also
says, "I issued warrants on affidavits filed before me for the arrest of
the following named persons; Jacob [Isaac C.] Haight, president of the
Cedar City stake; Bishop John M. Higbee, and Bishop John D. Lee [Lee
never was, at any time or place, a "Mormon" bishop, though he was an
"elder," and had presided over a small settlement or branch of the
church], Columbus Freeman, William Slade, John Willis, William Riggs,——
Ingram, Daniel McFarlan, William Stewart, Ira Allen and son, Thomas
Cartwright, E. Welean, William Halley, Jabez Nomlen, John Mangum, James
Price, John W. Adair,—— Tyler, Joseph Smith, Samuel Pollock, John
McFarlan, Nephi Johnson,—— Thornton, Joel White,—— Harrison, Charles
Hopkins, Joseph Flang, Samuel Lewis, Sims Matheny, James Mangum,
Harrison Pierce, Samuel Adair, F. C. McDulange, William Bateman, Ezra
Curtis, and Alexander Loveridge. (Congressional Globe, 37th Congress,
3rd Session, Appendix, p. 123).
19. For Campbell's Report, see Senate Documents, 36th Congress, 1st
Session, vol. ii, No. 56, p. 190; also No. 64, pp. 205-208; also
Cradlebaugh's speech, 37th Congress, 3rd Session, Appendix, p. 123.
20. See his speeches in the 37th Congress, passim; and especially in 3rd Session, Congressional Globe, Appendix, p. 119, et seq.
21. See his letter to General Johnston, May 1st and June 15th, 1859,
Senate Documents, 36th Congress, vol. ii, pp. 172-73. See also his
letter to Judge Elias Smith in Deseret News of May 11th, 1859; in which
he says of the Mountain Meadows Massacre: "I deem it my imperative duty
to say that the Indians had material aid and assistance from whites; and
in my opinion, the Pi-Ute Indians would never have perpetrated the
terrible massacre without such aid and assistance. Mr. Hamblin and
others, of Santa Clara, expressed much anxiety to bring the guilty to
justice."
22. Senate Documents, 36th Congress, 1st Session, ii, No. 2, p. 86; also quoted by Bancroft's History of Utah, p. 561.
23. Lee was executed on the 23rd of March, 1877.
24. Rom. xii:19. These were the words which Major James H. Carleton
caused to be inscribed upon a rude wooden cross he erected above the
cairn that marked the burial place of the Arkansas emigrants; but which
later was destroyed either by some vandal's hand or the ruthless ravages
of time; the cross has fallen and nothing now marks the resting place
but the ruck of stones, placed above the common grave of the emigrants
by United States troops some two years after the massacre (see Report of
Charles Brewer, ass. surgeon U. S. A., to Captain R. P. Campbell,
Senate Documents, 36th Congress, 1st Session, vol. ii, pp. 206-7; Judge
Cradlebaugh's speech, in the 37th Congress, 3rd Session, Congressional
Globe, Appendix, p. 123). The destruction of this inscription is
unjustly connected by the judge with President Young's first visit to
southern Utah after it was erected, (1861), (Ibid). It is also said that
when Brigham Young read the inscription on that occasion, he "changed
the purport of its language, and said to those around him that it should
read thus: 'Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord, and I have repaid!'"
(Stenhouse's Rocky Mountain Saints, p. 453; see also Woodruff's Journal,
entry for May 25, 1860).
25. I Tim., v:24.
26. This has reference to some homicides committed at Springville in
Utah county, in March, 1857. The victims were members of the Parrish
family, and the deed was committed on the eve of the intended departure
of the family for California. Also to the killing of the Aiken party, in
1857. The party received its designation from two brothers of the name
of Aiken, who, with four other men, were returning from California to
the eastern states. Four of the party were arrested in southern Utah as
"spies," and en route for Salt Lake City via Nephi the party was
attacked at night; two were killed outright, the other two, though
wounded, made their way to Nephi, whence they started for Salt Lake, but
were killed on their way at Willow Springs. The remark of the text also
has reference to all other homicides committed in 1857, and in all
antecedent years; whatever was done in that kind was done on the
responsibility of the guilty individuals; and in all subsequent years,
whatever was done stands upon the same footing. The law of God has not
lodged the right of capital punishment with the church. Even where there
is a church trial had, and proof given of the worthiness of death, at
that point it becomes the duty of the church to turn over those guilty
of offenses worthy of death to the law of the land, to be dealt with
according to that law, and through its ministers. What the law of God
does not auhorize the church to do, it has not authorized individuals to
do.
