Utah Historical Quarterly, Volume 55, Number 1, 1987

CO QO

<

O

T h e Frontier aicqacv

UTAH HISTORICAL QUARTERLY ^ ( I S S N 0042-143X) EDITORIAL

STAFF

M A X J . EVANS, Editor STANFORD J . LAYTON, Managing Editor MIRIAM B . MURPHY, Associate Editor

ADVISORY BOARD OF EDITORS KENNETH L . CANNON II, Salt Lake City, 1989 ARLENE H . EAKLE, Woods Cross, 1987

PETER L . GOSS, Salt Lake City, 1988 GLEN M . LEONARD, Farmington, 1988 ROBERT S . M C P H E R S O N , Blanding, 1989 RICHARD W . SADLER, Ogden, 1988

HAROLD SCHINDLER, Salt Lake City, 1987 GENE A. SESSIONS, Bountiful, 1989

GREGORY C . THOMPSON, Salt Lake City, 1987 Utah Historical Quarterly was established in 1928 to publish articles, d o c u m e n t s , a n d reviews contributing to knowledge of U t a h ' s history. T h e Quarterly is published four times a year b y the U t a h State Historical Society, 300 R i o G r a n d e , Salt Lake City, U t a h 8 4 1 0 L P h o n e (801) 533-6024 for m e m b e r s h i p a n d publications information.

M e m b e r s of the Society receive the Quarterly, Beehive History, a n d t h e bimonthly Newsletter u p o n p a y m e n t of the a n n u a l dues: individual, $15.00; institution, $20.00; student a n d senior citizen (age sixty-five or over), $10.00; contributing, $20.00; sustaining, $25.00; p a t r o n , $50.00; business, $100.00.

Materials for publication should b e submitted in duplicate accompanied by r e t u r n postage a n d should b e typed double-space, with footnotes at t h e e n d . Authors a r e encouraged to submit material in a computer-readable form, o n 5 H inch M S - D O S or P C - D O S diskettes, s t a n d a r d A S C I I text file.

Additional information o n requirements is available from the m a n a g i n g editor. T h e Society assumes n o responsibility for statements of fact or opinion by contributors.

Second class postage is paid at Salt Lake City, Utah.

Postmaster: Send form 3579 (change of address) to Utah Historical Quarterly, 300 R i o G r a n d e , Salt Lake City, U t a h 84101.

Contents W I N T E R 1987 / V O L U M E 55 / N U M B E R 1

IN THIS ISSUE

3

T H E CIRCLEVILLE MASSACRE: A BRUTAL INCIDENT IN UTAH'S BLACKHAWKWAR A R T H U R PRATT, UTAH LAWMAN . . .

ALBERTWINKLER

4

RICHARD S. VAN WAGONER AND MARY VAN WAGONER

22

MURDER, MAYHEM, AND M O R M O N S : T H E E V O L U T I O N OF LAW E N F O R C E M E N T O N T H E SAN J U A N FRONTIER, 1880-1900

THOMAS E . AUSTIN AND ROBERT S. MCPHERSON

NAVAJOS, M O R M O N S , AND HENRY L. MITCHELL: CAULDRON OF CONFLICT O N T H E SAN J U A N

36

ROBERT S. MCPHERSON

50

JEAN M . WESTWOOD

66

RICHARD DALLIN WESTWOOD: SHERIFF AND FERRYMAN OF EARLY GRAND COUNTY BOOK REVIEWS

87

BOOK NOTICES

98

T H E COVER Photographer C. L. Joy, kneeling at right, took this picture ca. 1900, probably in American Fork Canyon.

His wife, Nellie Forbes, posed directly above him holding a hat. USHS collections, courtesy of Charles F. Joy.

© Copyright 1987 Utah State Historical Society

Books reviewed Women Vote in the West: The Woman Suffrage Movement, 1869-1896 J . KEITH MELVILLE

BEVERLY BEETON.

87

RICHARD S. V A N WAGONER.

Mormon Polygamy: A History

RICHARD W . SADLER

88

LINDA K I N G NEWELL and VALEEN T I P P E T T S A V E R Y . Mormon

Enigma: Emma Hale Smith, Prophet's Wife, "Elect Lady, " Polygamy's Foe, 1804-1879 IAN T H O M P S O N .

A R L E N E H . EAKLE

90

BARRY GOLDWATER

91

Four Corners

Country

M A R K J U N G E . / . E. Stimson:

Photographer of the West . . . G. B. PETERSON

92

B R I G H A M D . M A D S E N . Chief

Pocatello: The "White Plume" K E N N E T H R . P H I L P , ed.

DAVID L . CROWDER

94

Indian

Self-Rule: First-Hand Accounts of Indian-White Relations from Roosevelt to Reagan . . . . GREGORY E . SMOAK

95

SALLY Z A N J A N I a n d G U Y L O U I S R O C H A . The Ignoble

Conspiracy: Radicalism on Trial in Nevada

ROBERT F . ZEIDEL

96

In this issue Although the themes of cooperative economics and community building under church leadership have been emphasized in much of the state's written history, and justifiably so, the U t a h frontier also witnessed its share of violent confrontations between settlers and Indians, outlaws and lawmen.

Settlements on what historian J u a n i t a Brooks called " t h e ragged e d g e " of the frontier were sometimes the scenes of appalling brutality, as the first article details. School at Dewey, Utah.

Circleville in Piute County was as Courtesy ofJean M. Westwood. isolated a place as you could find in U t a h during the 1860s. Inadequately defended and frightened by Indian raids and killings during the Black Hawk W a r , settlers killed, one at a time, a group of captive Paiutes, including women and children.

T h e second article examines the remarkable law enforcement career of Arthur Pratt who began his life's work as a deputy U . S . marshal serving a subpoena on Brigham Young and saw it end not long after he supervised the execution of J o e Hill.

San J u a n County provides the setting for the next two articles. T h e first shows how early M o r m o n settlers in this remote southeastern corner of the territory initially looked to local church leaders to enforce the law and how, in the final decade of the nineteenth century, law enforcement began to take a more traditional form. T h e second San J u a n piece highlights the activities of H e n r y L. Mitchell, a colorful misfit, who, despite genuine suffering over the death of his son at the hands of renegade Indians, seemed to take a peevish delight in stirring up trouble among his neighbors.

Residents of Grand County also lived through a "wild and woolly p e r i o d " when whiskey flowed freely and cowboys shot u p the town for fun. As sheriff, Dick Westwood led posses, broke up illegal stills, and felt frustrated when a distant j u r y turned notorious rustler "Silver T i p " free. Firmly for law and order, he was nevertheless compassionateâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;too compassionate. H e was killed by a prisoner to whom he was bringing, alone and u n a r m e d , a pack of cigarettes.

Black Hawk and a historic marker at Payson, Utah. USHS collections.

The Circleville Massacre: A Brutal Incident in Utah's Black Hawk War

BY ALBERT WINKLER

I N A P R I L leee THE WHITE SETTLERS OF Circleville annihilated a band of captive Paiute Indians, including helpless women and children. This incident of the Black Hawk War of 1865-68 was the largest massacre of Indians in Utah's history. The mass murder seemed necessary to those who were anxious about possibly continuing Indian hostilities. The whites of Circleville had suffered dearly in a previous Indian raid and

Dr. Winkler is an archivist in the Harold B. Lee Library at Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah.

The Circleville Massacre

5

wanted to prevent a similar tragedy. Their concern was increased by defenses inadequate for the realities of war. In addition, brutal responses by other whites to Indian disturbances had set a precedent for the settlers of Circleville.^ Major incidents of brutality occurred from the war's outset, with the killing of innocent men, women, and children committed by both Indians and whites. Although the Indian raids apparently had as their main objective the stealing of cattle, whites were slain in various attacks. The first year of the war witnessed the greatest number of killings at the hands of the Indians, in part because the settlers were illprepared for a war most had not foreseen. The largest number of whites were killed on the morning of May 26, 1865, when a war party raided into Thistle Valley near modern Indianola. John Given, his wife, and their son were shot. The three young girls of the Given family, ages nine, five, and three, were killed by blows of an ax or tomahawk to the head.^ In another brutal raid, staged on October 17, 1865, a party of Utes led by Black Hawk struck near Ephraim, leaving five dead, including two women.^ Some six weeks later, on November 26, several whites lost their lives in an attack on Circleville which will be described in some detail below.

For their part, the whites were equally capable of excesses. Two incidents in July 1865 stand out because of the relatively large number of Indians killed. Seeking to intercept a party of Indians that had recently ambushed and killed two men, about one hundred members of the Sanpete militia, under the command of Maj. Warren S. Snow, surrounded an Indian camp near modern Burrville on July 18 and a battle ensued. The militiamen fired blindly into a large, bushy cedar tree.

After the skirmish a "dozen or more" corpses, including women and children, were found near the tree. Soon after, several women and children being guarded by Louis Thompson of Ephraim and others staged an apparent escape attempt, with one of the Indian women striking Thompson with a stick. Reportedly, " H e then shot her. This excited ' A n analytical history of the Black Hawk War has yet to be written. Narrative histories include: Peter Gottfredson, Indian Depredations in Utah (Salt Lake City, 1919); Carlton Culmsee, Utah's Black Hawk War: Lore and Reminiscences of Participants (Logan: Utah State University Press, 1973); and Kate B. Carter, comp., "Black Hawk Indian W a r , " Our Pioneer Heritage, 20 vols. (Salt Lake City: Daughters of Utah Pioneers, 1958 â&#x20AC;&#x201D; ) , 9: 169-256. Each of these works includes various primary sources in the text which are most helpful in research. Gottfredson is particularly valuable. ^Gottfredson, Depredations, pp. 140-44. See also Albert Winkler, " T h e Massacre at Thistle Valley," Frontier Times, April-May 1978. ^Ephraim's First One Hundred y ^ r j (Ephraim: Centennial Book Committee, 1954?), pp. 13-15. See also Gottfredson, Depredations, pp. 169-76, and Albert Winkler, "Orphaned by Black Hawk's Warriors," True West, June 1982, pp. 48-52.

6

Utah Historical Quarterly

the others a n d they were soon d i s p a t c h e d . " This incident has been called " t h e squaw fight. "^ T h e r e are other reports of the killing of Indians by whites. Some are vague. O n e such imprecise account stated " t h a t 7 Indians k n o w n to have been engaged in Blackhawk raids had lately closed their accounts."^ Because of vague reporting, it is impossible to state how m a n y Indians were killed d u r i n g the Black H a w k W a r and u n d e r what conditions m a n y died. W h a t is known is that the whites b e c a m e increasingly frustrated in dealing with the Indians a n d began killing or incarcerating them.

O n M a r c h 14, 1866, the U t e chief Sanpitch and seven or eight other m e n were captured near Nephi by Major Snow, who took t h e m u n d e r guard to M a n t i . Snow threatened the captives, telling t h e m " t h a t if hostilities continued they would be shot to begin with, a n d so on until the last Indian was destroyed that could be found, for we could not put u p with killing a n d stealing any l o n g e r . " Snow ordered Sanpitch to dispatch m e n to bring in Black H a w k and his b a n d â&#x20AC;&#x201D; a rather naive d e m a n d , for Sanpitch h a d insufficient power to have Black H a w k apprehended.^ Probably taking Snow's threat to kill them at face value, however, Sanpitch and the others broke jail on April 12. All were h u n t e d down and killed.^ By the beginning of 1866 the Black H a w k W a r h a d expanded to include other Indians, most notably the Paiutes. Previous hostilities h a d centered largely in areas normally inhabited by Utes. T h e U t e raids were often similar in characterâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;swift attacks from nearby canyons, with the Indians dividing their forces. Some of the raiders would harass and even kill the whites, thus keeping them at bay, while others drove off the communities' cattle. Frequently a guard was left behind to slow any pursuit by the whites. Such tactics were not apparent in conflicts involving the Paiutes.

Described as " n o t a very warlike t r i b e , " by T h o m a s C. W . Sale, a U . S . government official, the Paiutes were also reported as " v e r y poor and destitute. T h e y have no horses or other domestic animals, a n d live principally on roots, pine nuts, small game, reptiles a n d *Gottfredson, Depredations, pp. 159-61. Gottfredson's account is based largely on the testimonies of the participants in the expedition, Joshua W. Sylvester and E. C. Petersen (Chris Feuting). The reports of the killings came with the phrase, "it was said," but who did the saying is not known. Gottfredson mistakenly identified Warren S. Snow as " G e n e r a l . " ^George A. Smith, " J o u r n a l , " March 27, 1866, Journal History of the LDS Church, LDS Church Library-Archives, Salt Lake City, Utah.

6Warren S. Snow to General George A. Smith, March 14, 1866, Journal History, ^Gottfredson, Depredations, pp. 187-89; Culmsee, Black Hawk War, pp. 80-88.

The Circleville Massacre

7

insects." They were also called "expert thieves" who occasionally stole stock and other articles from wagon trains on the California road.

Sale's assertion that the Paiutes owned no horses is inaccurate, for there are reports of them with horses. For example, Silas S. Smith in April 1866 reported seeing six mounted "Piede" Indians (apparently a branch of the Paiutes) who were "brought in" to Panguitch, "cautioned and released." Disturbances involving the Paiutes likely had little to do with the fact that the Utes were at war, because relations between the two nations were poor. Sale stated that the Paiutes were afraid of the Utes because the latter had been long "in the habit of stealing the Women and children . . . and either selling them to the Spaniards or to some other tribeâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;Sometimes they were Kept as Servants."^ The war between the whites and Paiutes also had cruel aspects.

The flrst such incident occurred in January 1866 near Pipe Spring, just over the Arizona border. A party of whites investigating the disappearance of two men was going to an Indian camp for information.

On the way, they discovered the bodies of the two men beneath the snow. Proceeding to the camp, the whites killed two Indian men who resisted arrest. Returning with prisoners, the militia group passed the spot where the corpses of the two whites were being lifted into a wagon.

Having found some clothing of one of the dead whites among the Piedes, the guards "lost their patience" and shot and killed five of the prisoners. One man was spared to be used as a guide.^ This was the first of a series of killings in an apparent attempt to eliminate thieves or to intimidate the Indians into leaving.

In the same month as the slaying of Indians near Pipe Spring, a few Paiutes stole some stock from the Mormon settlements in Nevada's Muddy Valley. When a group of Indians was caught drying the meat of a butchered animal, "the brethren took them prisoners and severely whipped them." Soon after, at a meeting between over fifty Indians and the settlers, the aboriginals were told that peace was desired but that the taking of stock must end. Anyone caught stealing cattle would be killed. All but two of the Indians agreed "very reluctantly" to cooperate. The two dissenters were declared outlaws, and the whites "told the Indians that . . . [they] would kill them as soon as . . . [they] ^Thomas C. W. Sale to O. H. Irish, May 4, 1865, Letters Received by the Office of Indian Affairs, 1824-81, Utah Superintendency, 1863-1865, National Archives, Washington D.C.; Silas S. Smith to George A. Smith, April 10, 1866, Journal History. sjames G. Bleak to George A. Smith, January 26, 1866, Journal History.

8

Utah Historical Quarterly

could catch t h e m . " O n e of these " o u t l a w s " was later apprehended a n d shot. T h e Indians reacted with "discontent and fear" and soon left the area.^^ O n another occasion the white settlers along the M u d d y River killed five Indians in retaliation for the m u r d e r of a miner. T w o m e n were formally executed by hanging. O n e m a n , Okus, confessed to the m u r d e r , and the other was implicated by O k u s as an accomplice. T h e three others were killed for resisting arrest.^^ T h e Paiutes were also capable of brutal conduct. O n April 2, 1866, three whites, two m e n a n d a w o m a n , were killed in L o n g Valley, probably by Piedes or other Paiutes. In this attack, the w o m a n was reportedly raped before she was killed. ^2 By late April 1866 a familiar pattern of frontier justice, including the s u m m a r y execution of those suspected of crimes, h a d emerged.

Even whites with questionable or no official status could take matters into their own hands with little or no fear of legal retribution. Inquiries often consisted of little m o r e t h a n routine questioning, while a j u d g ment of guilt u p o n an Indian required little more than proximity to a crime or to suspected hostiles or a reluctance to profess friendship to the whites. Often such fragile indications of wrongdoing were sufficient for m e n and women to be summarily killed or otherwise mistreated. T h e reluctance or inability of territorial and federal officials to assure that the proper legal procedures were followed in white relations with the Indians helped to create a climate that allowed for continued misconduct. Free to resolve their problems with the Indians with little or no fear of legal review, the whites of Circleville would virtually wipe out an entire group of Piede Indians.

Early in 1864 settlers h a d been called to go to Circle Valley. T h e first groupâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;from various towns in Sanpete C o u n t y â&#x20AC;&#x201D; a r r i v e d at the future location of Circleville in M a r c h . T h e y established Circleville on the west bank of the Sevier River about five miles upstream from the point where that river and the East Fork of the Sevier meet. T h e town grew rapidly. By the spring of 1865 forty-five " g o o d and s u b s t a n t i a l " log houses had been erected. T h e largest structure in the settlement was " a good and commodious log meeting-house, 36 feet by 2 0 " that would also serve as a school for eighty children. In N o v e m b e r 1865

loWarren Foote to D. W. Sessions, March 13, 1866, Journal History. ^^Letter], March 29, 1866, Journal History. This missive is anonymous, but the information in it was received from John Nebeker.

12Gottfredson, Depredations, pp. 181-83. See also William B. Maxwell to George A. Smith, April 12, 1866, Journal History.

The Circleville Massacre

Black Hawk V/ar veterans at an encampment in Richfield, Utah. Peter Gottfredson, author of I n d i a n D e p r e d a t i o n s in U t a h , is second from right. USHS collections.

Franklin D. Richards estimated, perhaps with some exaggeration, that the community numbered six hundred people.^^ Circleville became involved in the war when Maj. Warren S. Snow was again hunting Indians, this time with 103 men from Sanpete County. This force stopped at Circleville on September 18, 1865, and left the following morning eventually to skirmish with Indians at Red Lake in Wayne County. There, three whites, including Major Snow, were wounded and "several" Indians were killed.^* In spite of hostile activities nearby in the fall of 1865, the inhabitants of Circleville took inadequate steps to defend themselves. This was never more apparent than when the town came under direct attack on November 26, 1865. In all probability the raid was staged by hostile

'3These quotes are found in Edward Tolton to Editor, Deseret News, dated February 18, 1865, in Deseret News, April 12, 1865. See also Franklin D. Richards to William H. Hooper, November 8, 1865, Journal History; Edward Tolton to Editor, Deseret News, April 15, 1866, in Deseret News, May 10, 1866; Franklin D. Richards "visit to southern settlements," September 13, 1865, Journal History.

14Gottfredson, Depredations, pp. 167-69.

10

Utah Historical Quarterly

Utes. T h e inhabitants of the town were caught completely by surprise as the war party came down " E a s t C a n y o n " or " R o c k C a n y o n " from whence flows the East Fork of the Sevier River. T h e attack was skillfully managed. A group of Indian men gathered the town's cattle while others rode close to the settlement shouting and shooting. At one point, twelve Indians were observed on a hill keeping watch while others gathered and began driving the cattle back towards East Canyon.

In meeting the emergency the whites demonstrated inferior military skills compared with those of the Utes. T h e settlers were too scattered to offer effective resistance during the attack, for only six people were reported in the town when the Indians were first seen. Everyone ran for the protection of the meetinghouse before the m e n could organize themselves for some type of pursuit. A "little force" of whites, some mounted and some on foot, tried to overtake their adversaries, but by the time they crossed the Sevier River only one Indian was left in sight. H e kept his distance and was able to hold his pursuers at bay by the skillful use of a H e n r y rifle, an early lever-action repeater, which gave him a considerable advantage over a militia that possessed " n o modern a r m s . " T h e Indian was able to shoot the horse of one of the whites before retreating into the mountains.

T h e loss of cattle was not the only casualty suffered by the whites in the raid; the cost was high in h u m a n lives as well. A n elderly m a n , J a m e s Froid, had been riding in a wagon of a group of people returning from Salt Lake City with provisions for the winter when he decided to get out of the wagon and go ahead to town. W h e n the Indians struck, he made the mistake of trying to drive some of his cattle away rather than fleeing or hiding. H e was pursued and shot. From the physical evidence, the settlers later surmised that the wounded Froid was stripped and then riddled by bullets and arrows as he attempted to flee u p a ravine. H a n s Christian H a n s e n was shot in the back near the bed of the Sevier River and fell face down in the sand. W h e n his body was recovered the next day, it was noticed that his face had been smashed either by the fall or by the weight of his body pressing it down overnight and his nose had been driven into his head. T w o thirteen-year-old boys, Orson Barney and Ole Heilersen, were the other fatalities. Barney had been shot in the back of his head, and part of his skull was blown off. W h e n he was laid out for burial the next day, cotton was discreetly put into his hair to make him look more normal before his mother viewed him.

The Circleville Massacre

11

Circleville residents had "very little sleep" that night as they tried to assess their losses. Some relief was felt when a few of those missing and feared dead found their way to the settlement after dark. Eliza M. Munson and her husband James W. Munson were returning from Salt Lake City when they saw the Indians. He immediately packed her across the river. They planned to sell their lives dearly by having Eliza load the pistols as James shot them. Such measures proved unnecessary when the couple escaped unnoticed. Eliza's sister, Ellen A. Nielsen, was in another wagon with their two-year-old brother and her husband Mads. Mr. Nielsen kept one Indian at bay by pointing an old broken revolver at him. However, the Ute turned and shot one of the horses hitched to the wagon, making further flight possible only on foot.

While the Indian was reloading his rifle, the three whites jumped from the wagon to hide in some willows. Ellen, carrying her small brother, was so fearful of what might happen to her if captured that she jumped into a slough of the river where the water reached her neck. Her brother found the water too cold and frightful to enter, so Ellen allowed him to sit on the bank. He remained in easy reach so she could drown him and herself if capture became imminent. The Nielsens and the boy remained concealed while their wagon was plundered of food and clothing. By the time they reached town, Ellen's clothing was frozen stiff on her body and her brother was fast asleep.^^ One of the most important factors in the massacre the following spring was that Circleville's ability to defend itself was not significantly improved over the previous fall, thus giving the settlers continued reason for concern. The town was isolated and could expect little rapid assistance in the event of an emergency. The closest settlement was the hamlet of Marysvale roughly twenty-one miles to the north. Although the two communities were connected by a good road, the inhabitants of Circleville could expect little aid from that direction. A muster of the militia of Marysvale produced only "16 men, 13 guns and some revolvers," and it would be necessary to leave some men to guard the hamlet, although the community was actually a fort that was described as being "130 by 140 feet square. "^^

15A11 direct quotes are from Christian Larsen, "Biographical Sketch," LDS Church LibraryArchives. For other first-person accounts see Eliza M. Munson, "Questions Concerning Black Hawk War Answered," Utah State Historical Society Library, Salt Lake City, Utah; and Ellen A. Nielsen as cited in Gottfredson, Depredations, pp. 176-79. See also Culmsee, Black Hawk War, pp. 69-72. i^George A. Smith, " J o u r n a l , " March 25, 1866, Journal History, and George A. Smith to General [Daniel] Wells, April 2, 1866, Journal History.