27. Doctrine and Covenants, sec. xlii. This revelation was given Feb. 9th, 1831.
28. Court Record, Hamblin's testimony at Lee's second trial, Sept.,
1876. It must be remembered that then, late in 1857, and early in 1858, a
United States army was within the northeastern borders of the
territory, and "the United States judges were not in the territory,"
(Deposition of Brigham Young, see Court Record, second Lee trial, Sept.,
1857).
29. Jacob Hamblin, A Narrative of His Personal Experiences, etc., etc., p. 57.
30. See affidavit of Erastus Snow under date of 21st February, A. D.
1882, Mountain Meadows Massacre, Penrose, pp. 67, 68. Some mitigating
circumstances subsequently were learned respecting Haight's
responsibilities in the matter of not restraining Lee, and he was
restored to church fellowship.
31. Second Lee trial, 1876, Court Record, also Deseret News of Sept. 27th, 1876.
32. From a series of letters to the Deseret News on "Utah and the Mormons," 1874, impression of April 15th, of that year.
(Source: B. H. Roberts, A Comprehensive History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Vol. 4:160-180)
1891-January 9-Typewritten letter, Church Historian's Library;
also Der Stern 21:97-116
(April 1, 1891).
This document or article is an answer to a series of articles which had
appeared in the magazine, Illustrated American. The author of the
articles (seemingly unsigned) claimed to be a "Mormon." Wilford
Woodruff, as President of the Church, points out the historical
inaccuracies and plagiarisms in the articles. The articles and President
Woodruff's reply devote considerable space to the Mountain Meadows
Massacre.
Salt Lake City, Utah, January 9th, 1891.
Editor Illustrated American:
My attention has been called to articles in your magazine of December
27th and January 3rd concerning the "Mormon" Church. I have neither the
time nor the inclination to notice the numerous misstatements and vile
aspersions that frequently appear in the public prints in reference to
the "Mormons." They have been common for more than half a century, and
the later productions are chiefly mere echoes of the falsehoods refuted
years ago. There is nothing new in the articles that have been published
in the Illustrated American, except this: The writer claims to be a
Mormon, "the oldest Mormon in the Rocky Mountains;" to have been
connected with the "Mormon" Church for nearly sixty years; to be a
resident of this city now; to relate true "Mormon" History, and to
express the present views and intentions of the "Mormon" people. Thus
the old untruths and the current misrepresentations in reference to our
people are presented under a new guise, and that which might pass
unnoticed if published in the ordinary way or over the signature of the
compiler, is likely to attract attention and obtain credence because it
purports to be written by a "Mormon." This is why I devote some
attention to these articles.
That the person who has gathered from various sources scraps of
purported "Mormon" history, fragments of supposed "Mormon" doctrine and
figments of imaginary "Mormon" sentiment, is not and never was a member
of the "Mormon" Church, and that his whole pretension is false, is
evident to every one familiar with the subjects which he attempts to
treat.
In professing to relate how Nauvoo was settled, he speaks of "how Joseph
Smith, our leader, became possessed of a large tract of land in Hancock
County, Ill." and says, "The angel who revealed it to him bade him call
the city Nauvoo, which he said meant "The Beautiful."
When the place on which Nauvoo was built was first occupied by the
"Mormons," it was called Commerce, and at that time Joseph Smith,
instead of becoming possessed of this "large tract of land," was
suffering illegal imprisonment in the State of Missouri. It was never
claimed that an angel revealed the place to him. It was offered to the
Saints who had fled from their inhuman persecutors in Missouri, by the
owner, and was purchased and paid for in an ordinary business manner. No
"Mormon" would make the mistake that is here conspicuous.
He states that he was in the jail at Carthage with Joseph Smith and his
brother Hyrum when they were assassinated. That he put his head out of
the window and watched to see if there were signs of life in the man he
loved. That he expected to be shot the next moment, etc. It is a matter
of undisputed history that when Joseph and Hyrum Smith were murdered,
only two other persons were present in the prison where the attack was
made. They were Willard Richards, who died March 11, 1854, and John
Taylor, who died July 25, 1887. Their accounts of the tragedy have been
published many times since 1844 and the words used by this pretended
"Mormon" are the identical language of Dr. Willard Richards.