12

Utah Historical Quarterly

T o the south, the closest community was Panguitch about twentyseven miles away. In a visit to the town in M a r c h 1866, George A. Smith called a muster of the militia. Forty m e n appeared with twentytwo guns and " s o m e " revolvers. Only " o n e half of the guns were scarcely fit for service, being thin barrelled fowling pieces a n d out of r e p a i r . " T w o factors m a d e any aid from this direction unlikely. First, " t h e people were in a very scattered condition and exposed to the attacks of any m a r a u d i n g b a n d of savages" because they did not enjoy the protection of a fort. M o v i n g any sizeable force from Panguitch invited the possibility of a major disaster if the community was attacked in its absence. Second, the difficulty of reaching Circleville precluded prompt assistance. T h e road was considered " v e r y b a d , " a n d its route necessitated the crossing of the Sevier River by Smith and his party eighteen times when they traveled from Panguitch to Circleville. T h e circuitous journey took them from " b r e a k f a s t " to " d a r k " on M a r c h 23, 1866.17 Communications in the entire area were difficult because couriers were often hard to procure. O n c e , when express letters arrived at Alma (modern Monroe) that were to be forwarded to the militia stationed in Circleville, the M o r m o n bishop in Alma called on several y o u n g m e n to carry the dispatches. T h e y all refused, stating that they might be scalped by Indians or drowned in the flooding Sevier River. T h e letters were eventually carried by Lewis Barney who said it was unsafe to travel the roads between communities with less than twenty-five men.^^ Circleville was one of six settlements along the Sevier River that were considered " e x p o s e d " by George A. Smith during his M a r c h 1866 visit. Panguitch was considered to be in the most dangerous position because it had no fort. However, Marysvale was the only one mentioned as having the entire c o m m u n i t y within such a c o m p o u n d . At that time, Circleville was in the process of building a fort which was only one of a n u m b e r of important projects including repairing canals and ditches. It was certainly not as unprotected as Panguitch, but it was also not as secure as Marysvale. For the protection of Circleville, Smith suggested that an additional stockade be erected where the two branches of the Sevier River meet five miles from the settlement. H e wanted this enclosure occupied by thirty armed m e n ; however, no action was taken on this proposal. Circleville remained a m o n g those

i7Smith to Wells, April 2, 1866, and March 23, 1866, Journal History. i^Lewis Barney, "Autobiography," Utah State Historical Society Library.

The Circleville Massacre

13

towns listed as having " t o o few m e n and what are there are not over half armed and scattered over too much ground. "^^ T h e militia force of Circleville was led by M a j . J a m e s Allred. His relatively high rank was based on the fiction that a battalion was under his command. T h e n u m b e r of m e n available in Circleville was far less than the 150 thought necessary to comprise a company. In fact, the lack of manpower influenced the decision to abandon the settlement in the early summer of 1866. Meanwhile, to keep Circleville's manpower as high as possible those who had recently moved were " f o r c e d " to return. It was considered " n o t only cowardly but wicked" to leave at a time when every m a n was needed to defend the community. This practice caused some irritation when those who had bought the homes and land of those who had left had to make room for them when they returned. Writing from Parowan in M a y of that year, Jesse N . Smith reported that he had received word from the M o r m o n bishop of Circleville, William Allred, that the town had seventy-five families a n d seventy-five men. Another report, dated J u n e 1, 1866, by Capt. A. G. Cownover at Circleville stated that there were " 5 0 well armed m e n " in the settlement.2° O n e of the positive steps taken in the spring of 1866 to help the area militarily was the erection of a post known as Fort Sanford. O n M a r c h 23, 1866, George A. Smith was accompanied by a group of m e n from Panguitch as far as the mouth of Bear Creek where it empties into the Sevier River about ten miles north of the town. At this locale.

Smith gave a dedicatory prayer for the establishment of a community and a fort. Soon after, over fifty m e n from Beaver and Iron counties were called to establish and m a n the post. Silas S. Smith was placed in command of this force, and they began to erect a stockade and to make preparations for a settlement close by. T h e post was in a strategic location designed to protect the routes to Parowan and Beaver from Panguitch and Circleville. T h e importance of the garrison for Circleville lay in its putting a mobile force some seventeen miles from the town.

Still, the fort and the settlement were separated by terrible stretches of road. Any aid from this garrison was hours away even on the fastest horses. ^1 i^Smith to Wells, April 2, 1866, Journal History; Larsen, "Biographical Sketch."

20The quotes are from Larsen, "Biographical Sketch." See alsojesse N. Smith to Lieut.-General D. H. Wells, May 9, 1866, Militia Records, Utah State Archives, Salt Lake City, Utah; A. G. Cownover to General Pace, June 1, 1866, Militia Records, Utah State Archives.

21 Smith to Wells, April 2, 1866, Journal History; George A. Smith, "Journal," March 23, 1866, Journal History; Joseph Fish, "Diaries," [23 March 1866], Brigham Young University Archives, Provo, Utah.

14

Utah Historical Quarterly

Daniel H. Wells, head of the Utah Militia, visited Circleville in 1866 and ordered the town evacuated. USHS collections.

Despite the existence of Fort Sanford, the overall assessment of the town's ability to defend itself was not reassuring. When Daniel H. Wells, the commander-in-chief of the Utah Militia, visited Circleville in the early summer of 1866 to decide if the community should be abandoned, he expressed surprise that the people "were not all annihilated living in such an exposed out of the way place." He said the area had been settled ten years too soon, and he ordered the inhabitants to move immediately.2^ Late in April 1866 the Indian war flared up near Circleville, once again threatening that community. The town militia became minor participants in an attempt to retrieve some stolen cattle. On the night of April 22, twenty-one men from Richfield, Glenwood, and Alma were attempting to get back their stock by tracking the Indians who had taken them. Aided by a bright moon, the militiamen from Sevier County reached Marysvale. Before dawn on April 23 this group was ambushed just outside the fort. One man, Albert Lewis, was killed instantly. A shot hit the handle of a pistol of Christian Christensen, and the ball and fragments of the pistol grip went into his abdomen. Mortally wounded, he died twenty-one days later. Two other men were also hurt but recovered. After sunrise the body of Lewis and the wounded 22Larsen, "Biographical Sketch." The direct quote is in the words of Larsen.

The Circleville Massacre

15

men were retrieved. O n e of the men helping with Christensen was M a j . J a m e s Allred from Circleville who had apparently been in Marysvale that night. T h e militia followed the Indian trail until it headed up East Canyon near Circleville. O n a ridge, they were joined by about forty men from that town. T h e men discussed possible courses of action but decided to pursue the Indians no further. T h e men of Circleville returned home, no doubt having heard the disturbing details of the ambush.^^ T h e ambush at Marysvale and the presence of hostile Indians nearby certainly gave the people of Circleville cause for concern, but Indian trouble near Fort Sanford produced the greatest anxiety. It was probably on the morning of Sunday, April 22, that two Piede Indians were observed on the opposite side of the Sevier River from the enclosure. Two men, William M . West and Collins R. Hakes, went across to question them. T h e Indians appeared nervous and gave unsatisfactory answers to the inquiries of the whites. T h e Indians claimed they had an important message from Black H a w k to Capt.

J o h n Lowder, whom they expected to find in Panguitch. Informed that Lowder was in the fort, the Indians became nervous and attempted to push their way past. A scuffle ensued in which West was shot in the shoulder and one of the Indians was killed by Hakes. T h e other Indian, wounded by Captain Lowder who came riding up to the scene of the disturbance, made good his escape.^^ Soon after, a camp of Piede Indians near Fort Sanford was disarmed and brought into the stockade. Apparently, they were warned to remain peaceful and then released. T h e day following the scuffle near the fort. Captain Lowder and a group of militiamen visited a camp of Piedes two miles from Panguitch. T h e Indians became excited and shots were fired. O n e white, J a m e s Butler, was wounded, and " t w o or t h r e e " of the Indians were killed. T h e Indians were held captive for a few days and then released with instructions that they stay in a specific area. 2^ News of the shooting of William M . West near Fort Sanford made the people of Circleville decide to arrest the local group of Piedes. T h e report of the incident from M a j . Silas S. Smith to the inhabitants of the town stated " t h a t two of our friendly Indians had shot one of his 23Gottfredson, Depredations, pp. 193-95. Gottfredson calls Allred "Major Allred," but no other Major Allred is known in connection with the Black Hawk War other than James T. S. Allred.

2*John Louder as cited in Gottfredson, Depredations, pp. 190-93; Deseret News, May 10, 1866; Joseph Fish, "Diaries." "^^Deseret News, May 10, 1866; Joseph Fish, "Diaries."

16

Utah Historical Quarterly

men. "26 These two Indians were apparently associated with the Indians who lived in Circle Valley with the whites. The relationship between the settlers and these Piedes had been reportedly good. The whites treated them with kindness, often trading baked goods with them for venison and beaver meat. However, the settlers began to view their neighbors with increased suspicion when strangers were noticed coming and going among them, and it was feared they could be acting as spies for hostile Indians.^^ A message was sent, probably on April 23, 1866, to the Indians, requesting they come into town. Some of them came voluntarily and were interviewed by Bishop William J. Allred. According to his account, he told them what had been learned from Major Smith's letter and said the whites wanted to live with them in friendship and peace. If that was also their intention, they were informed, they would have to lend the settlers their guns. Allred further said that they could then work for the whites and be paid in whatever goods they needed. The Piedes were distrustful and hard to convince, but they reluctantly surrendered their weapons.^^ Maj. James Allred placed a guard over this group and returned to the camp in the evening where the other Indian men and the women and children remained. They were quietly surrounded, and Allred, "who spoke the Indian language very well," told them they would be treated well if they surrendered their arms and went to town. One of the men immediately tried to escape. The whites opened fire, and as the Indian fell his gun discharged. The ball grazed the chest of Oluf Christian Larsen and cut the barrel off the gun of the man standing beside him. Larsen believed that if the bullet had come three inches closer it would have killed them both. All the others in the band surrendered and were disarmed. The men were marched into the meetinghouse where they were put under guard. Sticks were placed across the small of their backs and their arms tied behind them. The women and children with their belongings were placed in a vacant cellar also under guard.^^ A message was sent to Col. W. H. Dame, the regimental commander over Major Allred's unit, requesting advice on what to do with the captives, "as we did not like to take the responsibility of deciding 26William J . Allred to George A. Smith, May 5, 1866, Journal History.

2''Larsen, "Biographical Sketch."

28Allred to Smith, May 5, 1866.

29The quote is from Larsen, "Biographical Sketch." See also Allred to Smith, May 5, 1866.

The Circleville Massacre

17

the course to be taken with the Indians. "^^ This message was received

by Colonel Dame when General Snow was with him in Parowan. Snow was quite clear in his orders, " I left instructions with Col. Dame to see that those prisoners were treated kindly and such only retained in custody as were found hostile or affording aid to the enemy. "^^ While they were awaiting instructions, the captive Piedes were apparently interviewed at some length. According to Bishop William Allred, in his letter of May 5, 1866, these Indians revealed quite a story. They "confessed to . . . carrying ammunition to the hostile Indians," this a complete reversal of what they had told him before being arrested: "They had told me they had not a charge [i.e., round] of ammunition." Continuing his account of the interview, Allred stated: "They say that Black Hawk is at the Red Lake or Fish Lake from 40 to 60 miles from Circleville with a large amount of stock and that the PiUtes, Pahvants and the Navajoes have agreed to unite against us as a people that our little valley will be full of them on the 24th. "32

The trustworthiness of these reports must come into question at this point. In fact these claims seem incredible. How could the Piedes be believed when at one point they said that they had no ammunition and at another that they were supplying such materiel to hostile Indians? Allred failed to report any physical evidence, such as caches of balls and powder being found among them. There is virtually nothing to indicate the Paiutes and Pahvants were in league with Black Hawk's Utes, especially in view of the long Paiute mistrust of that tribe. There is also no verifiable report regarding any attempt of the Utes to get support from the Navajos in their war on the whites. Equally suspect is the claim that a major invasion of these Indians on Circle Valley was imminent. No purpose was offered for the attack and no such move materialized.

It is more likely that the Piedes were exaggerating or lying or that the information was acquired through a series of mistranslations.

Moreover, what purpose did it serve to tell their captors such a story?

The Indians could well believe they had something to fear from the whites because they were disarmed, bound, and guarded, and one of their number had been killed attempting to escape. Logically, such 30Larsen, "Biographical Sketch."

3iGeneral Erastus Snow to Lieutenant General D. H. Wells, May 28, 1866, Militia Records, Utah State Archives.

32Allred to Smith, May 5, 1866.

18

Utah Historical Quarterly

information as the Piedes gave could only excite rather t h a n calm the settlers. F u r t h e r m o r e , the Indians h a d n o t h i n g to gain from giving such reports unless they were given u n d e r duress.

T i m i n g b e c a m e a very important factor in the tragedy. T h e whites were expecting instructions from their militia leaders to arrive at any m o m e n t . H a d the Piedes not attempted to escape, " t h e y might have been liberated in a few hours receiving gifts from u s , " Oluf Christian Larsen said. H e also reported that " a few m e n in the c o m m u n i t y exhibited great hatred to the Indians, but they were too few to have any influence as the people in general abhor[r]ed the shedding of blood. "^^ After dusk, Larsen h a d just been relieved from g u a r d duty over the Indians in the meetinghouse when they m a d e their break. It was supposed that the Indians h a d been able to free themselves from their bonds without the guards noticing. T h e captives h a d been seated near one another with their blankets over their shoulders. T h e y probably untied each other a n d planned their escape right in front of the guards, who could not u n d e r s t a n d their language. A t t e m p t i n g to take advantage of the darkness a n d the laxity that often comes with the changing of guards, they rose u p in a group, took the sticks to which they had been tied, a n d rushed their captors. T h e whites felt forced to shoot. By the time Larsen " r a n b a c k " he found all the Indians " s h o t a n d in a dying condition.''^^ In a couple of matter-of-fact statements, Larsen described what was done regarding the w o m e n a n d children in the cellar: " T h e next consideration was how to dispose of the squaws a n d papooses.

Considering the exposed position we occupied a n d what had already been done it was considered necessary to dispatch everyone that could tell that tale. T h r e e [or four] small children were saved a n d adopted by good families. "3^ A. C. A n d e r s o n reported that eleven Indians were in the cellar.

T h e y were b r o u g h t u p one at a time a n d killed. H e said he saw the whites slit the throat of the first victim brought up.^^ W h y the settlers chose to use a knife rather than a gun is a little puzzling, but perhaps 33Larsen, "Biographical Sketch."

3*Ibid. See also Allred to Smith, May 5, 1866. Few wounds received in such a melee would likely be mortal. It is more reasonable to assume that some Indians were allowed to die of wounds through lack of treatment or were killed rather than allowed to suffer.

35Larsen, "Biographical Sketch." In the version of Larsen's autobiography printed in Kate B. Carter, ed.. Heart Throbs of the West, 12 vols. (Salt Lake City: Daughters of Utah Pioneers, 1939-51), 9:208-i2, this quote has been omitted. In its place the following has been inserted in parentheses: "According to the record all the Indian prisoners were killed as they tried to escape. It was a terrifying experience for those early settlers in Circle Valley as they tried to protect themselves from the Indians in that vicinity. The orphaned Indian children were adopted by white families."

36Culmsee, Black Hawk War, pp. 90-91. Culmsee apparently had access to a letter Anderson wrote about the incident as an old man.

The Circleville Massacre

19

they wanted to conserve ammunition or feared that the report of shots would be heard for miles and alarm any Indians that might be in or near the valley. It is also possible the whites did not want to panic the others in the cellar as they awaited their turn to be murdered. These victims were women and children considered old enough to report what had happened.

It is uncertain how many were killed altogether. Bishop Allred said sixteen were killed and four children were allowed to live.^^ No other resident of Circleville at that time left an account mentioning the number of victims. Allred may not have included the man shot down while fleeing arrest or all of those killed in the meetinghouse and cellar.

Allred said the sixteen killed were " a l l " of the group of Indians, but he made no mention of those kept in the cellar. His number is plausible but may be considered the minimum possible figure.

The decision to kill these Indians by those who "abhor[r]ed the shedding of blood" is a bit surprising. Larsen's claim that those who "exhibited great hatred to the Indians" were too few to influence the entire community indicates that the decision seemed rational and not emotional to the settlers who undoubtedly feared retaliation if other Indians learned what had happened in the meetinghouse. Who was responsible for the decision or who carried it out is not known. It is certain, however, that the two principal authorities in the town. Major Allred and Bishop Allred, were in positions to know what was happening. Presumably, nothing of such importance could have transpired without their knowledge and consent.

The hope that the affair at Circleville would not become widely known was in vain, for both Indians and whites soon heard of it. The Piedes killed had said they were related to those of the Kane County area. Erastus Snow of St. George reported all those of that tribe who were camped above Toquerville had departed "in bad temper" after hearing of the events in Circleville.^^ Bishop Thomas Callister of Fillmore wrote that the Indians of the area were "somewhat uneasy hearing so many reports of cruelty to friendly Indians by our brethren."

Callister went on to state that Kanosh, a chief of the Pahvants, "thinks that the Indians have sufficient cause to lose confidence in our promises of protection to friendly Indians. "^^ Such knowledge certainly did little 37Allred to Smith, May 5, 1866. Erastus Snow believed that "15 to 1 8 " Piedes had been killed.

See Erastus Snow to Lieutenant General D. H . Wells, May 28, 1866, Militia Records, Utah State Archives.

38Snow to Wells, May 28, 1866.

39Bishop Thomas Callister to George A. Smith, May 13, 1866, Journal History.

20

Utah Historical Quarterly

Left to right: Territorial Governor Charles Durkee may have known of the massacre but took no action; Kanosh, a Pahvant chief, said the event destroyed Indian confidence in white promises; Erastus Snow believed "a closer enquiry" was called for. USHS collections.

to convince the Indians to trust the whites, but it cannot be proved that mistrust led to retaliation, such as additional attempts to steal cattle.

The news of the events at Circleville soon reached Parowan.

Joseph Fish recorded that the citizens of the town had learned that the Indians were killed in an escape attempt. Opinions differed regarding the actions of the whites. "Some looked upon this as butchery and not justifiable, and many others condemned this harsh move with friendly Indians [>yV]," Fish wrote. "Others said they were in league with the hostile Indians and should receive the same treatment. "*° Militia officials were also soon made aware of much of what had happened in Circleville. On May 3, 1866, Daniel H. Wells, commander of the Utah Militia, wrote to Brig. Gen. Erastus Snow saying that he did not know what else the "brethren" could have done.*^ Snow did not let matters rest upon receiving this opinion. Apparently disturbed by the affair, he wrote back to Wells on May 28, 1866, and reported he knew nothing of the affair in Circleville officially. By rumor, however, he had learned of the "slaughter of 15 or 18 Piede prisoners." Snow did not know why and how they were slain; nor had he been given any reason for their arrest beyond "suspicion" of complicity and of harboring spies from hostile Indian groups. He regretted not instituting " a closer enquiry" into the causes of their arrest.

Believing that the matter had gone beyond his jurisdiction. Snow left 40Joseph Fish, "Diaries."

4iDaniel H . Wells to Erastus Snow, May 3, 1866, Journal History.

The Circleville Massacre

21

the question of an investigation to the discretion of Wells.*2 Apparently Wells's mind was already made up, for no action was taken.

Bishop Thomas Callister of Fillmore stated he saw the territorial governor, Charles Durkee, and the superintendent of Indian affairs in Utah, F. H. Head, on May 10 when they came to visit the Indians at Corn Creek. That evening Head told Callister "privately" what policies he planned to pursue with the Indians and said he "regretted much that some Indians that had had the promise and assurance of protection and safety had been murdered. "^^ It is not certain that the murders referred to by Superintendent Head were those perpetrated by the whites at Circleville or that the governor knew of these killings, because Head talked with Callister alone. However, the closeness of the date of Callister's letter to the affair at Circleville provides some indication that he was referring to the Circleville killings. It is also probable Governor Durkee had been informed by Head of the incident. They were traveling together, and, furthermore, the governor needed to be apprised of the condition of white and Indian relations. But once again no action was taken; federal and territorial officials failed, as had militia leaders, to bring the law to bear on whites regarding their misconduct against Indians.

The brutality of whites during the early stages of the Black Hawk War suggests they were inadequately prepared to face the realities of an Indian uprising. This was nowhere more obvious than at Circleville.

The local militia was not ready in terms of numbers, materiel, and training to deal effectively with their aboriginal enemies. Town fortifications were built too late to give the settlers a feeling of adequate security, and the communities of the area and the garrison at Fort Sanford were too far away to provide rapid support in an emergency.

A disastrous raid had helped establish fear and hatred among the whites. Such emotions were exaggerated by the confusing nature of a war in which there was no easy way of telling peaceful Indians from renegades. Because legal authorities were too weak to control the brutal activities of the war and instances of savage behavior went unpunished, a dangerous precedent was set. By late April 1866 it was clear that whites needed to concern themselves little with legal action when Indians were mishandled. When it was feared that a local group of Indians could no longer be trusted, war hysteria took hold of at least some whites of Circleville and innocent people were killed. *2Snow to Wells, May 28, 1866. *3Bishop Thomas Callister to George A. Smith, May 13, 1866, Journal History.

Arthur Pratt^ Utah Lawman

BY RICHARD S. VAN WAGONER AND MARY VAN WAGONER

I N T H E LATE AFTERNOON OF OCTOBER 11, 1874, Deputy U.S. Marshal Arthur Pratt approached the gate of Brigham Young's Lion House office to serve a subpoena on the Mormon church president. Pratt was told that Young was ill and could not be disturbed. The gatekeeper advised that the papers could be served when Young's secretary returned. The twenty-one-year-old lawman, refusing to accept this arMr. Van Wagoner is a clinical audiologist in Salt Lake City, and Mrs. Van Wagoner is a graduate student at the University of Utah.

Above: Arthur and Agnes E. Caine Pratt with their children. Courtesy of Chester Pratt.

Arthur Pratt

23

rangement, left the premises. Undaunted, he soon returned in the company of U.S. Marshal George R. Maxwell. Joseph Shaw, Young's gatekeeper, defiantly refused the federal officials entrance. During the scuffle that ensued, Pratt wrestled Shaw to the ground where he was subdued, arrested, and taken to the penitentiary. The two lawmen, with a contingent of deputies, then returned to Young's office where they were met by Salt Lake City Mayor Daniel H. Wells who assured them that President Young would now accept the subpoena.

The Mormon community, used to seeing Brigham Young treated with imperial respect, was incensed by the actions of the lawmen.

Deputy Pratt was particularly singled out in an October 13, 1874, Deseret Evening News editorial: "There is a disposition manifest by some persons in this community," the piece began, "to do their utmost to create excitement, and not only excitement but real trouble." The chief concern of the News was how the eastern press would respond to the incident. "Nobody was hurt," the editor argued, and, with a little coolness, civility, and consideration on both sides, but especially on that of the deputy who gave the original offence, there would have been nothing at all amiss. It adds nothing to the dignity of the Federal Government when any one of its officers conducts himself with gratuitous offensiveness, and there are few Americans of any kind, or men of any nationality, who have the spirit of men within them, who would not resent the overbearing and hectoring arrogance and insolence of men clothed with a little brief authority.

Had Arthur Pratt been a boozing, womanizing gentile, appointed to his position by eastern political hacks, perhaps it would have been easier to understand his determination in serving the papers. But Pratt was the son of one of Mormonism's best-known couples. Apostle Orson Pratt and his first wife, Sarah M. Bates. Born in Salt Lake City on March 12, 1853, Arthur was educated in the city school system and graduated from the University of Deseret. In early 1870 he served as foreman of the Nineteenth Utah Territorial Legislature of which his father was Speaker. After a stint as director of a stage line from Salt Lake City to Pioche, Nevada, Arthur married Agnes E. Caine,^ on December 25, 1872, moved in with his father, and began new employment as an agent with the Salt Lake Furniture Company.

Young Pratt had just begun his new job as a deputy U.S. marshal in the fall of 1874 when smoldering family difficulties with Mormon

'Agnes E. Caine was a daughter of John T. Caine, Utah territorial secretary and for many years delegate to Congress.

24

Utah Historical Quarterly

church leaders came to a head. Arthur's mother, who experienced polygamy-related difficulties with Joseph Smith in the early 1840s, became rabidly antipolygamous and secretly raised her children to disbelieve in Mormonism. Sarah's 1868 refusal to accept Orson's other wives on equal grounds resulted in the couple's separation. Brigham Young, who had taken a dim view of Sarah since the Nauvoo difficulties of the 1840s, had her evicted from the Pratt family home south of the temple block, property which the church president claimed he owned. Sarah, disputing Young's claim to ownership, sued in court.

Though the case was ultimately resolved in Sarah's favor in the summer of 1876, it was not without great trauma to the Pratt family. In the midst of the lawsuit, Sarah was excommunicated on October 4, 1874, for apostasy. The next day Arthur suffered the same fate. Young Pratt's determined actions to serve Young with the subpoena mentioned above become more understandable when it is known that the incident occurred only one week after he and his mother had been excommunicated. ^ Arthur Pratt's law enforcement encounter with Brigham Young did not end with the 1874 incident. One year later the church president was ordered imprisoned on October 30 for refusal to pay $9,500 in alimony to his divorced wife, Ann Eliza Young. Judge Boreman deemed it best to place the church president under house arrest, and for three weeks Arthur Pratt and Boman Cannon served as his guards.

Despite Arthur Pratt's seemingly anti-Mormon posture, his longterm career in law enforcement proved him to be a man of integrity and unflinching honestyâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;a well-respected officer determined to fight injustice wherever found. Unfortunately, law enforcement officials usually retain their positions through the good graces of their political superiors. Pratt experienced the first of several politically motivated firings in February 1876 when, according to his own account, " I attempted to expose what I believe to be corruption in the marshal's office."^ When the administration changed hands, however, Pratt was rehired and was quickly back in the saddle again.

The Silver Reef area of southern Utah had experienced a boom period during the late 1870s when silver soared to $1.20 per ounce. By the early 1880s, however, plummeting prices plus production difficulties in the Stormont, Buckeye, and California mines resulted in finan^For a complete discussion of Sarah M. Pratt's life see Richard S. Van Wagoner, "Sarah M. Pratt: The Shaping of an Apostate," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 19 (Summer 1986):69-99. ^Journal History, February 8, 1876, LDS Church Library-Archives, Salt Lake City.

Arthur Pratt

25

cial losses for eastern stockholders. On February 1, 1881, Silver Reef miners were ordered to take a pay cut from $4.00 to $3.50 per day. The miner's union refused to accept the measure and a strike resulted. After a month of inactivity, sixty union miners gathered at the Stormont office of W. I. Allen and ordered the company boss to leave the camp.

After being "escorted" from the area by a group of strikers, Allen rode to Beaver, the seat of the federal district court, where he requested an investigation.

The federal grand jury, insensitive to the miners' concerns, found indictments against forty of the miners, and warrants for their arrest were placed in the hands of Deputy U.S. Marshal Arthur Pratt, who ordered Sheriff A. P. Hardy of Washington County to raise a posse of some twenty-five men. Pratt deputized the men, and under cover of a snowstorm the group rode to Silver Reef where they took the camp completely by surprise. Thirty-six men in irons were taken to Beaver for trial. Twenty of the men were convicted of riot and on April 11 Marshal Pratt arrived in Salt Lake with these men and ten others, all of whom were incarcerated in the territorial penitentiary at Sugarhouse.* In the late 1870s and 1880s Arthur Pratt's efforts in carrying out the government's antipolygamy campaign frequently pushed him to the forefront of the news. Stories, publicly denied by Orson Pratt in the March 23, 1878, Deseret Evening News, even rumored that Arthur had arrested his father on polygamy charges. Despite Apostle Pratt's spirited public defenses of Mormon polygamy, Arthur, like his mother, was very much opposed to the principle.^ In an 1882 newspaper interview Arthur was asked why he was not a Mormon. " I will tell you why," he replied; " I am the son of my father's first wife, and had a mother who taught me the evils of the system."^ The fact that he was not a Mormon improved his chances for advancement in the federal government after the March 22, 1882, passing of the Edmunds bill.

This amendment to the Anti-bigamy law of 1862, among other things, barred those guilty of polygamy or unlawful cohabitation from holding any civic office or position of public trust. All registration and elective offices were declared vacant in Utah Territory, and provisions were made for placing their duties upon "proper persons" to be appointed by a bipartisan commission of five members chosen by the president by * Andrew Karl Larson, " / Was Called to Dixie"â&#x20AC;&#x201D;The Virgin River Basin: Unique Experience in Mormon Pioneering (Salt Lake City: Deseret News Press, 1961), pp. 319-21. ^Arthur, Orson Pratt, J r . , and Harmel Pratt were all antipolygamous. The only one of Sarah's children to remain faithful to Mormonism was her deaf son, Laron, an avowed monogamist. ''Anti-Polygamy Standard, 11 [February 1882]:81.

26

Utah Historical Quarterly

and with advice and consent of the Senate. On September 22, 1882, Arthur Pratt called on Judge Elias Smith with a commission from the governor and demanded possession of the office of sheriff, together with the keys of the county jail. But he was denied access to the position. It was March 1885 before the Edmunds bill was declared constitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court. During this interval Arthur Pratt had found employment as a bookkeeper for McCormick & Co. On March 13, 1886, Gov. Eh H. Murray appointed both Pratt and Bolivar Roberts to territorial positions. But Mormons James Jack and Nephi Clayton would not vacate their offices. Six days later, Pratt and Roberts entered suit in the Third District Court for possession of the territorial positions of auditor of public accounts and librarian and recorder of marks and brands (Pratt) and treasurer (Roberts).

Federal officials, recognizing that the issue would not be resolved in court for some time, sought a temporary position for Pratt. "Arthur Pratt has resigned his position as a bookkeeper," the October 16, 1886, Salt Lake Herald reported, and he will devote his energies to aiding Marshal Dyer in running down offending Mormons. The average deputy's salary is understood not to be an extremely fat thing, so that to induce Mr. Pratt to leave as good a position as he had, Marshal Dyer must have offered something tempting.

Mr. Pratt's obvious experience in that line, and more than all, his wide acquaintance among the people, constitute his value in the Marshal's eye.

Pratt wasted no time adjusting to his new job. On December 5, as Salt Lake Herald associate editor Brigham H. Roberts was preparing the daily dispatches. Deputy Pratt arrested him for "unlawful cohabitation." And on February 11, 1887, Pratt accompanied Marshal Frank H. Dyer on a well-coordinated raid on Mormon church property including the tithing office, the historian's office, and the Gardo House. However, church president John Taylor and George Q. Cannon, the main objects of the search, were not apprehended. Orson Pratt, the husband often wives, had died five years earlier, and young Pratt was never faced with having to arrest his father. But Deputy Pratt had a special interest in proving a case against boyhood friend Abraham H. Cannon, a member of the First Council of the Seventy.

Cannon noted in his journal on May 10, 1886, that Arthur Pratt told the governor: "Cannon is the one who when asked if he had broken the law answered, 'Yes, thank God, I have.' "^ Though Cannon claimed ^The Abraham H. Cannon Journal is in Special Collections, Harold B. Lee Library, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah. Microfilms of the journal are also available in the LDS Church Library-Archives and the Utah State Historical Society Library, Salt Lake City.

Arthur Pratt

^

27

that Pratt misrepresented his words, he worried about the deputy's intentions. On July 27 Cannon noted in his journal that plural wife Mary E. Croxall sent her brother to tell him that "Deputy Marshal Pratt had told Alfales Young that I was married to M[ary] E. C[roxall].

She therefore thinks it best to remain concealed for a time, in which decision I agreed with her." Three days later, after the funeral of President John Taylor, Cannon recorded in his journal on July 30: Arthur Pratt is trying to work up a polygamy case against me, and the remark is attributed to him that he knew I had married Mamie Croxall since I was released from prison. I sent word that the officers might pull at that string as long as they liked. I saw M.E.C. in the evening and told her of the rumor. She will endeavor to avoid a subpoena. Her health is good and she is comfortably situated.

Despite his devotion to arresting Cannon and other polygamists, Deputy Pratt's intensity was apparently only job-related. On January 30, 1888, he was appointed warden of the Utah Territorial Penitentiary (Sugarhouse) where most Mormon "cohabs" were imprisoned.

When George Q. Cannon gave himself up to serve his time, he was treated remarkably well by Warden Pratt, even to the extent of allowing his cell door to remain open. On one occasion when a guard was abusive of Cannon, Warden Pratt immediately transferred the employee elsewhere. And Abraham H. Cannon, on a visit to his father, was even permitted a guided tour of a new part of the prison.

Young Cannon noted in his journal on January 23, 1889, that Pratt had taken the elder Cannon into his confidence on at least one occasion. " T h e one great secret of all this present [polygamy] raid," Pratt told Cannon was the fees obtained for every arrest. $8.00 per day was allowed for a team in going to make an arrest and $5.00 per day for feed for a team and man, all of which was charged to expense acc't. Then there is a fee for each man captured. [Marshal] Exum has charge of affairs in the northern part of the Territory, and he has made $4500.00 at the business within a short time, in addition to which he has paid Dyer 40% of all fees. If the fees were removed considerable of our persecution would cease.

Joseph Amos became prison warden on July 27, 1889, and Arthur Pratt was appointed deputy marshal in charge of the First Judicial District (Ogden). Some Mormons hated to see Pratt leave. Abraham H. Cannon noted in his journal on July 29 that Pratt had "won for himself many friends because of his firm yet kind discipline while in charge of the 'Pen,' and many will be sorry at his removal." Illustrating Pratt's respect for "those imprisoned for conscience' sake," Cannon added

28

Utah Historical Quarterly

Agnes E. Caine Pratt and Arthur Pratt, the latter from a Deseret News photograph dated December 20, 1913. Both prints courtesy of Chester Pratt, a grandson.

that he had said, " I could plow a furrow around a hundred acre field of such men, and tell them to stay within the boundary, and I would feel perfectly safe that not one of them would disobey instructions.''

Pratt did not live in Ogden long. On January 6, 1890, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that he and Bolivar Roberts could assume their positions as territorial auditor and recorder respectively. The Pratts returned to Salt Lake and took up residence at 164 East South Temple.

In addition to his territorial position, Pratt also served as secretary of the Salt Lake City Gas Company and assisted in the organization of the Republican party in the territory.

The February 19, 1892, Deseret Evening News reported assault charges brought against Arthur Pratt by D. A. Sullivan. The incident was the result of an election day fracas when Sullivan, a unregistered voter, was refused voting rights by election judge Rulon S. Wells. In his anger Sullivan struck Wells. Pratt, who was in the vicinity, immediately came to Wells's aid and "dealt Sullivan a blow over the head with a walking stick." Pratt's acquittal was noted in the February 24 Deseret Evening News.

Despite satisfaction with his territorial position, Pratt's heart was in law enforcement work. In late 1893 he was elected Salt Lake City chief of police. Prior to taking command of his new position on

Arthur Pratt

29

January 1, 1894, he visited the San Francisco police department.

Speculation ran high that Pratt would make significant changes to lessen the frequent charges of police brutality. " A good many members of the police force will stop twirling their ebony, cherry and mohagany clubs early in J a n u a r y , " the December 28, 1893, Deseret Evening News editorialized; "others will also be retired to private life as soon as the new men become initiated."

Chief Pratt's first year on the job was rife with difficulties. California was rampant with unemployment and hundreds of men unable to find jobs were given free passage to Ogden, Utah, by Southern Pacific Railroad. As the first group of the "Industrial A r m y " arrived in Utah, they began to drift south looking for food, shelter, work, or a passage elsewhere. Within a three-day period in late May, more than two hundred of these "wealers," as they were popularly called, had reached Salt Lake City. City officials, viewing the drifters as a "menace to the peace and quietude" of the city, desired to keep them under close scrutiny. Pratt was assigned responsibility to "feed and watch this indigent horde. "^ Leaders of the Industrialists informed Pratt that not only had they been given free passage on the railroad to Ogden but that there were 15,000 more men in California waiting to catch Southern Pacific freight trains. If matters were not complicated enough for Chief Pratt, on May 24, 1894, Davis County officials telephoned Salt Lake City Mayor Robert Baskin requesting his assistance in combating the depredations of Industrialists in that part of the state.

Baskin, perhaps recognizing that it was best to keep the unemployed men further north, where they would be more likely to catch a train out of the state, ordered Pratt and a force of policemen to "proceed to any point which the Davis County authorities might designate in order to check the pillage." On May 25 Pratt and twenty-two Salt Lake policemen, armed with a court injunction to prevent the Industrialists from crossing the Davis-Weber County line, arrived in Davis County.

Though the problems with the Industrial Army were resolved, Pratt continued to experience difficulties as he began his upgrading of the Salt Lake City police department. On August 10, 1894, he met with the entire police force behind closed doors. "Bickering, distrust, suspicion, [and] unrest" were undermining the efficiency of the force, he was quoted in the August 10 Deseret Evening News, and all such behavior "must be stopped no matter how great the cost." He also ^Mayor Robert Baskin to Utah Gov. Caleb West, May 24, 1894, Deseret Evening News.

30

Utah Historical Quarterly

warned against the conveying of information to newspapermen who were "often apprised of matters of importance" before the chief was. " I n regard to tale bearing to the commissioners," Pratt added, "that too must be done away with if every man had to be suspended." Two weeks later nine policemen were retired from the force under the chiefs "retrenchment order." Though grumbling was heard in the ranks, the August 29 Deseret Evening News was quick to point out that Pratt's measure would save $815 a month without impairing efficiency.

Late 1894 again found Chief Pratt in the forefront of the news.

Headlines of the December 6, 1894, Deseret Evening News announced the arrest of Pratt and two officers for contempt of court for refusing to identify a woman involved in an assignation.

The "Midnight Assignation Case" involved an unmarried couple who were found engaged in "criminal relations" in an unlighted hack near Holy Cross Hospital. When the matter was brought to Pratt's attention by the investigating policemen, the chief ordered the officers to remain silent on the matter. He had interviewed the ladyâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;a family woman who "begged that she not be exposed" and gave her his word that her identity would be kept secret. But rumors began to spread throughout the city, and a grand jury was convened for the purpose of discovering the identity of the couple to "remove suspicion from those who were not deserving of it." When Pratt was called before the jury he refused to provide the names of the individuals, arguing that if he were to violate his word given to the lady in question "it would ruin an entire well-known family of this city, and he was satisfied also that the exposure would very likely provoke bloodshed." He was then placed under arrest for contempt.

The city was divided on Pratt's adamant position. Some argued that the man had given his word which should be honored. But the December 11, 1894, Deseret Evening News "after recognizing his ethics in the situation," argued that the fact remains that the law makes no such exceptions in favor of the scruples of recusant witnesses, as does also the further fact that a serious precedent would be set if any witness, even a chief of police, were given the prerogative of refusing to testify because, forsooth, in his judgment, no evidence to warrant a conviction could be secured. A decision of that kind is not left to the witness under any circumstances; if it were, legal investigations and trials would in thousands of cases be nothing but a farce.

Pratt continued to be a political football for the Salt Lake City Board of Police and Fire Commissioners. He tendered his resignation on December 31, 1894, but was unanimously reappointed. On Decern-

Arthur Pratt

31

b e r 7, 1896, however, he was dismissed "for the good of the service" without benefit of a hearing. Believing that he was "illegally deprived of his r i g h t s , " Pratt applied to the T h i r d District C o u r t for a p e r e m p tory writ of m a n d a t e , a m e a s u r e designed to compel the b o a r d to restore h i m to office. D u r i n g a J u l y 14, 1897, b o a r d meeting he was reinstated to his position. But the Salt Lake Herald on September 3 , 1897, assailed Chief Pratt with n u m e r o u s charges including " f r a u d " a n d that he " g a m b l e d at p o k e r . " P r a t t filed a $30,000 libel suit against the paper, arguing that " b y m e a n s of said publication [he] h a d b e e n greatly injured in his standing a n d reputation in Salt Lake City, where he lives, a n d in other places where he is k n o w n . " T h e situation was so controversial that when M a y o r J o h n Clark r e n o m i n a t e d Pratt at the b e g i n n i n g of 1898, the new b o a r d refused to ratify the a p p o i n t m e n t . I n a letter to the city council, reported in the February 8, 1898, Deseret Evening News, the m a y o r appealed the decision. " I n selecting a m a n for chief of p o l i c e , " he wrote, I sought for a man of large experience, of conceded honesty, who could not be corrupted by bribes, of courage, discretion, executive ability, and one who would see that the laws and ordinances were strictly and uniformly enforced, without fear or favor, and yet without radicalism. Such a man I believe I found in Arthur Pratt. While out of courtesy to your honorable body, I have carefully reconsidered the nomination. I have seen nothing to change my opinion relative to him, but still believe he is the proper man for the chief of police. There are no charges against him of malfeasance or maladministration in office in all the years he has held the office in this community.

Believing that the appointment of Arthur Pratt as chief of police will "conserve the best interests of the police department," I again submit his name and ask your "advice and consent" to his appointment.

M a y o r Clark was of the opinion that t h o u g h a majority of the city councilmen m a y not have w a n t e d P r a t t in his position, the majority of city taxpayers did. H e noted in his letter that opposition to P r a t t ' s a p p o i n t m e n t likely came from " p e r s o n a l prejudice, political differences, [and] dislikes imbibed from a strict enforcement of the laws a n d ordinances of the city in the p a s t . " But the city council was not swayed by the m a y o r ' s appeal. A n o t h e r vote was taken a n d Pratt was again rejected by a vote of six to nine. T h e F e b r u a r y 9, 1898, Deseret Evening News charged that the negative-voting councilmen were representatives of the " s a l o o n p e o p l e . " Chief Pratt commenced m a n d a m u s proceedings before T h i r d District C o u r t J u d g e C h e r r y on F e b r u a r y 12, 1898. T h e intent of this suit was to compel the city into issuing a pay voucher of $750 representing

32

Utah Historical Quarterly

his salary for September 1897 through January 1898. A Utah State Supreme Court decision in late March ultimately vindicated Pratt. The March 25 Deseret Evening News advised that no motion for a rehearing be filed, and that the "de jure chief of police [be] allowed to enter upon the actual performance of the duties of his office without delay." After a lengthy discussion of the merits of the court's decision, the paper urged.

Now let wrangling cease. Let the City Council hold up the Mayor's hands in his efforts to give the city a good government. Let meddlesome schemers who were not placed in office by the people be no longer permitted to dominate the men who were. Again the " N e w s " says let us have peace.

The Salt Lake City police department continued to remain a hotbed of political meddling. Though Arthur Pratt remained its chief for a time, he eventually found another law enforcement position with fewer political strings attached. In 1904 he became the warden of the Utah State Prison at Sugarhouse, a position he had earlier held in territorial Utah.

During Warden Pratt's thirteen-year tenure the Utah State Prison became recognized as a model institution. He abolished "locksteps," striped clothing, the shaving of heads, "dark cells," and bread and water diets. An avid baseball fan, Pratt encouraged the sport at the prison. Prisoners who maintained good behavior throughout the week were allowed to play or watch the Saturday games. During inclement weather, musicals, literary programs, and lectures were sponsored.

Vaudeville and "moving pictures" were very popular. And the prisoners were allowed to make use of newspapers, magazines, and books.

Utah had insufficient funds for employing laborers on the building of new state roads during the early 1900s, and Pratt, under the guidance of Gov. William Spry, was one of the earliest advocates of utilizing convict labor on state highway systems. Prisoners were motivated by the novel idea of deducting ten days from their sentence for each day worked on the roads. The program was a resounding success. In 1915 the system employed a daily average of 54.5 men. In 1916 that number increased to 66.5. By Pratt's own estimation the 1915 convict work force alone saved the state $44,278. In addition to the financial advantages to the state, Pratt was convinced that the work done by the prisoners benefited them immensely. "It not only adds to their health," he was quoted, " b u t it gives them a better outlook on life in general and makes better men of them." As evidence of the success of

Arthur Pratt

33

State prison at Sugarhouse. Arthur Pratt was the warden there when the notorious Joe Hill was executed in 1915. USHS collections.

the program he noted that '' of all the men we have had working on the roads only three have come back to the prison, after their termination of sentence to serve for other crimes."^ One of the less desirable, though necessary aspects of Pratt's duties at the state prison was presiding over numerous executions on the prison grounds or elsewhere in isolated parts of Salt Lake County.

The most notorious of these cases was the November 19, 1915, execution of convicted murderer Joel Hagglund, alias Joseph Hillstromâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;Joe Hill as he was known in International Workers of the World circles. The "Songbird of the I W W , " or the "Wobblies' Troubadour," as legend dubbed him, drifted to Salt Lake City in the summer of 1913. On the evening of January 10, 1914, he and an accomplice fatally shot Salt Lake grocer John G. Morrison and his seventeen-year-old son Arling during an apparent robbery attempt.

Hillstrom was apprehended while seeking medical help for the chest wound he had received in the shootout with the Morrisons.

Hillstrom's lawyers, hired by the IWW, tried to prove that because he had written many of the organization's revolutionary songs, ^Undated Deseret Evening News clipping in Chester Pratt collection.

34

Utah Historical Quarterly

he was the victim of a capitalistic conspiracy. The defense was futile and he was convicted of the double murder on June 27, 1914. Judge Morris L. Ritchie turned Hillstrom over to Pratt to be "taken to the state prison and there be kept by the warden until September 4, 1914, and that on September 4 within the exterior walls of the state prison between the hours of sunrise and sunset you be shot until you are dead by the Sheriff of Sak Lake County. "^^ The seventeen months needed to exhaust the appeals process were dramatic. IWW propagandists, through their journal. Solidarity, charged that Hillstrom was the victim of a conspiracy of "the Utah Construction Company, the Utah Copper Company, and the Mormon Church."^^ The "Joe Hill Case" became an international symbol of labor unions. Thousands of protest letters, including a September 30, 1915, telegram from President Woodrow Wilson, were sent to Governor Spry. In early October he granted Hillstrom a brief reprieve, but after the October 16 meeting of the Board of Pardons, his execution was rescheduled for November 19. As that date drew ever closer, intense lobbying efforts to postpone the execution continued. Wilson sent another telegram to Spry requesting a "thorough reconsideration of the case of Joseph Hillstrom." But Utahns were even more shocked at the presidential intervention in Utah affairs when Wilson wired labor leader Samuel Gompers that " I have telegraphed Governor Spry of Utah urging justice and a thorough reconsideration of the case of Joseph Hillstrom."^2 Angry at the president's suggestion that justice had not already been served, Spry wired: With a full knowledge of all the facts and circumstances submitted, I feel that a further postponement at this time would be an unwarranted interference with the course of justice. Mindful of the obligations of my oath of office to see to it that the laws are enforced, I cannot and will not lend myself or my office to such interference. Tangible facts must be presented before I will further interfere in this case.^^

Those facts were not forthcoming, and Pratt began the final preparations for the execution. On the afternoon of November 18 he allowed newspaper reporters to interview the condemned man. Despite Hillstrom's air of bravado during the interview with the press, he lost ^°Deseret Evening News, July 8, 1914. '^Vernon H. Jensen, " T h e Legend and the Case of Joe H i l l . " Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 2 (Spring 1967): 108. '^William L. Roper and Leonard J . Arrington, William Spry, Man of Firmness, Governor of Utah (Salt Lake City: Utah State Historical Society and University of Utah Press, 1971), p. 151. i^Ibid., 152-53.