This plagiarist betrays himself in an equally conspicuous manner in his
account of the exodus from Nauvoo and the enlistment of the Mormon
Battalion at Winter quarters. It is stolen bodily from the celebrated
lecture of Gen. Thos. L. Kane before the Historical Society of
Pennsylvania which has been in publication for forty years.
He states that Col. Steptoe was in command of troops sent to the Mormon
capital at the time of the famous so-called "Mormon war," in which, by
the way, not one drop of human blood was shed. No Mormon or person
acquainted with Utah history could fall into such a blunder. Col.
Steptoe's visit occurred many years before, was of a pacific and civil
character, and he gave due credit to Governor Brigham Young and the
people here for their fidelity to the government and their peaceful and
industrious life. He also recommended the reappointment of Brigham Young
as Governor of Utah.
This pretended "Mormon," forgetful of some facts he previously
presented, says in his second article that, "every member of the
Territorial Legislature is a high dignitary of the Church; all local and
municipal government is under the same control; and thus it comes to
pass that, in America, a church absolutely governs a Territory."
The truth is that no high dignitary of the Church occupies a seat in the
Legislative Assembly; that no polygamist can hold any office or vote at
any election in Utah; that eight members of the last Assembly were
"Gentiles"; that Salt Lake, Ogden and Park cities are entirely
controlled by non-Mormon" municipal officers; that instead of the Church
governing the Territory, the Governor, the Judges, the Prosecuting
Attorney and other territorial officers as well as the postmasters, are
appointed by the United States Government, and that even the
registration officers and judges of elections are appointed by a
Commission appointed itself by the President and Senate of the United
States. No "Mormon" would so misstate the situation, because this
anti-republican condition of affairs is a constant source of "Mormon"
complaint, and no well informed anti-Mormon would commit such a palpable
error which the writer himself refutes in the sixth chapter of his
first contribution.
Minor inaccuracies still further prove the compiler of these articles to
be a person unfamiliar with actual "Mormon" life, however diligent he
may have been in culling anti-Mormon literature. He speaks of "The
United Order of Orderville" as a present organization, when it has not
existed for many years. He quotes a notice issued over forty years ago
in this city by a Bishop long since deceased, as being now posted in all
the settlements. He says that in each town, besides the ward bishops
there is a Presiding Bishop, which is not true. He entirely
misrepresents the functions of the Ward Teachers, and by many erroneous
references shows that his statement that he is "a Mormon of nearly sixty
years standing" is transparent and wilful fraud and deception.
This of itself should, in the eyes of all reasoning readers, vitiate his
entire contribution to the literature of the day. But there are some
statements artfully interwoven with the fabric of his story which
require specific refutation. Others may be dismissed with a general
denial. He puts remarks into the mouth of the late President Brigham
Young and other Elders of the Church, which they never uttered,
attributes acts to them which they never performed, repeats stories that
are taken from anti-Mormon works as though they were utterances of his
own, and expresses sentiments as entertained by the "Mormons" which are
entirely foreign to their belief and feelings and intentions. These all
lead up to the vain object of the articles-that is to deceive the
American public and foster the latest scheme for the disfranchisement of
the monogamic "Mormon" people, by conveying the ideas that polygamy is
still taught and entered into in Utah, that the Church dominates the
state, and that the "Mormons" are under military discipline and ready to
fight against the Government.
To this end the oft-refuted and spurious story of the Mountain Meadows
massacre is told, as fabricated by Utah romancers, and the Blood
Atonement fiction is reproduced after the style of the dime novelist. As
to the former, while the general public believe that the tragedy was
perpetrated under the sanction, if not by the direction, of Brigham
Young, the evidence elicited at the trial which resulted in the
conviction of John D. Lee, demonstrated the entire disconnection of
President Young and the Church over which he presided, with the awful
occurrence that has been so widely misrepresented for evil purposes. The
United States District Attorney officially and publicly announced this
at the trial. He declared he had received all the aid he could ask for
from the Church authorities to get at the root of the matter, and the
accused was convicted of murder by a jury composed principally of
members of the Mormon Church.
It is a fundamental doctrine of our creed that a murderer cannot be
forgiven; that he "hath not eternal life abiding in him"; that if a
member of our Church, having received the light of the Holy Spirit,
commits this capital crime, he will not receive forgiveness in this
world nor in the world to come. The revelations of God to the Church
abound in commandments forbidding us to shed blood. There are no people
living who have a greater horror of this offence against the law of God
and of man than the Latter-day Saints, commonly; but erroneously, called
"Mormons." This Church was no more responsible for the massacre at
Mountain Meadows than any Christian Church is for the atrocities that
may be committed by persons professing to be its members. It is but just
to the memory of President Brigham Young to say that the evidence
against his complicity with this dreadful crime, as accessory either
before or after the fact, is abundant, convincing and complete.
It is part of our faith that the only atonement a murdered can make for
his "sin unto death" is the shedding of his own blood, according to the
fiat of the Almighty after the flood: "Whoso sheddeth man's blood by man
shall his blood be shed." But the law must be executed by the lawfully
appointed officer. This is "blood atonement," so much perverted by
maligners of our faith. We believe also in the atonement wrought by the
shedding of Christ's blood on Calvary; that it is efficacious for all
the race of Adam for the sin committed by Adam, and for the individual
sins of all who believe, repent, are baptized by one having authority,
and who receive the Holy Ghost by the laying on of authorized hands.
Capital crime committed by such an enlightened person cannot be condoned
by the Redeemer's blood. For him there is "no more sacrifice for sin";
his life is forfeit, and he only can pay the penalty. There is no other
blood atonement taught, practiced or made part of the creed of the
Latter-day Saints.
We do not believe, as stated by the pretended "Mormon," that divulging
the secrets of the Endowment House, marital unfaithfulness on the part
of the wife, leaving the Mormon Church, are unpardonable, or that "the
only atonement that can be made for any of these offences is the
atonement of blood." The statement that "this doctrine is part of our
duty" is another proof that the writer is not a "Mormon," and that he
does not understand, or else that he wilfully misrepresents the faith
which he pretends to explain.
The connection drawn between this alleged doctrine and the murders
committed at Mountain Meadows, also proves the falsity of the claim that
the writer is a "Mormon," and demonstrates his misapprehension of his
own subject. The company that fell victims to Indian ferocity and white
vengeance and rapacity were not "Mormons." They had revealed no secrets,
they had not left the Church, they had done nothing to justify their
slaughter, even on the false theory of Blood Atonement copied by the
writer in the American from old newspaper fiction. This should be
evident even to the casual reader.
Another statement is equally absurd and obviously untrue. Speaking of
the Mormons said to have participated in the massacre, he says: "Some of
them are alive today. They nod to me familiarly on the streets of Salt
Lake City, and I nod back to them. The United States Government knows
who they are, knows what they have done; and yet it has never dared to
arrest them or interfere with them." This is as great a libel on the
officers of the United States entrusted with the enforcement of the law,
as it is upon the Mormon people. The whole machinery of the courts
judges, juries, prosecutors and peace officers, also the municipal
government and its police, are in the hands of anti-Mormons, who would
all be eager to punish a participator in that crime, and most of whom
would be glad to avail themselves of the opportunities for slander and
excitement which a revival of this dead issue would afford. The nonsense
of his statement, then, is only equaled by its falsehood, and in
attempting once more to make it appear that he is a "Mormon" he only
affords one more proof of his imposture.
As to the power and disposition of the Mormons to fight and the
necessity of a resort to arms he is equally ridiculous and erroneous.
There has been no militia, either Mormon or Gentile, in the Territory
for more than twenty years. There are no Mormons under arms. There has
been no drilling or military training. Peace and equal rights with other
American citizens is all that the Mormons desire. They do not believe
they will be required to handle the weapons of war. They have profound
faith that God will fight their battles. There is not the slightest
whisper of a carnal conflict among them. There is no pretext for a
collision between the Mormons and the government. The only dispute that
has arisen of late years between them was a question of law. That has
been settled by the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States
and the action of the Church in general conference. Plural marriage has
been judicially decided to be unlawful. The Church has accepted the
decision as legally final, and by my official advice as President of the
Church has in the most solemn and authoritative manner decided not to
enter into any marriages in future that are contrary to the laws of the
land.
What folly then for this assumed "Mormon" to say: "We must fight or we
must perish." "We would rather die than give up this article of our
creed." And what absurdity to say, "In every endowment house in Utah
plural marriages are being secretly celebrated today." There never was
but one endowment house in Utah and that, by my orders, was taken down
in 1889. If the temples are meant by that term, I say most emphatically
the statement is false, and that no plural marriages are or have been
celebrated in Utah, to my knowledge or that of any of my associates for
some years. And I cannot conceive how they could be performed without my
sanction and official consent.