Arthur Pratt

35

his nerve at 4:00 A.M. the next morning and began pounding on his cell doors, screaming with rage. Prison officials tried unsuccessfully to calm the hysterical man, then left him alone. When officials arrived at 7:00 A.M. to escort him to the prison yard for the execution, he had tied his cell doors shut with strips torn from a blanket. When the doors were finally opened, the desperate prisoner attacked the guards with a broom handle. Deputy Sheriff Corless verbally disarmed him by saying: "Joe, this is all nonsense. What do you mean? You promised to die like a m a n . " Hillstrom then laid the weapon down saying, "Well, I'm through. But you can't blame a man for fighting for his life."^* Shortly before the prisoner was strapped into a chair with his back to the prison wall, Pratt received a communication from Spry to question Hillstrom regarding a William Busky. The man had sworn out an affidavit that he was with Hillstrom the night the Morrisons were murdered and that Hillstrom was innocent. But the condemned man told Pratt he did not know anyone by that name, and the execution was carried out at 7:42 A.M. Arthur Pratt, prison reformer, was well respected by his peers.

Active in national law enforcement circles, he was chosen president of the American Prison Association for 1916-17. At the conclusion of his term, Pratt retired from the Utah State Prison and began new employment as chief special agent of the Oregon Short Line with headquarters at Pocatello, Idaho. But this was to be short-term employment only. In early 1919 he fell ill and traveled to California to see if a climate change would improve his health. After a short vacation he returned to Salt Lake City. Though his condition was not considered serious, he died on March 20, 1919, bringing to close one of the most remarkable law enforcement careers in the history of Utah.

^*New York World, November 20, 1915, as cited in Roper and Arrington, William Spry, p . 158.

Bluff, Utah, looking south. A frontier outpost in 1880, the town had evolved into a more settled community by 1908 when this photograph was taken. USHS collections.

Murder, Mayhem, and Mormons: The Evolution of Law Enforcement on the San Juan Frontier, 1880-1900

BY T H O M A S E. A U S T I N A N D R O B E R T S. M C P H E R S O N

SOUTHEASTERN U T A H IS A STUDY IN MARKED CONTRAST. In some areas there is the beauty of lush green alpine meadows, while only a few miles removed lies the stark red landscape of sand and slickrock desert.

Mountain drainages consist of deep canyons, many of which are impassable. This country literally stands on edge. In many instances it

Mr. Austin is the sheriff of Blanding, Utah, and Mr. McPherson teaches for the College of Eastern Utahâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;San Juan Campus. A version of this paper was presented by Mr. Austin at the 1986 annual meeting of the Utah State Historical Society.

Murder, Mayhem, and Mormons

37

is little changed since 1879 when the Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday Saints (Mormons) called a colonizing mission to the Four Corners area. The diverse reasons for the church expansion, the original exploration by the members first called, and the actual journey by the Mormon pioneer families are well chronicled in several writings, including David E. Miller's book Hole-in-the-Rock.

The Mormons were not, however, the first to establish themselves in the San Juan country. They were preceded not only by a number of Native American groups but also by several gentile settlers from Colorado, various small cattle outfits, and an assortment of transient white men.^ The area that these settlers moved into had the unsavory reputation of being a haven for renegade Indians and white outlaws. Morgan A. Barton, a son of one of these original Mormon pioneers, explained one of the purposes of the San J u a n mission as follows: And why were these people called to settle San Juan? Perhaps not specifically stated or publicly announced, but definitely apparent, for in settling this part of the country they were an established outpost, detracting marauding Indians from interior southern settlements of Utah Territory as well as being a point of interception of bank robbers, horse thieves, cattle rustlers, jail breakers, train robbers, and general desperadic criminals, reducing to a minimum a continuation of their terrorizing and plundering inland settlements in their manner of living while out of reach of law and justice and into which country U. S. officers didn't care to penetrate. These people were to be a shock absorber of premeditated plots of Caucasian outlaws and Indian renegades and if they failed in tact, diplomacy, mental ingenuity and patience in handling this phase of their mission they would fall into the category of what we term today as expendables, and they performed this part of their mission as any other. Many times I have seen my father, with other men, rushing home and at times out of religious services, for their horses and guns to take up the chase of outlaws.^

Obviously, this Mormon colony was charged with bringing law and order to an area that had not yet experienced it. This segment of their mission call was one of the hardest to accomplish since there were many factors that made this region attractive to the lawless element of society. The extremely remote location, the nature of the topography, the lack of any governmental organization, and the sparse population created an excellent hideout for those "on the r u n . " In establishing a 'Robert McPherson, "Navajos, Mormons, and Henry L. Mitchell," Utah Historical Quarterly (Winter 1987), mentions there were eighteen families at McElmo when the Mormons arrived at Bluff. ^Morgan Amasa Barton, "Back Door to San J u a n , " p. 9, as cited in David E. Miller, Hole-in-theRock (Sak Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1959), 8-9.

38

Utah Historical Quarterly

settlement, M o r m o n s could do little about the difficulties that nature provided, b u t they did do something about the sparse population along the river and the installation of county government, which included enforcement of the laws. T h e first ten years of law enforcement by the new settlers were organized around a type of church vigilance committee that saw civil authorities participating u n d e r the direction of church officials.^ T h e pioneers arrived at the future site of Bluff on April 6, 1880, where they elected to form their settlement, having neither the provisions nor the heart to continue the fifteen miles to M o n t e z u m a as originally planned. T h a t same day they looked over the land, selected a town site, a n d later in the evening held a c o m m u n i t y meeting in which committees were formed to lay out an irrigation ditch and to survey both town lots and agricultural fields.^ These meetings, held immediately after completing an arduous trek, are a clear demonstration of how these people felt about establishing physical order as soon as possible.

O n April 26, 1880, word was received at Bluff that the territorial legislature h a d acted in favor of forming a new county in the southeastern corner of the stateâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;to be called San J u a n C o u n t y â&#x20AC;&#x201D; a n d that the governor h a d appointed Silas S. Smith as probate j u d g e . Even before the j u d g e reached Bluff, the new selectmen called a meeting to organize county government.^ In addition to Smith as probate j u d g e , the same act h a d appointed Platte D . L y m a n , Zechariah B. Decker, a n d J e n s Nielson as selectmen and Charles E. Walton as clerk.^ As in the rest of the United States, taxes shortly followed the formation of government in San J u a n . T h e J u n e 7, 1880, meeting of the San J u a n C o u n t y Court provided for taxation at six mills on every dollar of assessed property value.^ This probably came as a blow to ^The terms vigilante and vigilance often invoke thoughts of well organized, highly structured groups who chase down and execute lawbreakers where they catch them. These terms, as they are used in this article, have quite a different meaning. Most instances of church/citizen-initiated law enforcement by the Bluff area settlers were disorganized and "spur of the moment" reactions to the immediate need of recovering stolen property. The Mormon posses had no intent to execute anyone, and did, in fact, dissuade a posse of cowboys from hanging Cass Hite for ferrying some outlaws across the San J u a n River. *Platte D. Lyman, Journal, Special Collections, Brigham Young University Library, Provo, Utah, p. 12. Lyman indicates that he arrived at the site of the settlement on April 5, but the main body of the wagon train did not arrive until April 6. ^Ibid., p. 16. The May 8, 1880, entry says that Lyman met S. S. Smith and a small company bound for San J u a n . See also "Minutes of San J u a n County Court, 1880-1900," San J u a n County Courthouse, Monticello, Utah, p. 7. The entry for April 26, 1880, shows the selectmen were in attendance but Smith was not. n b i d . , p. 7.

Tbid., J u n e 7, 1880, p. 8.

Murder, Mayhem, and Mormons

39

many of the Colorado cattlemen who grazed their herds in Utah to avoid taxation in their home state. The general feeling of the gentile residents of the county was that the Mormon government could levy all the taxes it wanted, but it still had to collect them.^ The tough job of assessment and collection had been given to Lemuel H. Redd, J r . , and the August 4 minutes of the San J u a n County Court show that he had already begun to assess and collect in earnest.^ He had a great hunger to become a wealthy man,^° and since his wages were fixed at 12.5 percent of the total assessed taxes for the year, it benefited him directly to ferret out every piece of taxable property. ^^ He is said to have refused a bodyguard, but records show that he did have a paid escort.^^ He was steadfast in his refusal to carry a weapon into the armed camps of the cattle companies, insisting that being unarmed was the only way to avoid confrontation. On one occasion he identified himself, only to come under the guns of the cowboys. He looked at them calmly and said, " I am going to assess all the livestock and every taxable thing belonging to this company and its employees, and when the time comes, I'm going to collect every cent of tax due."^^ The county records show that he not only collected those taxes but did so efficiently for the five years that he held the position.

Another big step in establishing governmental uniformity was a countywide election to select county officials. In the J u n e 7 meeting of the San J u a n Court, the election districts were established and preparations made for an August election.^"* Accounts do not reveal when it was held, but since there was a change of selectmen on August 4, it is reasonable to assume that it was prior to that date.^^ Little was said about the outcome of the voting, but sources indicate that Platte D. Lyman was elected to the office of prosecuting attorney, and James B. Decker was elected as sheriff. ^^ Mention was also made of an ap^ " S a n J u a n Stake History," Special Collections, Brigham Young University Library, p. 93, gives the quote cited and says it is according to an eyewitness. It is not hard to imagine the lack of enthusiasm that the gentile residents felt toward being taxed by the Mormon government and, religious attitudes aside, they were probably hostile about being taxed when they had not been taxed before. ^Minutes . . . County Court, August 4, 1880, p. 9. i^AmasaJ. Redd, ed., Lemuel Hardison Redd, Jr., 1856-1923 (Salt Lake City, 1967). Redd makes the following comment about his father: "Father remarked many years ago that while a young man he had a great desire to have wealth and said he made it a matter of earnest prayer." ' ' M i n u t e s . . . County Court, August 4, 1880, p. 9.

'2lbid., December 28, 1881, p. 12. '^Redd, Lemuel Hardison Redd, p. 8. '*Minutes . . . County Court, August 4, 1880, p. 9.

'nbid. '^Albert R. Lyman, "History of San J u a n County, 1879-1917," San J u a n County Library, Blanding, Utah, p . 19.

40

Utah Historical Quarterly

propriation of twelve dollars for the purchase of law books. ^^ Thus, the Mormons gave every indication that they were serious about enforcing the laws of the land since they now had a prosecutor, a sheriff, and positive knowledge of what the letter of the law was.

Though they were serious in spirit, the realities of living in a remote area and the difficulties of raising crops the first year soon slowed their efforts. The prosecutor left Bluff on June 14, 1880, to try to earn a living in Colorado by cutting railroad ties and freighting supplies to the mining camps.^^ He was not even present for his election and wrote little of it in his diary, apparently attaching no great importance to the office.^^ He and most of the able-bodied men were elsewhere trying to make enough money to supply their families on the San J u a n with the basics of life. One local historian had enthusiastically said " T h a t the machinery had been put in order to establish and preserve law in this erstwhile lawless region. "^"^ The machinery might have been there, but the men were not; and, as a result, the first winter for the people left in Bluff was one of constant theft, pursuit, and recovery of their property.

The first mention of such a case is dated January 11, 1881. Platte D. Lyman in his diary states that "six of the boys who have been out 5 or 6 days after stolen horses returned today with 5 head for which they paid the Navajos $2.00 apiece. They found them in Comb Wash 10 miles above the road."^^ The Bluff settlers would rather have ransomed their stolen stock than involve the Indians in a criminal investigation, partly because these pioneers followed the charge to feed and placate their Indian neighbors rather than fight them. Another reason the Mormons avoided criminal prosecution of Indian thieves was that it would have involved representatives of the federal government, possibly U . S . marshals, who were, at that time, actively pursuing Mormon polygamists. The community of Bluff had at least six plural marriage families.^^ Late in March 1881 an Indian named Navajo Frank, who was large in stature, surly in attitude, abusive towards the Bluff women, and suspected of thievery, was caught stealing horses. He escaped, '^Minutes . . . County Court, August 4, 1880, p. 9. '^Lyman Journal, J u n e 14, 1880, p. 18. '^Ibid., p. 26, Lyman says, "Yesterday I qualified as Prosecuting Attorney for this county having been elected to that office at the August election." ^''"San J u a n Stake History," p. 92. ^'Lyman Journal, p. 33.

2Tbid.

• C *' •.' X « :^

m»,^^Q-^"w

Old swing tree. Bluff, Utah, where tradition says the first settlers gathered for a meeting. The river destroyed the tree in 1908. USHS collections.

leaving the stolen horses behind, and the M o r m o n s decided to take no action against him. A few weeks later, however, K u m e n J o n e s caught Navajo Frank with one of J o n e s ' s favorite horses on the south side of the river. T h e M o r m o n retrieved his horse and recrossed the river to Bluff, telling Bishop Nielson of the incident. A few days later more horses were found missing. Bishop Nielson suggested that Thales Haskel and K u m e n Jones follow Frank and try to recover the missing stock, which they did. After several days and some help from friendly Navajos, the M o r m o n s located Frank with one of their stolen horses.

Haskel looked at Navajo Frank and told him that if he persisted in stealing from the M o r m o n s that he would " t a k e sick and d i e . " Navajo Frank laughed at the m e n but gave them back the horse. It was several months before he was seen again in Bluff, and when he did appear a physical change had taken place. J o n e s said, " y o u could scarcely believe he was the healthy, rugged Indian we h a d known some months

42

Utah Historical Quarterly

before. He was thin and haggard. His full chest was all sunken in. . . ."^^ Navajo Frank came to Bluff to plead with Haskel to write a letter to the Lord telling him that he would never again steal from the Mormons if his life would be spared. Haskel replied that he couldn't promise what God would do, but if Frank would stop his stealing and do what he could to get the other Navajos to do the same he might live.

He was still alive in 1919 when Kumen Jones wrote this account.^^ The incident with Navajo Frank was the first to involve any type of enforcement activity by the residents of Bluff. The action taken by Haskel was conceived at the highest level of Mormon church leadership, initiated by local church authority, carried out by members of the church as a religious undertaking, and played on compatible religious beliefs of the Indians. This event also indicates how these settlers involved their theology in every facet of their lives, while encouraging future church-inspired law enforcement activity.^^ The economic predicament had not improved by spring 1881 for the people of Bluff. Most of the men were forced again to leave for jobs in Colorado, and by the middle of May very few were left in the community. In September two young men, heavily armed, rode into town and asked if they might trade horses. During the conversation that ensued, one of the settlers remarked that trading would be difficult since the Bluff horse herd was grazing ten miles away in Butler Wash.

Acting on this information the two men left the area, taking with them the Mormon horse herd. The people again turned to their ecclesiastical leader, Bishop Nielson, for direction. The bishop selected L. H . Redd, J r . , Hyrum Perkins, and Joseph Lyman to pursue the thieves, giving them instructions not to overtake the outlaws until close enough to the other Mormon settlements in southwestern Utah to solicit help. The Mormon posse inadvertently overtook the bandits at Hall's Crossing on the Colorado River. After recovering their property and the thieves' entire outfit, they engaged in a gunfight with the outlaws. Joseph Lyman was critically wounded and one outlaw was killed in the exchange. Lyman's wound was so serious that only the timely intervention of a Navajo man saved his life.^^

^^Kumen Jones, "Writings of Kumen J o n e s , " Special Collections, Brigham Young University Library, p . 42.

^nbid. ^^Ibid., pp. 42-43. Jones states that Apostle Erastus Snow told the Bluff settlers that if they would live their religion, the Indians that would not be friendly would be destroyed by the hand of the Lord. ^^Albert R. Lyman, Indians and Outlaws (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1962): 45-51; Lyman Journal, pp. 44-45, the October 13, 1881, entry, gives a narrative of this event.

Murder, Mayhem, and Mormons

43

Large cattle outfits flourished in San Juan County in the 1880s, creating problems that were often solved by church rather than civil leaders. USHS collections.

This event appears to have been the first time that the Mormons were pitted against men who had few scruples about killing those who followed. It was an action that was initiated by church authority with no civil officials taking part in the affair. The posse was, by closest definition, a church vigilance committee.^^ During the first six or eight years of the 1880s the big cattle outfits flourished in San J u a n County.^^ The cattle industry attracted men who were wanted by authorities in the eastern states for various crimes committed in their jurisdictions. One account states that many of the riders for the cattle companies refused to go east of Dolores, Colorado, because they were afraid they would be arrested.^^ Four such men drifted into the McElmo area during the winter of 1886 and got jobs ^^No mention is made in any account, including county records, that affords the three Mormon men any law enforcement authority. ^^Charles S. Peterson, " S a n J u a n in Controversy: American Livestock Frontier vs. Mormon Cattle Pool," in Thomas G. Alexander, ed.. Essays on the American West, 1972-1973 (Provo, Ut.: Brigham Young University Press, 1974), Charles Redd Monographs in Western History, no. 3, p. 45. See also Don D. Walker, " T h e Carlisles: Cattle Barons of the Upper Basin," Utah Historical Quarterly 32 (1964): 270. ^^Cornelia A. Perkins, Marion G. Nielson, and Lenora B. Jones, Saga of San Juan (Salt Lake City: Mercury Publishing Company, 1968): 94.

44

Utah Historical Quarterly

with the L C Cattle Company in the spring. They worked for a few weeks and then left, taking with them some of the best horses of the company. The men headed southwest toward Bluff, and on a Sunday morning were seen by a Bluff man in Butler Wash. He approached them, but they warned him off with their guns. The man then rode to town and interrupted the Sunday meeting with the news. Bishop Nielson again advised the Bluff men to go in pursuit and overtake these individuals. Just as they were preparing to leave, the foreman of the L C cattle outfit, Bill Ball, rode into Bluff with some of his cowboys. He asked for and received help from the Bluff settlers in forming a posse comprised of fourteen men who elected him as leader. After a long chase, they overtook the horse rustlers several miles west of Bluff. The posse was ambushed by the thieves from the shelter of an old Indian ruin, and Bill Ball was mortally wounded. Even yet, the incredible drama was not complete. As the man lay dying, the killers robbed him of his pistol and spurs and then escaped across the Colorado River by a secret trail.^^ Although this incident reads like a wild west novel, it serves to illustrate that the Mormons, six years after the formation of the county government, still did not separate the powers of church and state. They formed the original posse at the direction of their bishop instead of the sheriff. The county law enforcement officials deferred to the cowboys, electing Ball as leader of the posse, and the investigation and pursuit that followed two weeks after the murder was initiated by friends of the murdered man, not the sheriff. When the investigation finally was begun, the peace officer's only function was to act as a guide to the eighteen-man posse. Amasa Barton, the sheriff, and Kumen Jones went with the posse at the direction of Bishop Nielson. Barton should have started the investigation immediately after the killing, yet it took him two weeks, eighteen cowboys, and a bishop's directive to prompt him to action. Obviously, San J u a n County law enforcement practiced a hands-off policy unless it involved the Bluff Mormons or unless a specific request for assistance had been receivedâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;and then only after approval of the church leader.

^°The Bill Ball killing is one of the best known of the San J u a n stories. The most accurate account seems to be Albert R. Lyman's unpublished "History of San J u a n C o u n t y . " Much of the information was extracted from interviews with participants in the events. Since it was written in 1918, it is logical to assume that the resources he utilized were more accurate than later renditions. For example, Lyman's 1918 account says that J . B. Decker had a horse killed in the ambush. Minutes . . . County Court, December 8, 1886, substantiate this: " A petition was presented by James B. Decker, asking for an appropriation of one hundred dollars to reimburse him for losses sustained while following horse thieves."

Murder, Mayhem, and Mormons

45

An event in 1886 that affected the county government and law enforcement again involved the Mormon settlers. Tired of fighting the river at Bluff, they began to look for an area where they could dry-farm and raise livestock. Fredrick I. Jones was called by the church authorities to settle in the area of Blue Mountain, where he chose the site of present-day Monticello. He surveyed an irrigation ditch, planted and cultivated a small crop, and put a fence around three hundred acres of prime farm land.

By J u n e 1887 some of the Mormons had moved families to the new townsite and were established in temporary shelters. Work was proceeding on the irrigation ditch and crops had been planted. The activity, however, was seen as a direct affront by Edmund and Harold Carlisle, who claimed this grazing area for their New Mexico and Kansas Land and Cattle Company. These two Englishmen resented the encroachment of the Mormon farmers and told them in blunt terms that if they did not abandon the irrigation ditch there would be trouble.

The Mormons sought legal aid and received it in the form of a quit claim deed that gave them possession of the lands they had settled.

Though an apparent victory, this began their problems with the Carlisle Cattle Company.

The following spring, buildings were erected with lumber that had been cut and hauled the previous fall. With the planting of crops, building of homes, hauling of logs, construction of the irrigation ditch, and fencing of land, it became obvious to the cattle companies that these settlers meant to stay. On July 9, 1888, the Carlisle men turned the water out of the Monticello irrigation ditch, and an injunction served on the Mormons by U. S. Marshal Pratt indicated that the water of North Fork belonged to the cattle company. After lengthy litigation the courts decided that the water should be shared equally between the Carlisles and the Mormons. This decision solidified the Monticello Mormons' hold on their land.^^ By 1889 law enforcement was evolving from the vigilante mode to a more traditional form. For one thing, the population of the county had increased, and with settlements at Bluff, Monticello, and in the Bueno district, the power structure had become spread out. Officials were needed to cover these different areas, and even though most of the new appointees were Mormons, they had to represent a growing gentile population which viewed direct church involvement in govern-

^'Perkins, et al.. Saga p . 90.

46

Utah Historical Quarterly

ment differently from the Mormons. As the population of the community increased, so did crime and a consequent demand for good law enforcement. ^2 Two characters illustrate how law enforcement changed during the period of 1889 to 1900. These two men could have been diametrically opposed, one being a federal marshal during a period of federal opposition to Mormon polygamy and the other a Hole-in-the-Rock Mormon. Although information is vague, it appears that Marshal Joe Bush and Sheriff Willard " D i c k " Butt worked cooperatively together to make the justice system a viable force in San Juan. Marshal Bush was considered something of a hero to the people of San J u a n County.^^ He did not bother the Mormons, and he won their respect by often catching the men he went after. He also carried a very short, sawed-off shotgun that had a tendency to make outlaws take notice.

Yet, Bush must have been an individual who felt that a professional image was not essential to his job, since he was arrested three or four different times in Salt Lake City for various offenses that included frequenting a house of ill repute, being drunk and disorderly, and discharging a firearm in a public building.^* Conversely, Sheriff Butt was a man of integrity and the first sheriff of San J u a n County to take his position seriously.^^ He was also the first sheriff to receive a wage from the county, one hundred dollars a year independent of fees.^^ Relations between the Carlisle outfit and the Monticello Mormons by 1890 verged on open warfare. The cowboys viewed the Mormons as farmers, which was almost as bad as being sheepmen, and the Mormons felt that the employees of the cattle companies were uncivilized and uncontrolled. The cowboys tried regularly to prove that they were exactly what the Mormons claimed. On many occasions the cattlemen would ride through the streets of town shooting at the buildings and terrorizing the population. One incident in 1890 brought the tension to a head. ^^From the Minutes of the County Court it is obvious that the region was marching to a faster tempo by 1888-89. The entries prior to those years were short and reflected that at times meetings were not held at all. By 1888 most of the proceedings were lengthy and complicated. Between 1880 and 1889 there are only four entries that make direct reference to criminal cases. There are that many references in 1890 alone. ^^Frank Silvey, "Noted Characters in the Pioneer Settlement of San J u a n Countyâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;Joe B u s h , " Microfilm 920, #94, Genealogy Library, Brigham Young University, p. 4. ^*From various accounts in the Deseret News. ^^For complete treatment of Willard Butt as sheriff of San J u a n County see Albert R. Lyman "Dick Butt, Sheriff of San J u a n , " Microfilm 920, #94, Genealogy Library, Brigham Young University. ^^Minutes . . . County Court, December 30, 1891, p. 113.

Murder, Mayhem, and Mormons

47

The problem started when Mons Peterson got his freight wagon stuck in the mud some distance north of Monticello. While he was in the process of getting another team to pull it out, the cowboys found the bogged wagon and looted it. They located, among the store goods, some liquor that was being brought in for "medicinal purposes." The alcohol proved to be too great a temptation for the wranglers who disposed of it in a few moments and then went on to Monticello for a night of terrorizing the community by shooting at the buildings and residents. As the evening progressed, one cowboy, John Gibson, even managed to shoot himself in the foot. They finished the incident by totally sacking Peterson's store and stabling themselves and their horses within.^^ The townspeople were outraged. Some of the community leaders went to the territorial district court in Beaver, Utah, where they filed a complaint against John Gibson, Robert Kelly, and William Johnson for the crime of riot and had warrants issued for the three men's arrest.^^ Marshal Bush came to Monticello only to find that Gibson was recovering from his wounded foot at his sister's house, so Bush went there to make the arrest. Apparently no one was home but Gibson.

Having no desire to be taken into custody, he decided to fight it out with Bush and hid behind a curtain waiting for the marshal to come into the room. The lawman entered the house, saw the pistol protruding from the curtain, and placed a well-aimed shotgun blast into it. The shot spoiled not only the curtains but also John Gibson's day, shooting his arm and side "all to rags.''^^ Notice had been given that lawlessness by the cowboys would no longer be tolerated on the streets of Monticello. The justice system, although slow in those territorial days, continued to assert its authority in the San J u a n country.

Ironically, the feud between the Mormons and the Carlisles ended in a marriage between the two. There were again two colorful characters, the first being William " L a t i g o " Gordon. As foreman of the cattle company and stepson to Harold Carlisle, he was well versed in the harassment tactics that the cattlemen used against the farmers. The second actor was D. H. " K i n g " Dalton, a county commissioner who fancied himself the ultimate power figure in the region.*° Latigo took ^^Perkins, et al., pp. 107-8; also Lyman's " H i s t o r y , " pp. 68-69. ^^The People v. Robert Kelly, William Johnson and John Gibson; Indictment for Riot (15 March 1890), San J u a n County Courthouse, Monticello, Utah. ^^Silvey, " B u s h , " p. 5; also Lyman " H i s t o r y , " p. 69. *°An interview with a direct descendant of Dalton, who prefers to remain unnamed, indicates that King Dalton received his nickname because of his egotistical attitude.

48

Utah Historical Quarterly

exception to the fact that Dalton had appointed William E. Hyde as sheriff, since the Carlisle foreman had experienced many difficulties with Hyde in the past. Feelings ran strong enough between the two men that Hyde had threatened Gordon, saying he would burn his hay, barns, sheds, and house. Latigo went to Dalton's place to encourage the new sheriffs removal. The two men argued, and Latigo shot his "44 caliber Colt's Frontier Six Shooter," in the general direction of Henry Dalton, the commissioner's son. Latigo was charged, on a complaint by Dalton, with assault to commit murder.*^ A warrant was issued and he was arrested by the sheriff.

In the court action that followed, a very important show of support was made by the Monticello Mormons in Latigo's behalf. They filed a petition with the prosecutor, requesting the charge be dropped from a felony to a misdemeanor: . . . we are acquainted with the defendant above named, and fully appreciate the charge against him of assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill and murder. . . . We have known the defendant for years, as a kind hearted and industrious citizen and neighbour and we have never known anything bad about him, except his excessive use of liquor, which alone we are satisfied, is the responsible agency which caused him to do the act complained of. . . . We know that his heart is not that of a murderer, for no man ever left his cabin hungry, or in distress. . . . We . . . solicit you not to prosecute him for Felony, but that you change the charge against him to "Assault" to which charge, we are told he will plead guilty. We have talked to him and know that he feels the shame and senses the disgrace and wrong of his conduct. . . .

The petition was signed by sixty-three Monticello people, probably a good portion of the community. Among the signatures are those of a county commissioner, county attorney, sheriff, ex-sheriff, the justice of the peace, and other officers in the government.*^ A few years later, Latigo married one of the Mormon girls and was even interviewed by a Mormon bishop prior to the marriage. The bishop asked Latigo if he had ever killed a man, to which Latigo replied that he did not think so, unless one counted the black man that he and some of his friends had found bathing in a water hole and had kept pushing under until he did not come up again. He thought that incident would probably not count because it was more of a joke than

*' The State of Utah v. W. E. Gordon; Indictment for Assault with Intent to Murder (27 J u n e 1901), San J u a n County Courthouse. *'^The State of Utah v. W. E. Gordon; Petition by Citizens . . . in San Juan County (August 1901), San J u a n County Courthouse.

Murder, Mayhem, and Mormons

49

intent to do harm.*^ Whatever the reasons, Latigo's personality had won over a substantial part of the Mormon community and helped bridge the gap between the settlers and the cattle company.

The Dalton/Latigo incident illustrates the progress that the justice system in San J u a n County had made. In this criminal action the constituted state court requirements were met. There was a regular complaint filed; attorneys represented both sides; a petition, in correct form, was submitted; and a four-page continuance affidavit was supplied to the court.

By 1901 the final shift from church- to state-controlled law enforcement had been completed. There were still problems with lawbreakers after 1901, and it should be noted that the county officials were still primarily Mormons. However, the church and church leaders did not seem to have the degree of influence on governmental function that they had had in the early days of the county.

What caused the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to actively engage in law enforcement in San J u a n County, Utah? Perhaps the church leaders were such dynamic individuals that their followers looked to them for guidance in all difficulties. Education, a rare commodity on the frontier, certainly affected the reading and understanding of law and subsequently may have determined who participated in its enforcement. It is possible that church-initiated law enforcement was not done by choice but by necessity. Regardless of the reasons, the facts clearly show that Bishop Nielson and other leaders of the Hole-in-the-Rock Mormons in Bluff had a church vigilance committee that enforced the law for eight years.

*^Redd, Lemuel Hardison Redd, pp. 154-55.

Navajos5 Mormons, and Henry L. Mitchell: Cauldron of Conflict on the San Juan

BY ROBERT S. MCPHERSON

Monoliths dot the landscape of Monument Valley, south of the San Juan River in southeastern Utah. USHS collections.

through the deserts and canyon lands of southeastern Utah, presenting a challenge to those who want to use its water. Yet, in the spring of 1879, for the Mormon exploring party searching for a place to settle, this river provided the only large and continuous source of water for crops and livestock. Silas S. Smith, leader of this group, must have been surprised when he ventured into T H E SAN J U A N R I V E R WINDS ITS WAY

M r . McPherson teaches for the College of Eastern U t a h â&#x20AC;&#x201D; S a n J u a n Campus. He expresses appreciation to the Brigham Young University History Department for providing research funds through the William J . Snow Award. A version of this paper was presented at the 1986 annual meeting of the Utah State Historical Society.

Conflict on the San Juan

51

the area of present-day Aneth to find a number of non-Mormon or "gentile" settlers already busy at work constructing houses, irrigation ditches, and a dam. The leading figure of this group was a man named Henry L. or "Old M a n " Mitchell, a character who would add color and turbulence to the settling of the San J u a n area in the years to come.

Mitchell is one of those interesting personalities in history who quietly appears on a scene, flourishes with a roaring fanfare, and then exits without a trace. Little is known about his early life, which started in Missouri as did that of other Colorado settlers who drifted into Utah to settle the public domain.^ Prior military service is indicated by his signing a letter as a former "First Lieutenant in Company K, 8th M .

S . , " although he would later assume the title of captain. His son. Porter, was also enlisted in the same unit as a sergeant.^ When and where this service was rendered is unknown, but it seems likely to have been during the Civil War, since Porter was born in 1843.^ By 1878 the Mitchells had settled in Utah with a large extended family tied together through both birth and marriage. To unravel the genealogical relationships of this group is like untying the Gordian knot, but it appears that in addition to Henry L. Mitchell and his wife, there were at least three sons, two daughters, and three sons-in-law, each of the latter with his own trading post and farm. There were also Mitchells living in the Mancos-Cortez, Colorado, area, where Mitchell Springs gave rise to a small village called Toltec, which by 1889 had died out. But it was " O l d M a n " Mitchell, patriarch and spokesman for this group, who served as the major figure in events occurring in and around his ranch at the mouth of McElmo Canyon on the San J u a n River.

He arrived there in the summer of 1878, having spent the previous year in Montezuma Valley, Colorado. Like many of the settlers from this area, he traveled down McElmo, a natural passageway because of the canyon's level grade, continuously flowing creek, and excellent farm lands. By 1879 there were eighteen families, comprised of seventy men, women, and children living in McElmo and along the San Juan.^ Mitchell selected his homestead site on one of the flood 'See Ira S. Freeman, A History of Montezuma County (Boulder, Colo.: Johnson Publishing Company, 1958).

2H. L. Mitchell, E. B. Mitchell, J o h n Bruer, and C. B. Jackson, "Evaluation of Property Destroyed in Kane County, U t a h , " December 24, 1879, Record Group 75, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Consolidated Ute Agency, Federal Records Center, Denver, Colorado (hereafter, correspondence from these files cited as Consol. Ute Agency Records). ^Mortality Records, Clerk's Office, Montezuma County Courthouse, Cortez, Colorado. *Freeman, A History of Montezuma County, p. 53.

5Mitchell, et al, "Evaluation of P r o p e r t y . "

52

Utah Historical Quarterly

plains of the river where he had established a farm and trading post, started some irrigation ditches and a dam, and managed some cattle and horses. Still, eking out an existence in this area was challenging, given the fluctuations in the height of the river and the ever-present threat of Indian raids. And so it must have been equally surprising to him to find a new influx of white neighbors coming from another direction, when Mitchell and the Mormons came face to face.

When the exploring party arrived at the Mitchell ranch, the members appeared to be welcomed guests. The Mormon group, comprised of twenty-six men, two women, and eight children, seemed to feel comfortable with their established neighbors. Showing characteristic vigor, they shovelled their way into acceptance by the gentiles by digging ditches, working on the riprap dam, and planting crops. The San J u a n Stake History suggests that Mitchell's group would have given up their farming attempts if the explorers had not offered to help.^ At the same time this aid was being given, groups were sent out to seek agricultural land for the future Mormon colony. Symbolically, the group's intent to settle was shown by raising the American flag (made of blue and red shirts) at Montezuma Creek on the Fourth of July.^ After two months of effort, the dam-building project was abandoned, but an agreement was reached that the two Mormon families who remained behind could have a share of the crops grown by their neighbors.

On a more social level, the explorers attended the wedding of Clara M. Mitchell to a Mr. Williams, the ceremony being performed by a Presbyterian minister from Mancos. There was also the assistance given to Mrs. James Davis, the wife of a member of the exploring party, by a non-Mormon midwife, who at one point was having little luck effecting the delivery. While she was absent, Silas Smith approached the woman in labor and administered to her through prayer, causing the problem to cease and winning for him the epithet of "doctor" among the gentiles.^ This seemingly propitious start was, however, deceiving. The settlers needed help, the Mormons needed help, and there was no one else to call on. Underlying this friendly cooperation were two different views of life. The Mormons' ideals are seen in their charge to settle this 6"San J u a n Stake History," Special Collections, Brigham Young University Library, Provo, Utah, pp. 15-16. ^"Life of Parley Butt," Special Collections, University of Utah Library, Salt Lake City, p. 4.

8"San J u a n Stake History," pp. 20-21.

Conflict on the San Juan

53

lawless region as a first step "in the march of the saints . . . towards the center stake of Zion [Missouri]," while Mitchell harbored in his memory a resentment that caused him to give his family and neighbors a charge that "they would soon give the damn Mormon outfit the same medicine that he had assisted in giving them back in Missouri."^ It is ironic that the experiences derived in the East would be brought out to the West to meet again on the San J u a n .

Before the explorers departed for Cedar City in mid-August, they had constructed Fort Montezuma about five miles below the Mitchell ranch. The James L. Davis and the Harrison H. Harriman families remained there in order to grow crops and to await the arrival of the main body of Mormons. ^° They would eventually be joined by William Hyde from Salt Lake City, who came not as a part of the Hole-in-theRock expedition but as a trader to the Navajos. ^^ Crossing Montezuma Wash, part of the exploring party encountered one of Mitchell's sons, Ernest, and his partner James Merritt. In a previous meeting these two had insisted that they were looking for an isolated area in which they could herd cattle, but now Merritt secretly informed one of the explorers that the would-be cattlemen were really in search of a Navajo mine with ore that assayed at 90 percent silver.

Desiring more company, Merritt asked George Hobbs, a Mormon, if he would like to accompany them for a quarter share of the profitâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;the same amount promised Mitchell. Hobbs declined because of his responsibilities to the main body of Mormons awaiting his report, but he did admit that the heavily stocked larder of these prospectors, along with the possibility of obtaining wealth, was appealing.^^ Hobbs's refusal eventually proved to be a wise decision.

In the latter part of 1879 Henry Mitchell started a correspondence that turned into a continuous stream of communications reporting injustices by the Indians to the government. In all fairness to Mitchell, he was in a difficult position. His ranch bordered the Southern Ute Reservation to the east and the Navajo Reservation to the south, while to the west and north lay lands claimed by small bands of Southern Utes and Paiutes who were often cited in government reports as "renegades." Because of kinship ties among all three of these groups, ^David E. Miller, Hole-in-the-Rock: An Epic in the Colonization of the Great American West (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1959), p. 12; Kumen Jones, "Writings of Kumen J o n e s , " Special Collections, Brigham Young University Library, p. 203. io"Life of Parley Butt," p. 4; Miller, Hole-in-the-Rock, p. 156. ''Albert R. Lyman, "History of San J u a n County, 1879-1917," Special Collections, Brigham Young University Library, p. 15. '^"San J u a n Stake History," pp. 46-47. Merritt's name is sometimes spelled Merrick.

54

Utah Historical Quarterly

each used the others for protection or to shift the blame for problems away from themselves.

Real trouble started in December 1879. According to Mitchell, the Utes were off their reservation threatening to drive the settlers from their homes. Leaders like Mariano, Red Jacket, and Narraguinip were encouraging their band members to kill cattle and provoke incidents with the settlers in order to force relocation out of the Utes' territory. ^^ A few weeks after this, Mitchell wrote to Gov. Arthur L. Thomas of Utah on behalf of the "gentile" citizens of Kane County, asking that fifty good guns and two hundred rounds of ammunition for each weapon be supplied to them for protection against hostile Utes, Paiutes, and Navajos. Reasons for this action were based on the isolated location of the McElmo settlers, the demands by the Navajos that the white men leave, and the aggressive herding of 20,000 Navajo sheep around the Mitchell household, an act which "cleared away all grass several miles back from the river. "^* The Navajo agent, according to Mitchell, was not in control, having failed to curb this activity. Mitchell then pointed out an interesting fact that would remain true through the years to come. The Utes, Paiutes, and Navajos were friendly with the Mormons but not with the gentiles. If the guns were sent to the Ute agent named Page, then Mitchell would see that they were put in the hands of his neighbors, half of whom were ex-soldiers and all of whom he would be responsible for. The shipment was never made.

In another letter at this same time, Mitchell placed a claim against the United States with the hope of collecting a part of the Ute annuity.

Stating that his earlier homestead in Montezuma Valley, Colorado, had been destroyed, he charged the government with a $1,000 fee as reimbursement for the two residences, a half mile of cedar fence, two corrals, seventy acres of grain, 1,500 grape cuttings, and 2,200 peach seeds that had been lost.^^ He, along with three other citizens placing similar claims, blamed much of this activity on Narraguinip, who was said to have admitted to destroying the property because of the livestock and the fences in the area. Mitchell later made similar claims, many of which he was accused of fabricating.

'3H. L. Mitchell to Ute Agent, December 4, 1879, Record Group 75, Letters Received by Office of Indian Affairsâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;New Mexico Superintendency, 1879, National Archives, Washington, D. C. (hereafter, correspondence from these files cited as Letters Receivedâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;New Mexico). '*H. L. Mitchell to Governor Thomas of Utah, December 27, 1879, Letters Receivedâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;New Mexico. '^Affidavit of Henry L. Mitchell, December 24, 1879, Consol. Ute Agency Records.

Conflict on the San Juan

55

The new year brought no cessation of problems. Ernest Mitchell and James Merritt had not been heard from for sixty days. Either their mining venture had been so profitable that they were too busy or else they had run into trouble. The first indication that the latter was true was when a Navajo, Boy with Many Horses, visited a Paiute camp sixty miles above Lee's Ferry. There he saw four mules that were taken

by Paiutes after killing the owners. Since the Navajos were often blamed for deeds they did not commit, they were anxious to have the affair investigated.^^ At the same time, Mitchell wrote to Galen Eastman, the Navajo agent, saying that both the Utes and Navajos were acting "sausy" and that if fighting occurred, most of the settlers would be in trouble because the men were out looking for Merritt and Mitchell. However, if nothing happened in the next couple of weeks, there would be two hundred men present to hold out against Indian attacks until the soldiers arrived. ^'^ As February drew to a close the fiery rhetoric grew in intensity.

Merritt's and Mitchell's bodies were found in Monument Valley, and Henry Mitchell went to retrieve them. Although it was a Navajo guide who led him to their corpses, no single group claimed responsibility, the Navajos blaming the Utes, the Utes blaming the Navajos, with the Paiutes serving as another possible culprit.^^ Following the burial, Mitchell launched into some of his most vitriolic and outrageous prose. Claiming that five other men had been killed (although their bodies had not been found), that the Utes were in league with the Navajos, and that both were equally bad, he went on to inform the Navajo agent: "If you can't take care of these Navajos, let me know because if nothing is done, there won't be any Navajos. In ninety days, 1000 men will be here who can kill just as well as Navajos can. These Navajos are terrors, cutthroats, thieves and murderers. "^^ Agent Eastman sent Navajo representatives to investigate the murders. They returned with word that the guilty ones were renegades who were not attached to any agency.^° A second inquiry by a Navajo and a Mexican named Jesus Alviso confirmed that three or four i^Galen Eastman to Commissioner of Indian Affairs, February 6, 1880, Letters Received — New Mexico. ' ' ' H . L. Mitchell to Galen Eastman, February 15, 1880, Letters Received — New Mexico.

18J. Carpenter to Carl Schurz, February 28, 1880, Letters Received—New Mexico.

19H. L. Mitchell to Galen Eastman, February 27, 1880, Letters Received — New Mexico.

20Galen Eastman to Commissioner of Indian Affairs, March 8, 1880, Letters Received—New Mexico.

56

Utah Historical Quarterly

Indians of Ute/Paiute ancestry, living north of the San Juan, had killed the two miners.^^ This incident is instructive in understanding how Henry L. Mitchell reacted to this and future situations. While most would agree that he had ample reason to be upset and inflammatory over his son's death, the tack he took was counterproductive. First, he did not have a clear picture of events before he started making accusations. Bouncing between the possibilities of Navajos, Utes, and Paiutes, he finally realized who the guilty were, but not before offending two Indian agents and frustrating the commanding officer of Fort Lewis. Next, he resorted to threats, promising that armed action was the only real solution. Third, he exaggerated what actually happened, claiming people were killed who were not even in the fight. And finally, he became the focal point for much of the written communication that came from the Four Corners area. Mitchell was a relatively prolific writer, chronicling activities, real and imaginary, that affected interactions on the San J u a n between Indians and whites. For the next five years the Mitchell ranch, or "Riverview," became an important center of Indian-white conflict.

With the arrival of the Mormons at Bluff in April 1880, Mitchell's imagination found a new field of endeavor. The Hole-in-the-Rock expedition took much longer and was far more trying than the Latterday Saints had expected, and so they stopped eighteen miles short of Montezuma Creek, their original destination, and organized the city of Bluff. Within a month's time, Mitchell filed a claim against the Mormons and Indians, who were supposedly driving the gentile settlers out of the McElmo and Montezuma Creek areas. Considering the bedraggled and tenuous condition of the Mormons one month after their arrival, one wonders how Mitchell could write this letter: i have bin drove from my home on the san wan by the indians through the mormans it being no longer safe for me to live thare without protection. Tha have driven evry gentile out. The morman get the indians to do it. This is a horrible state of things. When will it stop. Colonel, i am here below Parroot City campt out and destitute of allmost everything, i have lost by those Indians several thousand dollars by the Utes and Navahoes and i think it is wright that the government sould pay me out of the Indian annuity at least a part, i am getting old and wore out and then to be robd and drove from my home, i think it hard and if you can do any thing for me i will be vary great full to you.^^ 2iCaptain F. T. Bennett to Acting Assistant Adjutant General of New Mexico, March 22, 1880, Letters Receivedâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;New Mexico.

22H. L. Mitchell to Colonel Page, July 13, 1880, Consol. Ute Agency Records.

Conflict on the San Juan

57

â&#x20AC;˘MM^*''^^

^<J

An early log home in Bluff, Utah, photographed in 1907. USHS collections, gift of Neil M. Judd.

While there was no such conspiracy between Mormons and Indians to drive out the gentiles, there developed a spirit of competition among the white men for roads and resources. For instance, the ties between the Colorado settlers in Utah and the towns of Colorado were natural. Mancos and Durango served as depots for goods that were eventually freighted to the lower San J u a n . It did not take the Mormons long to realize that although the Hole-in-the-Rock trail was an accomplishment, it was impractical to use as a shipping route to Escalante and beyond, and so they also turned to freighting to and from Colorado.2^ Also, the Montezuma-Aneth area had a store run by William Hyde and a postal service operated by James F. Daugherty.