I object to the publication of the articles in the ILLUSTRATED AMERICAN,
chiefly on the ground that they pretend to be written from a "Mormon"
standpoint, and that thus the public are misled and the people whom I
represent are correspondingly injured. For, while objections might
reasonably be made to the many misrepresentations those articles
contain, yet they are principally old stories retold, and they have been
often disproved. But when they are attributed to a "Mormon" source,
their falsehood becomes doubly shameful, and they can only be
characterized as cowardly and contemptible.
The editorial remarks that have accompanied them follow the line and
lead to the end they have in view. They credit the Mormons with lives
which are "models of decorum," yet they assert that the Mormons
massacred men, women and children at Mountain Meadows. The same people
who are held up to admiration for their honesty, truth, and fidelity to
their religion, are accused of "a policy of deception" and while
yielding to the demands made upon them at a great sacrifice of feeling,
they are charged with defying the government, "flinging down the
gauntlet," and wanting and preparing to fight.
All this is a libel upon the Latter-day Saints. They have no such
belligerent feelings or intentions. They are not deserving of the
imputations cast upon their veracity. They intend to obey the law and
sustain good government. They revere the Constitution of our country and
desire to promote republican institutions. They are under no Church
obligations or restrictions which interfere with their perfect freedom,
whether in politics or in business. Their faith is different from that
of the orthodox sects and they claim the right to worship as they choose
without hindrance from any earthly power, while conceding that right to
all who differ with them. If any one of their number violated the law,
he is amenable to the law. But a community should not be condemned for
the unapproved wrongful acts of individuals. That our views on the
subject of civil government as it relates to religion may be understood,
I quote from the Doctrine and Covenants of the Church, which with the
Bible and the Book of Mormon forms our standard of religious principle:
"We believe that religion is instituted of God, and that men are
amenable to him, and to him only, for the exercise of it, unless their
religious opinions prompt them to infringe upon the right and liberties
of others; 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; that 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 judgment are best calculated to secure the
public interest, at the same time, however, holding sacred the freedom
of conscience.
"We believe that every man should be honored in his station: rulers and
magistrates as such, being placed for the protection of the innocent,
and the punishment of the guilty; and that to the laws, all men owe
respect and deference, as without them peace and harmony would be
supplanted by anarchy and terror; human laws being instituted for the
express purpose of regulating our interest as individuals and nations,
between man and man, and divine laws given of heaven, prescribing rules
on spiritual concerns, for faith and worship, both to be answered by man
to his Maker. ...
"We do not believe it just to mingle religious influence with civil
government, whereby one religious society is fostered, and another
prescribed in its spiritual privileges, and the individual rights of its
members as citizens denied.
"We believe that all religious societies have a right to deal with their
members for disorderly conduct according to the rules and regulations
of such societies, provided that such dealings be for fellowship and
good standing; but we do not believe that any religious society has
authority to try men on the right of property or life, to take from them
this world's goods, or to put them in jeopardy of either life or limb,
neither to inflict any physical punishment upon them; they can only
excommunicate them from their society, and withdraw from them their
fellowship."
The following are the articles of faith of the Church as published for
many years, and re-affirmed and adopted at the last general conference:
"1. We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.
2. We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam's transgression.
3. We believe that, through the atonement of Christ, all mankind may be
saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.
4. We believe that these ordinances are: First, Faith in the Lord Jesus
Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the
remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the Gift of the Holy
Ghost.
5. We believe that a man must be called of God, by "prophecy, and by the
laying on of hands," by those who are in authority, to preach the
Gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof.
6. We believe in the same organization that existed in the primitive
church, viz: apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, etc.
7. We believe in the gift of tongues, prophecy, revelation visions, healing, interpretation of tongues, etc.
8. We believe the Bible to be the word of God, as far as it is
translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the Word
of God.
9. We believe all that God has revealed, all that he does now reveal,
and we believe that he will yet reveal many great and important things
pertaining to the Kingdom of God.
10. We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration
of the ten tribes. That Zion will be built upon this continent, that
Christ will reign personally upon the earth, and that the earth will be
renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory.
11. We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the
dictates of our conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let
them worship how, where, or what they may.
12. We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers and magistrates, in obeying, honoring and sustaining the law.
13. We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and
in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the
admonition of Paul, "We believe all things, we hope all things;" we have
endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there
is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report, or praiseworthy, we
seek after these things.-JOSEPH SMITH."