However, as the Mormon community expanded, the seat of power shifted so that the gentiles could see their control slipping away. In October 1882 a regular mail service was established from Mancos to Bluff.^'^ County officials were Mormons, including judges, tax assessors, selectmen, and clerks. Laws were passed that reflected their 23"Jessie M. Sherwood Writing about Mary M. Jones Life," Special Collections, University of Utah Library, p. 9; see also Lyman's " H i s t o r y " and Platte D. Lyman, "Diary of Platte D. L y m a n , " Special Collections, Brigham Young University Library.

24Albert R. Lyman, " S a n J u a n County History ^ H i s t o r i c a l Sketches," Utah State Historical Society, Salt Lake City, p. 4.

58

Utah Historical Quarterly

interests, such as the rule that a liquor license for one year would cost $200 paid in advance.^^ Demographically, the Mormons also took the lead, with Bluff having 107 people in 1880 and 190 in 1890, while McElmo was not even included in the 1880 census and claimed only 16 people in 1890.^^ Attempts by Mormons to include the gentiles were unfruitful. On June 1, 1895, Henry L. Mitchell was put in charge of the McElmo district roads, but on September 7, Hyde and twelve others wanted to change the route of the county roads to go to the Colorado line via the San J u a n instead of leaving the river at McElmo. Mitchell and eight others protested, perhaps because this change would affect the services rendered by friends and relatives along the old route. Within four months the Bluff and McElmo road districts were consolidated into the Bluff road district. Parley R. Butt was made supervisor, and the county road went from Bluff to the Colorado state line.^^ Power politics were in the hands of the Mormons.

On a more physical and overt level were conflicts with Indians.

Mitchell complained to the secretary of the interior that large groups of Navajos were wandering twenty to forty miles off the reservation, "robbing white men, claiming they own the land, and threatening to kill all whites. . . . I know they intend to make trouble this spring. "^^ The Navajo agent's reply to the Bureau of Indian Affairs demonstrated a handy bit of detective work. Agent Riordan had started by contacting the primary Navajo leaders who lived along the San J u a n as well as the tribal chiefs—Manuelito and Ganado Mucho—to see if any knew of an uprising. He also wrote to Mitchell and his son-in-law, James F. Daugherty, who had authored a similar complaint, since "there is a looseness about the statements, a vagueness that gives a person really very little to work on in the way of investigation." Riordan realized the close ties between the two authors, and though each sent a separate letter, having a different date and place of origin, the agent believed "they were written in the same house, on the same table, and (I doubt not) within the same h o u r , " since these two men lived in the same 25Utah Works Progress Administration, "Historical Records Survey," Utah State Historical Society, p. 16; "Minutes of San J u a n County Commissioners," Historical Sketches of San J u a n County, Utah State Historical Society, p. 6.

26Utah WPA, "Historical Records Survey," n. p.

27San J u a n County M i n u t e s , " Minute Book 1880-1914, Utah State Historical Society, pp.

26-29.

28H. L. Mitchell to Secretary of Interior, J a n u a r y 15, 1883, Record Group 75, Letters Received

by Office of Indian Affairs, 1881-1907, Bureau of Indian Affairs, National Archives, Washington, D. C. (hereafter cited as Letters Received—BIA).

Conflict on the San Juan

59

house and were business partners. Riordan talked to more than one hundred Indians and found no evidence to support Mitchell's and Daugherty's accusations. Finally, two close friends of the agent, who had stayed at Mitchell's ranch for a couple of nights, had observed no friction but only that "relations between the traders and the Indians seemed remarkably pleasant." The general conclusion from this investigation was that the complaint was lodged in order to lay the foundation for a claim against the government in the future.^^ Mitchell also used the Indians to protect his interests. Although he protested that the Navajos were wandering far off their reservation, he issued passes, which he had no authority to do, for the Indians to come across to the north side of the river to graze their flocks on Mormonused public domain. According to Cass Hite, " T h e Navajos and PahUtes crossed with their countless herds of sheep and goats, and from the San J u a n to the Blue Mountains—north 40 miles—they eat every particle of vegetation. This caused great suffering and loss among stock belonging to the Mormons, who say that remonstrance is useless. . . ."^° It was also intimated that Mitchell sold ammunition and whiskey to the Indians. Thus, Mitchell played a number of different angles in his game of one-upmanship. By trying to convince the agents that Indian attacks were imminent, he prepared the way to lodge future claims against the government. The loss of property— whether real or imaginary—served as a basis for requesting financial reimbursement. He constantly insisted that troops be sent to his vicinity to provide protection; these soldiers would stay at his ranch and buy goods at the trading post. By encouraging the Indians into his general area, he added more trading business, irritated the Mormons, depleted their resources, and decreased their desire to remain.

Mitchell continually proved himself to be an opportunist par excellence. At least part of this scenario was not lost on Agent Riordan who, after explaining why the Navajos felt justified in living outside their boundaries, noted that " T h e Indians are persistently encouraged to leave the reservation by small traders living around through the country surrounding the reserve. These men generally treat the Indians pleasantly and the Indians listen to them. It is 'business,' pure and simple with the trader. "^^ 29D. M. Riordan to Bureau of Indian Affairs, February 21, 1883, Letters Received—BIA. 30Cass Hite to Galen Eastman, April 17, 1883, Letters Received—BIA. 3iD. M . Riordan to Commissioner of Indian Affairs, December 31, 1883, Letters Received—BIA.

60

Utah Historical Quarterly

Peter Tracy, living one mile below the Mitchell ranch, was not as fortunate in having such profitable relations. He had a reputation for being violent and quick tempered, and so it was a stroke of luck that he was not home when a group of Utes and Paiutes passed through his farm plot and helped themselves to corn and melons. When they returned the next night, however, Tracy demanded payment. A fracas ensued, and one of the Utes, reportedly Sore Leg from Narraguinip's band, shot him through the neck, killing him instantly.^^ Mitchell and Daugherty immediately wrote letters, accusing the Navajos as well as the Utes, though their story differs in detail from that of the investigating cavalry officer sent from Fort Lewis. They seemed to revel in keeping a cauldron of conflict boiling on the San J u a n River.

But 1884 was their year to fall into the hot water. Seemingly innocent events started in February when two miners, Samuel Walcott and James McNally, left from Mitchell's store to prospect for gold and silver in Indian country. Leaving behind a wagon, some papers, and personal effects, Walcott and McNally had every intention of returning to the San Juan, but after separating from the main party of miners, the two men were killed while buying supplies from some Navajos in the vicinity of Navajo Mountain.^^ Mitchell took a personal interest in what occurred and was able to convince Fred Fickey, an insurance adjuster from Baltimore, Maryland, and friend of Walcott, of what he believed had happened. Fickey became just as prolific in writing letters as Mitchell, corresponding with military commanders, the governor of Utah, and the commissioner of Indian affairs. Much of Fickey's information came from Mitchell and Daugherty and was tainted with their prejudices.

Mitchell said that he had asked the Navajos about Walcott and McNally but that the Indians had become angry. Mitchell had heroically tried to pacify them, but a fight had broken out at the trading post. He next suggested that his personal letter to Fickey be published "so that the Navajo Indians will be learned a lesson. "^^ Mitchell wrote a second letter, painting an even gloomier picture of the situation.

Fickey relayed information about Mitchell, saying that his neighbors "are gentiles surrounded by Mormons and Indians and he says 32Colonel Stanley to Warren Patten, August 31, September 1 and 2, 1883, Letters Received â&#x20AC;&#x201D; BIA. Further investigation of this incident indicates that blam.e for the murder was later placed on a Navajo. See David M. Brugge's Ms., "Navajo Use and Occupation of Lands North of the San J u a n River in Present-day U t a h , " in author's possession.

33For an account of this incident see J . Lee Correll, "Navajo Frontiers in Utah and Troublous Times in Monument Valley," Utah Historical Quarterly 39 (1971): 151-161.

3*H. L. Mitchell and J . F. Daugherty to Fred L. Fickey, April 16, Letters Receivedâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;BIA.

Conflict on the San Juan

61

the Mormons have tried to get the Indians to kill them on more than one occasion (and I have no doubt of it). Of course the entire Mormon element and all their Indian allies will misrepresent Mitchell; they would break up his settlement if they could and will do all the lying needed to screen themselves. "^^ Fickey then went on to blame William Hyde, a Mormon and old neighbor of Mitchell's, who also had a ferry near where the two prospectors had been killed. Hyde was accused of being one of the "prime actors or originators of the affair." Fickey was convinced that if the Indians were forced to tell the truth, blame would rest on the Mormons.^^ Nothing could have been further from the truth. The Mormons knew little about the incident, had no part in encouraging the Indians in acts of violence, and made very little mention of Mitchell and his following in their diaries and journals. In reality, the Mormons were very busy trying to grow crops, harness the San J u a n River, and maintain their own friendly relationships with the Navajos and Utes.

Now it was Mitchell's turn to have problems. On April 15, approximately two weeks after the deaths of Walcott and McNally, three men— A. Johnson, William Grove, and Victor Neff—came into the trading post, having returned from a search for the miners' bodies.

While the men were discussing their lack of success, four Navajo men and two women came into the store wanting to trade. One of the Navajos took an unloaded gun and aimed it at a calf outside, then at a boy, and then at one of the white men. One of the travelers saw this last move and drew his own gun, believing he was being threatened.

Another Navajo took the rifle away from the one doing the pointing and showed that it was unloaded, thus decreasing the mounting tension that filled the room. However, the disarmed man called to his friend outside, a man named Bai-alil-le, and said, "These Americans are going to kill m e . " Starting towards the store, gun at the ready, Bai-alille presented a threat to the white men, who drew their guns and started shooting. The first Navajo to fall was the one who had been pointing the gun in the store. Two shots killed him instantly.

The sound of firing brought Mitchell's son and another man from the nearby fields onto the scene. One of them fired a shot that hit Baialil-le in the forehead, knocking him unconscious. The white men then rushed out of the store, firing in all directions and hitting one Indian in the elbow as he jumped a fence. Mrs. Mitchell helped the two Navajo 35Fred L. Fickey to John L. Thomas, May 26, 1884, Letters Received—BIA. 36Fred L. Fickey to Commissioner Hiram Price, J u n e 10, 1884, Letters Received—BIA.

62

Utah Historical Quarterly

women, trapped in the store, to escape out a back door, and though they were fired upon while running, neither was hit. In the meantime, Bai-alil-le revived and escaped, as did the remaining Navajo man.^^ In the usual Mitchell style, this incident became an instant war.

Although one cannot doubt the seriousness of the event, that imaginative flair that Mitchell added to any incident immediately became evident. Preparations were made to withstand a siege by hauling water from the river, boarding up the trading post windows, and sending word to the military that the "ranch was surrounded by Navajos, fight in progress. "^^ Near the ranch a group of Utes had pitched camp and had witnessed the events. Taking advantage of the action, they rode to Spencer's store four miles up the river and told the two hired men working there that a fight had broken out. The two men left the post to go to Mitchell's, providing a wonderful opportunity for the Utes to clean the shelves of goods, which they did. Spencer later claimed a $2,400 loss.39

Edgar O. Noland, owner of the Four Corners trading post thirteen miles above Spencer's, knowingly purchased some of the stolen goods from the Utes and then wrote to the Navajo agent, D. M. Riordan, using this property as " p r o o f that both Utes and Navajos were involved in the Mitchell fight. This led Riordan to say, " I do not see what can be expected from Indians who get their moral training from contact with such men, and there are many such."*° This event becomes particularly ironic when one realizes that Noland and Spencer were both related to Mitchell through marriage.

The night of the gunfight the Navajos returned with a large party and ran off the stock at Mitchell's post and other nearby settlements.

Mitchell claimed a loss of fifty horses. Cowboys from the Carlisle Ranch, herding cattle on Blue Mountain, willingly came to the assistance of the Mitchell group, eventually swelling the ranks to a total of twenty-three people at the trading post.

Within a week's time a detachment of cavalry under Lt. J . F. Kreps from Fort Lewis arrived. He reported that he had been watched during much of his trip by both Utes and Navajos, "the two tribes evi'''Report of Herrero Segundo submitted to D. M. Riordan, April 29, 1884, Letters Received—BIA. 38Mayor R. H. Hall to Assistant Adjutant General at Fort Leavenworth, April 18, 1884, Letters Received—BIA. 39Second Lieutenant J . F. Kreps to Major R. H. Hall, April 21, 1884, Letters Received—BIA. 40Edgar O. Noland to D. M. Riordan, April 26, 1884, Letters Received—BIA.

Conflict on the San Juan

63

dently being banded together for mischief. . . . It is the opinion here that the two tribes are assembling on the other side of the river, about seven miles distant and that the Mormons are urging them on to war.

At any rate every person here is badly scared and believe what they say."*^ In reality, the Mormons had little to do with the conflict. One Navajo, named Old Peejo, warned a woman, Mrs. James Allan, to stay home and keep her children nearby because trouble with the whites was expected.^^ Platte D. Lyman, a Mormon settler, mentioned in his diary how a party of Navajos came in to trade, their main group being two days ride back from the river. He noted, "they are, as usual, very friendly to our people. "^^ Also, Kumen Jones, another Mormon settler, told of traveling to the Navajos to assure them that peace was most desirable, while at the same time allaying their fears of the cavalry.^* There was no conspiracy on the part of the Mormons.

Short on supplies and expecting a company of cavalry from Fort Lewis and one from Fort Wingate, Lieutenant Kreps departed from the Mitchell ranch on April 27, leaving two soldiers behind to help guard. The lieutenant was convinced that the Indians "want to kill the white gentile settlers" and that the whole affair could explode into a large scale war.*^ This was not true of Captain Ketchum or Captain Smith, who arrived at Mitchell's four or five days later. Both were convinced that the Indians did not want trouble, that Mitchell was the cause of the incident, and that there was no need for two companies of soldiers to be stationed there when a squad with an N C O would suffice.

Captain Ketchum's report was particularly illuminating; in it Mitchell claimed that he had been threatened by the Navajos because he did not give in to their demands for a better price on wool. They then threatened to kill the whites in the store, went outside and prepared their weapons, and threatened to shoot his son. Ketchum wrote, " T h e fifteen Indians present at the 'battle' as Mr. Mitchell terms it . . . kept up a constant fire for several hours on his ranch of from two to three hundred yards range, but I failed to discover the effects of any shots upon his establishment or out buildings." The reasons for *iSecond Lieutenant J . F. Kreps to Major R. F. Hall, April 21, 1884, Letters Receivedâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;BIA. *2Albert R. Lyman, " H i s t o r y , " p. 38. *3Platte D. Lyman, " D i a r y , " p. 312. **Albert R. Lyman, Indians and Outlaws (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1962), 62.

45Second Lieutenant J . F. Kreps to Post Adjutant at Fort Lewis, May 1, 1884, Letters Receivedâ&#x20AC;&#x201D; BIA.

64

Utah Historical Quarterly

animosity between the white men and the Indians, Ketchum noted, were that Mitchell now forbade the Indians to herd sheep on the north side of the river and that "the Mitchells have not the faculty of preserving friendly relations with the Indians; three are quick tempered, especially the sons. The question naturally arises why should they have trouble with the Navajo and no other San J u a n traders. . . . "^^ Captain Smith concurred with many of these findings, adding, " I t is the general verdict among both whites and Indians that he [Mitchell] is a firebrand among them. I do not believe half of what he told me as there is no evidence to bear out his statements."*^ Life did not get easier. On J u n e 18 the San J u a n River reached flood stage, and Mitchell's place, as well as William Hyde's and Fort Montezuma, were flooded and much of them washed away.*^ Problems continued in December when Navajos came to the ranch, now established on the bank overlooking the river, to explain their need to graze flocks north of the San Juan.^^ Mitchell complained to the agent that he was being overwhelmed by the Navajos and their livestock. An investigation was made, but only thirteen Navajo families were found across the river on Southern Ute land and not the public domain. The settlers living near McElmo stated that they had no complaints to make about any Navajos, but "their opinion was that Mr. Mitchell had originated the reports for his own benefit and wholly without cause. "^° Again, in September 1885, he was accused of withholding from the family of one of the Navajos killed in the previous shooting affair jewelry stripped from the body. The slain man's mother and father first went to Agent Bowman and procurred written permission to go and visit Mitchell, but once they reached his post, he gave them only part of the property and a promise of ten horses in exchange for the remainder. The Navajos left peacefully, going to the agent for assistance with the transaction. But as usual Mitchell contacted the military authorities, saying the "Indians came to his house in large numbers, heavily armed and in a hostile and threatening manner; that they made threats of violence and injured his buildings, etc. [and he asked] for the presence of troops for protection." Even the Navajo agent was attacked for the Navajos' "letter of an incendiary character." Bowman *6Captain H. H . Ketchum to Post Adjutant at Fort Lewis, May 20, 1884, Letters Received—BIA. *7Captain Allan Smith to Post Adjutant at Fort Wingate, May 14, 1884, Letters Received—BIA. *8Platte D. Lyman, " D i a r y , " pp. 313-314; Albert R. Lyman, " H i s t o r y , " pp. 39-40. *9H. L. Mitchell to W. A. Clark, December 28, 1884, Consol. Ute Agency Records. sojohn Bowman to Commissioner of Indian Affairs, February 23, 1885, Letters Received—BIA.

Conflict on the San Juan

65

responded to Mitchell's charges with a request to the commissioner of Indian affairs for a letter chastising Mitchell "who has had and makes more trouble for and with the Navajos than all of the settlers living the entire length of the San J u a n River. He lies to the Indians, gives them passes, tells them that he is a brother to the Great Father, etc."^^ Yet, by the end of 1885 a change occurred; there was no more mention of Henry L. Mitchell. Indian depredations continued in 1886, 1887, and 1888, each time resulting in petitions from settlers in McElmo Canyon, but Mitchell's name was absent, although in the 1886 correspondence Porter and Henry F. Mitchell's names appeared.

Both of these men moved back to the Cortez-Mancos area, but nothing was said about their "Old Man."^^ Records of Montezuma County, Colorado, and San J u a n County, Utah, are silent also. The only clue to his departure is provided by Kumen Jones, who noted that the Mitchells spent " a very few troublesome years" in the area and then "hit the trail back out, much worse off than when they came in."^^ No doubt this exodus was much to the relief of both the Indians and the Mormons.

In summarizing the activities of Mitchell, one finds a quarrelsome man who rarely lacked words. Through pen and deed he was able to involve Navajos, Utes, Indian agents, Mormons, cavalry, the governor of Utah, and the commissioner of Indian affairs in a series of incidents that encouraged six years of turbulence and indecision. While his actions at times seem inconsistent—such as his encouraging Navajos to graze their herds north of the river, then later complaining about it—he was effective in playing one group against another as an opportunist par excellence. Thus he proved the adage that "as coals are to burning coals and wood to fire, so is a contentious man to kindle strife." And strife there was during the 1880s to keep boiling the cauldron of conflict along the San J u a n .

sijohn Bowman to Commissioner of Indian Affairs, September 10, 1885, Letters Received—BIA. 52Petition from Citizens of McElmo County, December 16, 1886, Consol. Ute Agency Records; J . S. Carpenter and B. Gifford to C. F. Stollsteimer, May 17, 1887, Consol. Ute Agency Records; Petition of Citizens of McElmo County, J a n u a r y 30, 1888, Letters Received—BIA. 53Jones, " W r i t i n g s , " p. 203.

Richard Dallin Westwood: Sheriff and Ferryman of Early Grand County

BY JEAN M. WESTWOOD

twenty-six years old, left Mount Pleasant, Utah, bound for Moab, a settlement in the far eastern edge of what was then Emery County. He was looking for a piece of farm land on which he could build a home for himself, his young wife, Martha, and their baby daughter, Mary Ellen.

It was just ten years since the first permanent settlers had moved into "Spanish Valley" by the Grand (Colorado) River in the southeast part of the territory. The valley had long been part of western history.

O N

FEBRUARY I7, I889, R I C H A R D DALLIN W E S T W O O D ,

Mrs. Westwood lives in Scottsdale, Arizona.

Above: Richard Dallin Westwood, ca. 1888. All photographs accompanying this article are courtesy of the author.

Richard Dallin Westwood

67

Indian "writings" are still found on the rocks. Manos, metates, arrowheads, stone weapons, and ancient bean, maize, and squash seeds have all been frequent finds throughout the area, attesting to early Indian cultures.

The Spanish Trail through here was used first by the early Spaniards as a route from New Mexico to California.^ Later it was used in part by Mexican traders, trappers, prospectors, and various Indian tribes. The first party traveling the entire trail apparently was led by WiUiam WolfskiU and George C. Young in the winter of 1830-31.2 In 1854 Brigham Young sent a small expedition under William D. Huntington to trade with the Navajos and explore the southern part of Utah territory. They used this route. The next year Young called fortyone men under Alfred N. Billings to found a mission among the Ute Indians in the Elk (La Sal) Mountains. They built a fort of native stone, a stockade, and a corral in Spanish Valley. They found a good climate and rich soil. But after losing three men to Indians, they left after only one summer.^ The Elk Mountain or Sheberetch band of Utes had their home base in what became the Moab area. They had joined Black Hawk in his war raids on the central Utah valleys, where both Dick's and Martha's parents lived, and had brought back cattle stolen in those raids. Winter range was great in the river basin, and the high Elk Mountains provided good summer feed. Black Hawk eventually gave up and began to move his tribes to the Uintah Reservation in 1867. But the superintendent of Indian affairs for Utah, F. H . Head, had to make a separate peace in 1868 with the Elk Mountain Utes. In 1870 his successor, Bvt. Col. E. J . Tourtellotte, complained that " T h e Elk Mountain Utes . . . are the most wild and disorderly Indians of this superintendency." During the reign of J . J . Critchlow at the reservation in the 1870s the situation gradually improved, but over half the Indians still left the reservation in the summer months. After the White River uprising in 1879, Colorado Utes ended up on the Uintah Reservation as well. Many years would pass before they finally settled down to complete reservation life.*

iLeRoy Hafen and Ann Hafen, Old Spanish Trail: Santa Fe to Los Angeles (Glendale, Calif.: Arthur H . Clark Company, 1954), p . 68.

2 Fawn McConkie Tanner, The Far Country: A Regional History of Moab and LaSal, Utah (Salt Lake City: Olympus Publishing Company, 1976), p. 37. ^Phyllis Cortes, ed.. Grand Memories (Grand County, Daughters of Utah Pioneers, 1972), p. 8. *Floyd A. O'Neil, " A History of the Ute Indians of Utah until 1890" ( P h . D . diss., University of Utah, 1973), pp. 57, 75, 8 1 , 96, 110.

68

Utah Historical Quarterly

In the mid-1870s attempts to use the valley by cattlemen Crispin Taylor and George and Silas Greene (local historians debate which came first) failed. Taylor and two nephews escaped, losing their cattle, but the Greens were apparently killed by the Indians.

Others cameâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;prospectors and ranchers, who brought small herds of cattle, seeking range landâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;willing to brave the chances of Indian raids. In 1877 a mulatto, William Granstaff (called Nigger Bill) and a trapper named Frenchie moved into the old Mormon fort. Each laid claim to part of the valley. John Shafer and C. M. Van Buren brought in cattle and built a cabin about eight miles above the present site of Moab. Walter Moore arrived in December 1878 and bought out the Frenchman's claim, staying the winter in the old fort.