I am eighty three years old. I expect before very long to meet my Maker
and give account for my earthly acts and words. In view of this I
testify before God and all mankind that the foregoing articles of faith
and discipline are the true doctrines of our Church, that God has
established that Church by revelation and has given authority to His
servants to administer its ordinances, and that it will prevail against
the errors and forces which are used for its destruction. But its
weapons are not carnal, it claims no civil authority, it wields no
political domination, and it seeks no quarrel with any earthly
government. All men and all nations are responsible to the Almighty for
their acts, and with Him I am willing to leave the issue between us and
our enemies and defamers. WILFORD WOODRUFF. President of the Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
(Source: Messages of the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 3: 210)
Emigrant trains in Utah
While the Army of the United States was approaching the territory of
Utah, a courier rode posthaste into Salt Lake City. He had covered the
three hundred miles from Cedar City in three days. As James Haslam stood
before President Young he recounted a story and delivered a message
which caused that beloved leader grave concern and galvanized him into
action.
During this period of Utah's history there was a constant string of
emigrant trains passing through the territory on their way to
California. The feeling between such emigrants and the Saints was not
always a wholesome one. The emigrants often entered the territory with a
deep-seated prejudice against the Mormons. Often these companies
contained Missourians who had taken part in driving the Saints from that
State. Toward these, some of the Mormons could not help feeling
resentful and suspicious.
These emigrant trains did much to antagonize the Indians throughout the
territory. Easterners generally did not share the feeling of
brotherliness toward the Red Man which the Mormons had manifested. They
looked upon them as little higher than animals and often fired upon them
without provocation. Indians entering their camps for peaceful trading
were often treated badly, and some Indians were wantonly killed. This
aroused the anger of the Indian tribes. This was especially true
throughout the southern settlements. The ire of the white settlers was
also aroused. The Indians had been difficult to control before, but now
it became impossible to control them.
A crisis in feeling was reached during the time that a large company of
Arkansas emigrants were on their way to California via southern Utah, in
1857. This company contained a group of Missourians who styled
themselves the "Missouri Wildcats." Their spirit seemed to dominate the
caravan. They boasted openly of having helped to oust the Mormons from
Missouri and Illinois; that they were going to return and help the Army
which was approaching Utah to exterminate the Saints.
The evidence concerning their actions in passing through the southern
settlements is so conflicting that it is difficult to determine the
entire truth. Among the charges against them was the assertion that they
had poisoned a dead ox, which caused the death of a number of Piute
Indians who ate it. It was also alleged that they had poisoned the
springs, causing the death of a number of cattle, and illness to the
settlers who attempted to save the fat of the animals.
The Indians were thoroughly aroused. All the accumulated insults of the
many caravans caused them to seek vengeance. To the Indian mind all
whites except the Mormons belonged to one tribe, the "Mericats." Their
law demanded blood vengeance against any of the offending tribe.
Ordinarily the influence of the settlers was exerted to keep the peace,
and at any cost prevent an attack upon emigrant trains. At this time it
appears that this restraint was not used. Many of the whites were goaded
by the taunts of the "Missouri Wildcats," and by their depredations to a
point of extreme bitterness.
On the sixth of September, while the emigrant train was making an
extended camp on "Mountain Meadows," forty miles southwest of Cedar
City, a council of leading Saints was held in Cedar City. It was decided
that a messenger should be sent to Brigham Young, acquainting him with
the situation. James Haslam, of Cedar City, was that messenger.
After reading the message Haslam brought, Governor Young asked him if he
could stand the return journey. He was answered in the affirmative.
After several hours' sleep he mounted his horse for the return ride. As
the President handed him an unsealed answer, he said:
"Go with all speed; spare no horse flesh. The emigrants must not be
meddled with, if it takes all Iron County to prevent it. They must go
free and unmolested." [1]
In the instructions Haslam carried back to Isaac C. Haight of Cedar City we read:
"In regard to emigration trains passing through our settlements we must
not interfere with them until they are notified to keep away. You must
not meddle with them. The Indians we expect will do as they please, but
you should try and preserve good feeling with them." [2]
Haslam arrived at Cedar City on September 13, having made the remarkable
ride of over six hundred miles in six days. As Isaac C. Haight: read
the message he burst into tears and said:
"Too late, too late!"