In 1879 the Mormon church sent A. G. Wilson and George Powell (who had previously brought in some cattle and looked over the valley) down from the Castle Valley area of Emery County, with their families, to begin a settlement near the river. Jeremiah and Lorenzo Hatch and William A. Pierce and their families moved up from the San J u a n country.

The new pioneers brought farm tools and seeds as well as cattle.

Mrs. Wilson brought some peach pits, which she shared with the other settlers as they came in, beginning the fruit industry that became as characteristic of early Moab as cattle and mining. George Powell planted the first grapes, the roots of which are still producing grapes today. In 1881 Orlando Warner brought fruit trees, ground cherry seeds, and the roots of wild yellow currants. Renegade Indians continued to harass them all, particularly the outlying cattle ranchers.

From time to time the settlers in Spanish Valley and up and down the river would have to move into the old fort, often for weeks on end.

A mail route was established in 1879 from Salina through Green River, Spanish Valley, La Sal, and on over the Colorado line to the gold camps, serving the two hundred people on the route about once a month or every six weeks. The settlers needed a name for their main settlement so they could apply for a post office. They chose the name Moab, meaning the far country. In 1880 the area became part of newly formed Emery County. In 1881 the Emery Stake of the LDS church organized a ward in Moab with Randolph Stewart as bishop. He moved from Huntington to Moab in the late winter. His wife, Sarah, was midwife for the new settlement and for years was both doctor and nurse. She raised her own herbs, spices, and medicines, as well as melons, apples, grapes for raisins, and hops to make yeast.

Richard Dallin Westwood

69

Each year a few more settlers came to the area, sent by the Mormon church, bringing in cattle, or prospecting for silver and copper. In 1883 Norman Taylor built a flat boat that ran on a cable across the Colorado River, ending the drownings that sometimes happened when settlers tried to ford the river. The Denver and Rio Grande Western Railroad was completed across the northern end of the area in 1883. This ended the long cross-country treks from Salina with supplies. Halfway houses were established at Courthouse Wash between Moab and the rail stop at Thompson and at Cane Springs between Moab and the Blue Mountain area, now Monticello. It was still eight hours from Moab to the railroad.

Only a small part of the land could be used for farming, that which was close to water from the creeks. But the warm climate drew many prospectors and cattle ranchers. There was both intermingling and conflict between them and the growing Mormon settlement at Moab.^ This was the settlement to which the Westwoods wanted to move.

Many of the settlers had come from the Sanpete area, and friends and relatives of Dick and Martha were already there when he set out to find them a place in the valley. It was not the first time young Dick had moved, so he felt quite confident he could make a go of it.

Richard Dallin Westwood and his twin sister, Anthear, were born August 9, 1863, in Springville, to Richard Webley Westwood and Catherine Dallin. Richard Webley Westwood came from a family of actors in England who worked at various trades to supplement their acting income. As converts to the Mormon church, they set out for Utah via New Orleans. On the boat up river toward St. Louis a cholera epidemic broke out. Both father and mother died, and the children were left in St. Louis with an aunt and uncle. It took three years, until 1852, for them to get enough money to come to Utah. Philip Westwood and his sister Mercy Ellen wrote a play the children performed to help pay their way to Salt Lake. Mercy Ellen (Tuckett) acted in the old Salt Lake Theatre and then with brothers Philip and David formed a dramatic company that performed at Camp Floyd and eventually left Utah to perform in mining camps throughout the West.

Meanwhile, young Richard Webley lived in Springville with his aunt, Susannah Hurst, until he married Catherine Dallin, an aunt of sculptor Cyrus E. Dallin. Two older and five younger sisters were born to this couple, but Richard Dallin was the only boy. All through his life he was very close to his sisters and their families. ^Cortes, Grand Memories, p. 13-28.

70

Utah Historical Quarterly

Richard Dallin Westwood's parents, Richard Webley Westwood and Catherine Dallin.

When he was six the family moved to Fairview where his father was justice of the peace and ran the mail from Fairview to Thistle.

They lived in the old fort and then in a two-room log house. His father acted in plays in Fairview and Springville, directing a play each year in Fairview to raise money for the Christmas fund. All the children helped in this. Richard Webley loved Shakespeare and acted in Shakespearean plays throughout Utah Valley. He loved both to read and write poetry.

So the children appreciated literature from their early days, and all liked to act, sing, and dance.

When young Dick was ten his mother died in childbirth. She may have had a bad heart, for some of the older girls wrote of going out to gather herbs for her for heart medicine. The baby, Sylvia, lived only a month. The older sisters tried hard to mother the family, but a year later their father married Louisa Baker, who loved Richard Webley's acting and his handsome looks. She was not much older than his children and did not like them, so the family was broken up and the children farmed out.

Eleven-year-old Dick went to live with and work for neighbors, the Henry Fowles. When Dick was sixteen the Mormon church called the Fowles family to Arizona. He went with them to drive a team. After

Richard Dallin Westwood

71

three years he h a d saved enough to b u y his own teams a n d wagons. For several years he freighted between Flagstaff, Globe, Wilcox, a n d T u c s o n , but he was homesick for his own family a n d Utah.^ I n late 1886 Dick brought his teams a n d wagons back to the Sanpete area and began freighting from M o u n t Pleasant to Thistle J u n c t i o n . In her autobiography M a r t h a wrote: The day he got home my Mother saw him coming. She said " O h , there's little Dick," and ran out and grabbed him around the neck.

He was driving a six-animal team, four mules and two horses. . . . He had two big wagons with the largest wheels I'd ever seen. When he left our house that afternoon, I dropped my sewing and rode with him out to Birch Creek, to his sister Matilda and my brother Hazard Wilcox's house. . . . Several days later they all came to spend the day with us. He seemed just like a brother to me, as two of his sisters had married my brothers. But in the fall of 1887 we started to keep company. He afterwards told me he had made up his mind I was going to be his wife that first day when he came back.^

Dick's father and his second wife h a d moved the justice of the peace office to Thistle, where they also r a n the hotel a n d post office.

M a r t h a a n d Dick were married by h i m at his h o m e .

T h e newly weds lived with M a r t h a ' s parents while Dick drove his express wagon between Spring City a n d Thistle, buying a n d selling chickens, ducks, eggs, and butter. But both wanted a place of their own, especially when their first d a u g h t e r was b o r n . M o a b seemed to t h e m a good place to go.

So Dick left for M o a b , driving three teams with two wagons as far as Salina C a n y o n . T h e n the snow b e c a m e so deep the teams couldn't pull the loads. H e left one wagon a n d hooked all the horses onto the other. H e had taken two loads of flour to sell a n d part of their belongings. H e left one load of flour b u t carefully covered it with canvas. Several months later he went back for the other wagon, found the flour intact, took it to Castle Dale a n d sold it.

In M o a b he found work for his t e a m a n d wagon. H e bought a seventeen-acre farm within the M o a b townsite for two h u n d r e d dollars.

It h a d a small, partially built cabin on it. Later he found that this land h a d never been filed on, so he filed on it. H e h a d to take hillside to m a k e u p the additional 123 acres required for a desert claim. M o a b ' s ^Biography by daughter, Ruth Johnson, in Richard W. Westwood, J r . , ed., Westwood Family History (Provo, Ut.: J . Grant Stevenson Company, 1973), p. 249. ''Grace W. Morse, ed.. Autobiography of Martha Ann Wilcox Westwood Foy (privately published, 1983). All the subsequent quotes and narrative of the personal lives of Richard D. and Martha Anna Westwood in the early Moab years use material or quote directly from this book.

72

Utah Historical Quarterly

best farm land was north of Pack Creek. The Westwood homestead was on the south side where most of the soil was thin, sandy, and rocky.

Cattle found good grazing up on the mesas and in the forests, but as in many other areas of near desert the gramma grass became scarce as more cattle grazed on it. Also the creeks flooded whenever there were heavy rains in the surrounding mountains, and the irrigation dams frequently got washed out by floods.

According to Martha's story, when Dick sent word that he had bought a home she prepared to move. She took the train from Thistle to Thompson where she stayed the night. She then rode the stage to Moab, taking all day for the thirty-six-mile journey. The sand was so deep, she said, the horses could hardly pull through it. When they reached the Grand (Colorado) River a man was waiting with a rowboat and a team on the other side. They piled the freight on the back of the boat and left room for the two passengers to sit on top of a 100-pound coffee box. The load was so heavy water splashed into the boat. With one arm Martha held her baby and with the other held onto the coat collar of Mr. Tweedy, the other passenger, to keep from being thrown into the river. She wrote, When we finally got across the river, 1 asked how far it was from there to Moab, and was told three miles. We traveled on, it seemed endlessly, until we came to the last house in sight. I asked when on earth we would ever get to town. Mr. Darrow, the stagecoach driver, said " W e have already come through town and this is about the last house." I was then ushered into and made welcome by my brother John Wilcox and his wife Violet. Dick had found work for his team and wagon at Little Castle Valley and couldn't be there to meet me. It was May 1, 1889. The next day Violet took me to see my little house which was a quarter of a mile away, surrounded by tall greasewoods. When I saw it, I began to cry and asked if I had to stay there. . . . Never in my life had I felt so desolate and lonely.

The little cabin had half a roof and a floor all but four feet from the wall on one side, no doors and windows but openings left for them, and no chinking between the logs. She wrote that the sun and wind had full sway, day and night, also rats, mice, and other small animals.

Dick came home to move her in. He had bought a new cookstove, bed, cradle, table, six chairs, and a rocking chair, plus a tub and washboard, two brass buckets to carry water, and two iron kettles to cook in.

She had sewed rags for a carpet and brought bedding, dishes, and silverware, plus two sacks of dried fruit. With these new possessions and the pride he showed in having furnished their first home, life did not seem so bleak.

Richard Dallin Westwood

73

Richard D. Westwood and his wife Martha Wilcox, ca.

1888.

But in a few days Dick had to go back up to Castle Valley to work, leaving her alone with the baby, who luckily was a "dear good natured soul all her life." Martha said that her little niece slept with her at night, but it seemed the long, lonely days would never pass. She went to church at the new meeting house and often stayed the night with her sisters, Mary and her husband, Herbert Day, and Ellen and her husband, John Oliver.

Early in July Dick came to take her up to Castle Valley with him.

She rode a mule on a pack saddle with a feather bed strapped over it and carried the baby in her arms. She was the first white woman to go over Rimrock Trail, about which J . N. Corbin, editor of the Grand Valley Times, wrote in January 1897: " . . . after that final part where man and horse go down the so-called heavenly staircase, a rock trail steep as stairs the whole thousand feet, I would sign any petition to have a road built or an elevator put i n . " At one place their pack horse lost her footing, rolled 200 feet down the mountain, and lodged in a cedar tree. Dick went down to cut her loose, then came back for Martha and the baby. She wanted to walk, but he told her the mule would make it all right and she did.

74

Utah Historical Quarterly

They had a good month together, but then his job at the ranch ended. Martha wouldn't go back up the mountain, so he got Will Shafer to bring her out in a rowboat down the river, along with Mr. and Mrs. Mat Martin, while he took his team out. She wrote.

That day and the first day I came to Moab were the first two times I was ever in a boat, and the first big river I had ever seen. It was a frightening experience for an 18 year old, who had lived a rather sheltered life until her marriage. We reached the landing in Moab at dark and walked up to Mrs. Martin's mother and father's place, the Gibsons. They wanted me to stay all night but I had heard they were rough people and was afraid, so Mr. Shafer borrowed a horse and I rode it up to brother John's to stay until Dick got home a few days later.

They had sold a cow which had been given to them at their wedding for $16 before coming to Moab. Martha had spent $8.00 of it on her feather bed, white bedspread, silverware, and flatirons. The other $8.00 they now used for lumber for casing a window, front and back door, and finishing the floor and roof on their little cabin. John Oliver plastered the room for them, and they papered the walls. Dick built a brush shed in front of it for a summer kitchen and wove willows all around the sides. Then they had a housewarming. Martha said the Darrows and Gibsons had a long running feud, apparently over some cattle, but they all came to the dance. Cowboys came with the Darrow and Gibson girls. The house was so small they could dance only one square at a time. Gibsons and Darrows would not join hands or speak, but the dance went on just the same. The cowboys all kept their guns strapped on, and she was relieved when morning came and they all went home without a shooting scrape.

They cleared the land that fall and winter and in the spring planted an orchard, alfalfa, and a garden. Dick freighted from Thompson to Moab for their living. He also cut and hauled logs from the mountain and fenced their place on two sides, the other two had the mountains on the south and west as natural boundaries. That winter they got acquainted with Moab and really enjoyed themselves. Dances were the main amusement in town, and they went to most of them.

During the Christmas holidays they "went to six dances that week.

Our main transportation . . . was Jimmy, the mule. We had only one that was gentle enough to ride so Dick rode in the saddle and carried the baby, and I rode behind the saddle on a clean blanket. It didn't matter that our clothes were wrinkled as everyone looked the same."

Alma Lutz, Judge Taylor, and sometimes Dick called the dances during those early years. Alma taught them how to do the waltz, schot-

Richard Dallin Westwood

75

tische, var souvanne, polka, quadrille, Virginia reel, Scotch reel, and the French four. Billy Allred, Mark Walker, Dudley Wilson, and Angus Stock all played violins, Lester Taylor an accordion, and Alma Lutz used bones or clappers made from beef ribs. Because only one set at a time could dance in private homes, O. W. Warner built a dance hall at his ranch where two quadrilles could dance at a time, or four couples could round dance. Each family brought refreshments, usually cake and ice cream but sometimes box suppers to raise money for some public need. July 4 and Mormon Day (Pioneer Day) meant horse races, foot races, dramas, and speeches (which Dick helped direct). For these and Christmas and New Year's Day there were also big community dinners ending in dances.^ The second winter, Martha's sister, Mary, moved east of Moab to Wilson Mesa with her husband. Martha kept their children so they could go to school and also be company for her. The third winter, the whole Day family stayed with Dick and Martha while they cleaned their old house, getting ready to move back in it. When a diphtheria epidemic swept the town, Jimmy Day died. Martha wrote.

There were 19 deaths in three weeks. My husband went from house to house helping care for the sick, digging graves to bury the dead. Sister Mary also lost a little girl, one and a half years old. After they moved from our house, Dick moved in with them and helped care for them until all were well. We were not touched, somehow.

Then their lives changed. Grand County was created from part of Emery County on March 13, 1890, with the county seat at Moab, a total population of 541,^ and 3,692 square miles of brush-covered desert, broken canyons, warm valleys, the La Sal Mountains, and the Colorado River. The first county officers were appointed, but as soon as they got organized they held an election. O n August 28 Richard Dallin Westwood was elected sheriff.

He had a large territory to cover and all kinds of troubles. A small settlement, later named Elgin, was over on the Green River. The main shipping point for cattle was up at Thompson, with the summer range nearby. Cisco, east of Thompson, was an alternate cattle-shipping point. Miners working the gold and copper discoveries in Miner's Basin in the La Sals and on the Colorado and Dolores rivers took their ore to Cisco in wagons to be shipped to the mills. Farmers hauled the ^Cortes, Grand Memories, p. 34.

9Deon C. Greer et al.. Atlas of Utah (Ogden and Provo: Weber State College and Brigham Young University Press, 1981), p. 110.

76

Utah Historical Quarterly

produce from their orchards to Cisco and Thompson. At the mines they fought over claims. Isolated settlements and cattle ranches all through the county were subject both to rustlers and to the diminishing but still present Indian raids.^° Until Moab was incorporated in 1903 the county sheriff handled all the duties of the law in the town as well as in the county with only a deputy or two and sometimes a posse.

Moab itself went through a wild and woolly period. There was a saloon on each side of Main Street. Whiskey was brought in by the barrel and sold without restriction. Cowboys who had imbibed too much would ride up the streets shooting at one side and then the other or just for fun would hold up a local merchant. The dances, one of the town's main entertainments, often turned into brawls, as Martha had feared hers might do.^^ O n the other hand, civilization was coming to the town. In 1887 the school board decided to build two schools, one in the lower valley and one in town for the eighty school-age children who had been meeting in tents and homes. A cowboy, Tom Trout, had purchased a town lot with money won in a horse race and he donated this for the town school. Today, the junior high stands on this lot. O. W. Warner donated one and a half acres in town to build a Mormon meetinghouse, begun in 1888.^^ Dick was not at all religiousâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;probably as a result of his broken home as a child, but Martha was and the building of the church meant a lot to her.

The famous Telluride robbery by members of the Butch Cassidy gang took place the year before Dick became sheriff. The gang used a network of trails through the county to move stolen cattle and horses from the La Sals, the Book Cliffs, the Yellow Cat mines, or the Arches area down to the Green River and on the Robbers Roost. There are still remains of two old cabins, one in Spring Canyon and another on Horsethief Point, said to have been the outlaws' way stations. Other outlaws herded stolen cattle across the Dewey ford upriver to the Dolores Triangle and over to box canyons at Gateway, Colorado. So the sheriff spent many an hour on the trail, usually recovering only part of a stolen herd.

There was no jail. When the "Brock G a n g , " apparently a local group of rustlers, were captured and sentenced to six months they served their jail terms in the Darrow Hotel on Main Street, really a lOCortes, Grand Memories, p. 116-59. i^Tanner, The Far Country, p. 148-50. '^Cortes, Grand Memories, p. 31.

Richard Dallin Westwood

77

large rooming house with a balcony across the front, operated by M a Darrow, the only woman in town who smoked (a corncob pipe). Oddly enough, this was also the Moab hotel where the Wild Bunch and other outlaws came to quench their thirst, enjoy a good meal, or stay the night. Another hotel in town, the Maxwell House, catered to more respectable travellers.^^ Martha, who had joined the LDS Relief Society on arriving in town, lived for her church and longed for the kind of sheltered life she had known as a child. She hoped the respectable sheriffs office would bring them both a steady income and that kind of life. Instead, There was no jail so the prisoners Dick arrested had to be brought to our little one room cabin. One time I had to feed and provide beds for five people for three weeks before they could have their trial: one woman, a boy 13, and three men. Sometimes when Dick was called away from home he would leave me to guard prisoners in the daytime and send Ervin Wilson, a deputy, to help guard them at night. 1 had a curtain around my bed so I could get into bed without being seen.

Convicted prisoners were taken to Salt Lake. Martha says that most were just turned loose, as they had no money to pay their fines.

In the beginning the county had no funds to pay the officers' salaries, so they were paid with county warrants. When the warrants came due and there was still no money in the treasury, the Westwoods had to stand the expense of feeding the prisoners in addition to receiving no pay. In 1892 the county purchased a lot with a house on it from Oren D. Allen on what is now the northwest corner of Main and First North. They used this as a courthouse and built a small jail, in which to hold prisoners until trial.^^ After four years Dick decided he just could not feed his growing family on nonpaid warrants, so he resigned. In the next five years four men tried the office in his place.

Meanwhile, Dick and Martha had lost a baby boy at birth. Ella, as they came to call the firstborn, was four years old before Kate was born in 1892; then Ruth was born in 1895 when Dick quit as sheriff.

When Ruth was five weeks old he got a contract to get out logs for two houses, one for the Westwoods and the other for the Bransons. Over the next four years he also freighted, fenced his seventeen acres, and built a new house of three rooms, plus an attic for bedrooms, using his i3Ibid., p. 30, 45-46. i^Grand County Courthouse Records, Moab, Utah, recorded deed and plat of town. Also Cortes, Grand Memories, p. 50.

78

Utah Historical Quarterly

share of the logs. He planted ten acres of new orchard to add to the one and one-half acres they already had in orchard. He left Martha to tend it while he took a summer contract building mountain fences. She also had a big garden and five acres of alfalfa to tend while he worked then and later again at the sawmill. Sometimes she would take the girls and camp out with him for a few weeks up in the mountains away from the summer heat.

Dick rented a large, already-producing fruit farm for several years and picked, packed, and freighted the apples from it to Thompson, taking the culls to feed their pigs and to dry for home use. Apples rode better in the wagons to Thompson than other fruits, but as early as 1896 O. W. Warnerâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;from whom Dick was renting the orchard and who had brought in and sold or given away thousands of fruit trees to get the industry going in the valleyâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;shipped three hundred crates of peaches. Peaches and other fruits such as grapes bruised too easily and usually were better for drying or canning than for sale until better roads were built. Bishop Randolph Stewart developed a peach that would not bruise so easily, still named the Stewart peach. ^^ The Westwoods' first surviving son, Neil, was born in 1898, just after their new house was finished, and another daughter, Grace, was added in December 1900. Times seemed to be better, although there was never enough to keep their growing family fed and clothed as well as Martha would have liked, especially because Dick was always giving away food or clothes or even bedding to those he thought were in real need.

To add variety to their entertainment, Dick formed a "home dramatic" acting company, including Frank Shafer, D. A. Johnson, Malissa and Zola Stark, some of the Taylors, and others. Martha said they took Neil and then Grace along in the baby buggy to rehearsals and got someone to sit by them during the plays themselves. In 1901 the town had an epidemic of scarlet fever. Their two eldest, Ella and Ruth, were very sick, so they were quarantined all winter. So many were sick by spring that school was stopped in April.

Dick was a sociable fellow who liked a drink, a cup of coffee, and a cigarette. Family stories say that he was baptized as a child in a cold creek. One night in Moab, in his cups, he and a friend took the local bishop down to the creek and baptized him. For this he was excommunicated.^^ His family finally had him rebaptized after his death. i^Tanner, The Far Country, p. 192. '^Interviews with daughter Ella and granddaughter Zona Cato.

Richard Dallin Westwood

79

The Grand Valley Times records that he was appointed road supervisor in November 1899, and he oversaw a great deal of street work in Moab. He also acted as a deputy or posse member intermittently during these years. On March 3, 1899, he was in a posse that went on a twelve-day trip into the San Rafael country after horses stolen from Andrew Tangren. They had a two-hour battle with the outlaws with a hundred or more shots fired on both sides, as far as known without damage. Out of ammunition, the posse returned home. A second trip in a few weeks brought home eight horses and one mule. Later articles detail trips by saddle horse to Loa to testify against Jim Hawkins, alias "Silver T i p , " charged with assault with attempt to murder.

Then on May 26, 1900, Sheriff Tyler and a posse member, Sam Jenkins, were killed forty-two miles above Thompson in the Book Cliffs. Along with Sheriff Preece of Vernal, they had been out three weeks looking for cattle rustlers. A year earlier, searching for Tom Dilly, a cattle rustler, Tyler had shot a rustler he thought was Dilly in the head. Instead, he had killed "Flat Nose'' George Curry, a leader of the Hole in the Wall Gang. Harvey Logan (Kid Curry) had sworn to avenge that death.

Learning that Dilly was out after more cattle above Thompson, Preece and Tyler led their posses there and then split up to search for the outlaw. Tyler and Jenkins found what they thought was an Indian camp. Leaving their guns and horses with Deputy Day, they approached the camp. Seeing cowboys, they exchanged hellos, turned back toward their horses, and were shot in the back. Day got away and found Preece and his four men. They then went to Thompson and wired Gov. Heber M. Wells who sent men from Salt Lake to assist the Moab, Price, and Vernal posses in finding the outlaws.