"The Massacre," added Haslam, "was all over before I got home." [3]
The Mountain Meadows Massacre
Mountain Meadows is a narrow valley five miles in length, situated three
hundred and twenty miles south and a little west of Salt Lake City. It
is on the plateau which forms the southern rim of the Great Basin. The
Arkansas and Missouri emigrants, in the first week of September, 1857,
went into encampment in the south end of the valley near a spring.
Several hundred Indians gathered in the vicinity, and at break of day on
September 8 or 9 commenced an attack upon the emigrants. The attack was
repulsed and the emigrants "dug in" for a siege.
The Indians, meanwhile, sent runners to the neighboring tribes to gather
warriors. A number of white men also arrived upon the scene of
conflict.
It was a deliberately planned massacre, treacherously carried into
execution. On the morning of September 11, a flag of truce was sent to
the emigrant camp and terms of surrender proposed. The emigrants were to
give up their arms. The wounded were to be loaded into wagons, followed
by the women and children, and the men to bring up the rear, single
file. Thus they were to be conducted by the whites to Cedar City. This
was agreed to, and the march began.
A short distance from the encampment, the white men at a given signal,
fell upon the unarmed emigrant men. At the same time hundreds of
Indians, who had lain in ambush, rushed upon the hapless party. In five
minutes the terrible tragedy was enacted. Only three men escaped the
first deadly assault. These were pursued by the Indians and killed. Only
the smallest children were spared. These were taken into the homes of
settlers and cared for. Later the United States government provided a
fund to gather the children and transport them to relatives in Arkansas
and Missouri and to an orphanage in St. Louis.
Responsibility of the Tragedy
News of the Mountain Meadows' Massacre was a shock to the leaders of the
Church, and brought a deep and sincere sorrow to the entire territory.
Unfortunately, no thorough investigation to bring the perpetrators to
justice was held until twenty years later. George A. Smith was sent by
Brigham Young to investigate the affair and made formal report to
Brigham Young in 1858. By that time Brigham Young had relinquished all
civil authority to his successor, Governor Cumming. John D. Lee, the
Indian Agent, in his report of Indian affairs to the government, gave
his own story of the tragedy, but the government did not order an
investigation.
Brigham Young urged Governor Cumming to investigate the charge of white
men participating in the massacre. In 1876, Brigham Young said on the
witness stand:
"Soon after Governor Cumming arrived, I asked him to take Judge
Cradlebough, who belonged to the southern district, with him and I would
accompany them with sufficient aid to investigate the matter and bring
the offenders to justice." [4]
Governor Cumming, in the face of settling the difficulties of the "Utah
War" and the pardoning of offenders against the United States
Government, made no move to prosecute any participant in the crime.
An attempt was made by non-Mormons to hold Brigham Young responsible for
the tragedy. Judge Cradlebough took the lead in that attack and made an
attempt, in 1859, to probe into the affair. Of this effort, Forney, the
Indian agent, reported:
"I fear, and I regret to say it, that there is with certain parties a
greater anxiety to connect Brigham Young and other Church dignitaries
with every criminal offence than diligent endeavor to punish the actual
perpetrators of crime." [5]
For the deed at Mountain Meadows there is no excuse. The perpetrators
were never held guiltless by the Church and the Church must not be
condemned because of the vile deeds of a few of its members. The law of
the Church was announced from the beginning by the Son of God:
"Behold, I speak unto the Church. Thou shalt not kill; and he that kills
shall not have forgiveness in this world, nor in the world to come. And
again I say, thou shalt not kill, but he that killeth shall die. * * *
And it shall come to pass, that if any person among you shall kill, he
shall be delivered up and dealt with according to the laws of the land;
for remember that he has no forgiveness, and it shall be proven
according to the laws of the land." [6]
NOTES
1. Report of Lee trial. Deseret News, September 10, 1876. Also Penrose, , pp. 94-95.
2. Church Business Letter Book, No. 3. See Roberts, Comprehensive History of the Church, Volume 4, pp. 150-151.
3. Haslam's testimony, Penrose, , Supplement, p. 95.
4. Court Report, second Lee trial, 1876. See Roberts, Comprehensive History of the Church, Volume 4, p. 168.
5. Senate Documents, 36th Congress, 1st Session, No. 2, p. 86. See also, Bancroft, History of Utah, p. 561.
6. Doctrine and Covenants, Section 42.
(Source: William E. Berrett, The Restored Church, [Deseret Book, 1953], 470.)