Dick Westwood was called to form the Moab posse. Although the governors of Colorado, Wyoming, and Arizona jointly instigated an intensive manhunt, the Westwood group stayed out by themselves for thirty-two days, until they finally lost the trail in the White Mountains near Rawlins, Wyoming. Dick was appointed in absentia as sheriff to fill the vacancy caused by Tyler's death. The Times commented: The appointment of R. D. Westwood to fill the vacancy caused by the death of Jesse Tyler will give general satisfaction throughout the county. Westwood has been with Tyler in many of his trips after criminals and was formerly sheriff of the county and has always been ready to be at the front when men are required. The posse he is with on the trail of the murderers of Tyler and Jenkins was the first to start and have been on the go ever since, while the other posses have returned from the chase.

Utah Historical Quarterly

80

.^^^'^

^

^

'

^

'

^

â&#x20AC;˘^

'

Left to right: standing are Neil Westwood and Joseph H. Johnson; seated are Richard D. Westwood, Vere Westwood, and Charles Cato, ca. 1920.

He reluctantly took the appointment. Although the county raised his salary to $800 a year, it was still hard to keep his big family. In October he was out with a posse again, chasing three young men who had held up the train at Cisco. He returned home to oversee the shipment of over two thousand boxes of apples to the railroad from his own and other valley orchards. He was called back to Loa to testify in a second trial of "Silver T i p " for cattle rustling. When the jury returned a not guilty, that ended it; he refused to run again.^^ Meanwhile, in August 1900 Samuel King, who had built a ferryboat at Dewey, contracted to build a river road up to Dewey. In 1902 the Grand River Toll Road Company of Provo, headed by Reed Smoot, gave Dick a contract to repair the road and put in toll gates.

J . H. Webb and Emil Boren had just hit a gold strike on Wilson Mesa.

Prospecting started in areas all up and down the river. Over the next ten years Dick Westwood was often recorded as shipping gold from the Dolores area.

The Times called for a new ferryboat at Dewey in a February 3, 1903, editorial, as the old one was dilapidated and could not handle the '^Tanner, The Far Country, p. 162-64. Grand Valley Times, search of all records, specifically March 3, April 4, 1899, J u n e 1, 8, 29, 1900. See also L. L. Taylor, Grand County commissioner, in publication of Utah Peace Officer's Association, fall 1949.

The Westwood homestead at Dewey, Utah.

new mining traffic. Rising ice wrecked the old boat, and on March 22 Westwood was awarded a contract by the Grand County Commission to operate a new ferry at Dewey. He also contracted to build a new road between Dewey and Cisco.^^ When Dick was repairing the road the first year, the Westwood family stayed at Dewey five and a half months. Martha ran the post office and the halfway house, cooking for both the road crew and the transients at twenty-five to thirty-five cents per meal. The family went home to Moab for the school year and for the birth of another son, Vere. The following year they stayed in Moab and Dick farmed the Warner orchards and farms.

When he got the ferry contract and the contract to build the new road, they moved back up to Dewey where they remained for the next twelve yearsâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;until the suspension bridge was built across the Colorado in 1915. In order to work the mining claims that Dick kept hoping would give them more money, they sometimes sublet the ferry. Two winters they moved to the pump house up at Cisco until the ice went out. One winter they rented a little log cabin on an island in the middle of the Colorado River. Two more children, Ida and Anna, were born in those years.^^ ^^Grand Valley Times, February 3, March 13, 22, 1903.

19See Morse, Autobiography, for story of years at Dewey. Also taped family interviews and Westwood, Westwood Family History.

82

Utah Historical Quarterly

At first, to have enough students so the school board would hire a teacher, Martha enrolled herself and four-year-old Grace. When the mining nearby caused the population to grow, a new school was built on the other side of the river. Nevertheless, the Westwoods sometimes boarded other children to keep the enrollment up during the cold months. Martha served on the county school board for two years, one year as chairman, traveling on occasion to Moab and other areas to carry out her duties. She continued through all the years, with the help of her girls, to run the boardinghouse at Dewey, feeding all those who came in on the stage or the wagons hauling ore or produce or just travelers going through. Dick was a school trustee for the district from 1911 until 1914 and was elected justice of the peace in 1914.

The oldest girls were sent down to Moab to board for high school, one year each, and finally Martha went down one winter and took all the children, leaving Dick at the ferry by himself. Dick and Martha had grown further apart as the years went on. Although he still loved her dearly, he would not become a " g o o d " Mormon, and he was always restless at home farming or running the ferry too long at a time.

Kate and Ella grew into young women and were both married from Dewey. Martha sadly missed them, for they had helped her with the boardinghouse and even managed it when she was away. She had taught them to be good housekeepers, to sew both clothes and fancy linens, and to make hats; and Dick had fostered in all the children a love of reading, reciting poetry, and putting on family skits.

Dick's drinking grew heavier in their early years upriver. Each day he would have the stage driver bring him a pint of whiskey from Cisco. When Martha finally wrote to an attorney about a divorce, Dick saw the letter and, curious as to why his wife was writing an attorney, read it. Realizing at last the extent of his wife's distress over his drinking, he quit and never drank again.

In spite of his long years of hunting down outlaws, Westwood trusted people. He was always lending someone money, a horse, or sacks of potatoes and corn. Often, the loaned items were things Martha needed to keep the family fed and the boardinghouse going.

Equally characteristic of the man was his fearlessness. One time in the later Dewey years, the family went across the river on the ice to eat New Year's dinner with friends. When a thawing wind came up, they hurried to reach the river before the ice went out and stranded them.

They found water already a foot deep all over the ice. Dick ran across to make sure the ice was still solid underneath, then called to Martha to

Richard Dallin Westwood

83

drive the team across as fast as she could make the horses run. Just a few minutes after they got home the ice went out. When the children went back to watch the ice jam, they found their father in his ferryboat working the ropes without a thought for his life, making the j a m push him and his boat up on the bank so it would be saved. The Moab ferry was wrecked by the same ice jam.

They had homesteaded a farm at Dewey, pumping water from the Colorado for their crops. When they moved back to Moab in 1916, after the bridge was built and the ferry quit running, they brought their herd, forty-five head of young cows. They had few other worldly goods. The old house in Moab needed lots of repair, and some of the orchard was dead. They still could not make a living from these seventeen acres, but it was where they wanted to live, at least in the winter.

After four years they sold the Dewey farm and bought a dry farm at old La Sal where they moved the cattle and the childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;even some of the married onesâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;and stayed summers for six years. They lost most of the cows to rustlers, made only one good crop, and wound up a thousand dollars in debt. So they gave up and traded the dry farm for a Moab town lot on which Dick promised to build Martha a better home.

They moved back onto the old farm, sharing it in later years with son Neil and his growing family. Some of the children moved away as they married, but most of them stayed in Moab. They all tried to help out their parents, and after Dick's death three of them did build Martha her house in town.

Between 1916 and 1925 Dick served four terms as deputy sheriff under W. J . Bliss and Heber Murphy. Murphy resigned in 1925, and Westwood once more became sheriff to finish the term, serving to the end of 1926. He was then sixty-two years old. When Joe Johnson, deputy sheriff and town marshal, fell from a horse and was killed in December 1927, Dick took over, agreeing to stay on as deputy to Sheriff J o h n B. Skewes and as town marshal only until the next election. ^^ By this time Grand County had grown to nearly 1,800 people, with much of the growth in the Moab area. It was still isolated, although the roads had been improved out to the railroad. Farming, raising cattle, and mining remained the three legs of the economy.

There was a community church and the Mormons had built Star Hall, a recreation center and theater, next to their church.^^ 20Grand County Courthouse Records; also Times Independent, successor to Grand Valley Times.

2iCortes, Grand Memories; also McConkie, The Far Country.

84

Utah Historical Quarterly

Richard D. Westwood, standing second from left, and other family members, ca.

1920.

The character of the town and the area had not changed much from the early days. There were still wide, dusty streets in the small business section and farms throughout the valley. There was still plenty of lawbreaking and even cattle rustling, but the main outlaws were bootleggers. Joe Johnson said that when they raided stills Westwood would always ask one of the others to taste the evidence to be sure it was alcohol. He did not want to be tempted to start drinking again.

Dick's family remembers when he took a crew up above Cisco to raid a bootlegging camp. The bootleggers had worked all night and then gone to camp to sleep. Westwood waited until they were snoring and then had his crew take the distributor caps off all their cars, break up the still, and empty all the liquor except a couple of bottles for evidence. They went into camp, guns drawn, and caught all the bootleggers asleep in their BVDs. One managed to reach a gun, but no one was hurt. They caught them all.

Richard Dallin Westwood

85

On September 6, 1929, two bandits, Delbert Pfoutz and R. H. Elliot, were arrested by Sheriff Skewes and Deputy Westwood at the Moab Co-op store for the robbery of the B. W. Hector road camp at Klondike. They had been followed to Moab by Hector and LaDue Williams, who had reported the robbery to the sheriff. Meanwhile, the actions of Pfoutz and Elliot in the store had aroused the suspicions of R. J . Reid and Ralph Miller. While Miller was wrapping their purchases, Reid slipped out of the store to get the sheriff. The two bandits and their car were searched before they were taken to the jail. No gun was found, but some .32 caliber cartridges were, plus loot from several robberies. Because of the cartridges t h e ^ i s o n e r s were searched again.

It was afterward learned that Elliot had the gun concealed under a wide belt buckled tightly about his body. Miller and Reid thought Pfoutz had had the gun in the store, so he was searched more thoroughly.

Westwood and Skewes agreed that the two prisoners were dangerous and still might have a gun, so they would take no chances and go together or with another person whenever they took in food. At 5:30 P.M. Westwood took food to the prisoners in company with J. W. Johnson. One of the prisoners asked for some cigarettes. No one will ever know why the aging deputy returned alone with them or why he left his gun in the sheriffs office. He was gunned down.

The two bandits never did agree on their stories. What is known is that the cell was unlocked and that Elliot shot Westwood three timesâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;through his right shoulder, his right side below the ribs, and through the left arm into the body, striking the heart. Dick apparently lived for two or three minutes. The prisoners escaped. Pfoutz was seen going south through the courthouse lot and later toward the cliffs south of town. Elliot went east along the street north of the courthouse.

It was nearly dark when the crime was discovered. Every man in town wanted to be in the posse, but it was too dark to track them.

Guards were posted all night on every road out of town, and Friday morning the manhunt started. Pfoutz's tracks were followed down the Colorado five miles. There he had improvised a raft from a log and started to float down the river. A man on horseback went back to Moab for a motorboat. Skewes and four men raced it down the river, watching closely along the banks as they went. Ten miles down the river they captured Pfoutz on a knoll a short distance from the stream.

In the meantime, posses had been scouring the surrounding hills for the other man. About 2 P.M., V. R. Johnson, on the road to Monticello, saw a man on foot a mile below Blue Hill, holding up his hand for

86

Utah Historical Quarterly

a ride. Some of his fingers were m i s s i n g , m a t c h i n g Elliot's description. Johnson raced past him toward Monticello. At Cane Springs he met Albert Beach, driving a truck toward Moab. They came back together and again passed the fugitive. Beach then got off the truck where he could keep Elliot in sightâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;he only had a .22 rifleâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;while Johnson drove on two miles to where armed guards Len and Arch Stocks were stationed.

The four drove up to Elliot, who meekly surrendered. He Richard D. and Martha Westwood with had lost his gun when he fell their granddaughter Mildred Double, in the night while trying to 1929. scale the cliffs south of town.

On September 26 the two men were charged with murder and taken to Price to await trial. In the middle of November they were returned to Moab, where feelings ran high. On the evening of November 16 the prisoners were left alone to eat dinner. The front door on the jail and also the gate on the high fence around it were locked. When the sheriff returned ten minutes later they were gone. No one knows how they got the key.

Tracks showed they had escaped to the hills north of town on foot.

Sunday morning the trail was taken up and followed to Wilson Mesa.

Again it got too dark to track. But Monday morning the fugitives were found at the old Gardner Ranch twenty-five miles east of Moab and returned to face trial. Both men were found guilty and sentenced to life imprisonment. ^^ When the fugitives were captured the second time, Neil Westwood, Dick's son, was there. He had sworn to shoot them on sight, and no one would have stopped him. But he could not pull the trigger. His father, whatever troubles and joys he had otherwise in life, had stood for law and order. Neil could not take the law into his own hands.

22Lamont Johnson, " M a n h u n t , " Startling Detective, March 1941, See also Times Independent, September 12, September 19, September 26, November 21, December 5, December 12, 1929.

Women Vote in the West: The Woman Suffrage Movement, 1869-1896. By BEVERLY BEETON. (New York and London: Garland Publishing, 1986. xiii -t- 164 pp. $30.00.)

The Fifteenth Amendment promised political rights to the recently freed slaves following the Civil W a r .

Women suffragists such as Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton considered it only right that women also should be entitled to vote. There was little interest in including women in the enfranchising amendment, however, or in supporting a separate amendment for them. What did emerge in the fight for woman suffrage were proposals for testing the idea in the territories. Woman suffrage could be safely tried in the territories because they were under the control of the national Congress which could stop the experiment if it proved unwise. Only Wyoming and Utah territories enacted woman suffrage laws in 1869 and 1870 respectively.

By the end of the century only four Rocky Mountain states had extended the franchise to their women: Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, and Idaho; and it would be another quarter of a century before the gender denial of the right to vote would be eliminated nationwide with the passage and acceptance of the Nineteenth Amendment in 1920.

Beverly Beeton unfolds the interrelationship of the national suffrage movements with the developments in these four mountain territories and states in a well researched and informative narrative. The motives for and

against suffrage are bared for the reader to examine. The "noble experim e n t " promoting women's rights may have been legislated for additional reasons than purely wholehearted beliefs in equality.

Beeton believes Wyoming legislators were interested in advertising the territory following the completion of the transcontinental railway and embarrassing a nationally appointed governor. She also advances the position that Utah legislators were interested in passing their suffrage bill to protect polygamy and to promote statehood.

Conversely, those on the national level initially thought woman suffrage in the territory of Utah would bring about the elimination of polygamy but later concluded the women's vote in Utah was under control of the M o r m o n church hierarchy and withdrew the Mormon women's franchise in the Edmunds-Tucker Act of 1887.

Utah reinstated women's voting rights in the state constitution in 1895, but not without a fight in the constitutional convention. Brigham H .

Roberts spoke eloquently and at length against including woman suffrage in the constitution for fear it would block statehood for Utah. Friends of equal suffrage led by Franklin S. Richards, the son and husband of early suffrage leaders, organized to refute Roberts's arguments. Mormon historian Orson F. Whitney addressed the convention

88 and insisted suffrage was woman's right. After two weeks of intense debate, the equal suffrage clause was included in the constitution by an overwhelming majority. Women were denied the opportunity to vote on the adoption of the constitution, but it was nevertheless appoved by an absolute majority of all male voters. Review sailed through Congress without significant protest, and President Grover Cleveland issued the proclamation admitting Utah as the forty-fifth state on January 4, 1896.

Wyoming retained universal suffrage in its transition to statehood in 1890, but Idaho was admitted the same year with only non-Mormon male suffrage. The suffrage battle continued for six more years in Idaho until a suffrage amendment was placed on the ballot and approved by the voters in 1896. Colorado included voting rights for women not in its original state constitution but by referendum in 1893.

Beeton concludes with an assessment of the impact of woman suffrage Mormon Polygamy: A History. By RICHARD S . ture Books, 1986. vi + 307 pp. $19.95.)

Plural marriage among the Mormons has been a focal point of interest and controversy almost from Mormonism's nineteenth-century beginnings. Mark Twain poked fun at it more than a century ago, while Kimball Young, Larry Foster, and Michael Quinn have more recently labored to research and write about this "peculiar institution." Richard S. Van Wagoner, a clinical audiologist by profession, has in this volume and in his recent article on Sarah Pratt {Dialogue, vol. 19, no. 2) made an important contribution to the study of Mormon polygamy. The bibliography and end notes are instructive and provide the basis for understanding the inter-

Utah Historical Quarterly in the Westâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;that the predictions of o p p o n e n t s a n d advocates were unfulfilled. The suffrage did not degrade women, nor did the women's vote regenerate the world. But these four states enhanced human rights by including women in the franchise.

Beverly Beeton is to be commended for her impressive and exhaustive research. Her interpretive insights show a feminine bias occasionally, but they are generally credible. T h e writing style offers some difficulty to the reader because some of the transitions are rough and many of the quotes are not integrated smoothly into her narrative.

The editing and format of the book detract from the quality of an important and substantive study. The most significant weakness is the omission of an index. This is essential to such a valuable source book on the evolution of American suffrage.

J . K E I T H MELVILLE

Brigham Young University V A N WAGONER.

(Salt Lake City: Signa-

pretations made by Van Wagoner throughout the book.

The first seven of the book's nineteen chapters deal with the beginnings of polygamy to the Mormon exodus from Nauvoo, while chapters eight through thirteen describe polygamy as it developed under Brigham Young and J o h n Taylor. The last six chapters relate the difficulties surrounding the Manifesto and the decade of the 1890s and continue with a study of plural marriage into the recent twentieth century.

Both the beginning and the ending of the principle of plural marriage were periods of stress and trauma for the church and its members. Some reasons

Book Reviews and Notices for the difficulties surrounding the beginnings of plural marriage include the secrecy with which the practice began, the public denials of the practice while privately plural m a r r i a g e s were undertaken, the opposition to its practice by some of Joseph Smith's close followers including William Law and E m m a and Hyrum Smith, and the variety of stories seeking to expose polygamy which were circulated widely both from within and without the church. Van Wagoner suggests that Joseph Smith began to ponder plural marriage as early as 1830 and began to experiment with its practice during the church's Kirtland period.

Although suggesting that Smith had "relationships" with Fanny Alger and others, Van Wagoner notes that " a distinctly polygamous marriage ceremony was apparently not performed until Joseph Smith was 'sealed' to plural wife Louisa Beaman on 6 April 1841" (p. 7). In Nauvoo, the practice of plural marriage became an integral part of Mormonism.

The author's treatment of plural marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo is sometimes disconcerting to the reader.

This was a period of secrecy, duplicity, and difficulty, yet Van Wagoner often handles events by giving the reader a wide variety of sources and then allowing the reader to draw his own conclusions. Although the beginnings of plural marriage continue to be controversial, Van Wagoner as a historian cannot substitute a variety of historical sources for his own interpretation of those sources. The reader needs the historical citations to see where, why, and how the historian has arrived at his interpretations, but he also needs to see the historian's interpretation of those sources. Indeed the history of plural marriage during the Kirtland period is so muddied that a clear interpretation is needed.

89 In Nauvoo, Joseph Smith emphasized plural marriage, and Van Wagoner points out that Smith's emphasis on posterity was the basis of his concept of the "Kingdom of G o d . " Historical estimates suggest Joseph was married to as few as twenty-seven and as many as eighty-four women, and yet he consistently publicly denied the practice (pp. 231-32). Celestial or plural marriage, temple work for the living and the dead, and the law of adoption all became intertwined at Nauvoo. With Joseph Smith's death, the Mormon movement was splintered with the large majority of Mormons following Brigham Young westward to Utah and to a public announcement of the doctrine of plural marriage in August 1852. James J . Strang suggested he was Smith's authorized successor and secretly practiced polygamy in the Old Northwest while Joseph Smith III became president of the R L D S church in 1860 which openly opposed plural marriage.

Van Wagoner concludes that 20 to 40 percent of Utah Mormon families were polygamous and that the Mormon hierarchy urged involvement in the practice. Heber C. Kimball commented that " a man who goes into plurality looks fresh, young, and sprightly," while a man who with one wife "is inclined to the doctrine, soon begins to wither and dry u p " (p. 91).

The period of 1856 and 1857 (the Reformation) saw more polygamous marriages contracted than during any other two-year period. Some polygamous relationships ended in divorce; for example, Brigham Young granted 1,645 divorces during the period of his presidency. Although not popular with all Mormons, plural marriage was abhorred by most Americans and became the basis of a crusade to eradicate this "twin relic of barbarism" during the last half of the nineteenth century.

90 As plural marriage had a difficult time being born, it was a difficult doctrine for many to lay aside. Van Wagoner documents the events surrounding the Manifesto, including the document itselfâ&#x20AC;&#x201D; "the Manifesto contained several incorrect statements" (p. 146). The practice of continuing to perform plural marriages during the decade of the 1890s and the first part of the twentieth century, the difficulties for plural marriages and families after the Manifesto, and the political difficulties that polygamy brought the church during the Reed Smoot hearings are detailed by the author. A major contribution of the book is to bring the polygamy story current by outlining fundamentalist M o r m o n

Utah Historical Quarterly groups and their relationships as well as the attempts by the Mormon church to suppress plural marriage and fundamentalist groups. Polygamy and related doctrinal issues are explored from Short Creek, Arizona, to the Davis County Cooperative Society (the Elden Kingston Group) and from Colonia LeBaron Mexico (the Church of the First Born of the Fullness of Time) to Ron and Dan Lafferty, Royston Potter, and Alex Joseph.

Mormon polygamy continues to be of historical as well as current interest, and this volume helps to put the doctrine and the practice into focus.

RICHARD W . SADLER

Weber State College

Mormon Enigma: Emma Hale Smith, Prophet's Wife, "Elect Lady, " Polygamy's Foe, 1804-1879. By LINDA KING NEWELL and VALEEN TIPPETTS AVERY. (Garden City: Doubleday & Co., 1984. xiv + 394 pp. $19.95.) " I t seems to me that the rocky hills of Pennsylvania had developed in her a character of uprightness and integrity that carried her bravely through trials that would have overwhelmed women of more common m o u l d . " (Fulton Journal, May 30, 1879.)

These words penned by someone who knew Emma Smith personally, and interwoven into her sometimes riveting and sometimes provocative biography, are typical of the recurrent pattern of Emma Hale Smith Bidamon's life. And the pattern in turn acts as the underlying theme of one of the most significant Mormon biographies of the last decade.

Members of the Reorganized LDS church viewed Emma as patient, valiant, and silently suffering through her trials. Utah Mormons viewed Emma, the perpetually young wife beloved by their prophet Joseph Smith, as an antagonist of Brigham Young and the

LDS church over the question of plural m a r r i a g e â&#x20AC;&#x201D; who r e n o u n c e d her position as Elect Lady of the church.

Neither view is reality. And it is the reality of Emma's life that Linda King Newell and Valeen Tippetts Avery give us in Mormon Enigma: Emma Hale Smith: Prophet's Wife, "Elect Lady," Polygamy's Foe: " . . . we have attempted to reconstruct the full story of this remarkable and much misunderstood woman's experiences" (p. xii).

Using some family papers, Joseph Smith's diary, twenty-two surviving letters between Joseph and Emma, letters written by E m m a after 1844, one page of family blessings, and numerous original documents collected over eight years' research, including personal visits to every place Emma ever lived, these authors deal candidly with the problem of balance in describing historical events held sacred by some and refuted by others.

91

Book Reviews and Notices With courage and a sensitive fairness, Newell and Avery have challenged these sources to reveal who E m m a was, how she dealt with the realities of her life, and what impact she had on the lives of others. And they give to us a word portrait of a warm, loving woman who met life head-on with passion and greatness.

Just as significant as the life they portray is the diligent and thorough research model the authors demonstrate.

Rumors concerning E m m a ' s character and her defection from the Mormon church stem from a letter to the editor printed in the New York Sun, December 9, 1845. Over the signature " E m m a S m i t h " the letter stated (1) " I am left here with a family of children without any means of giving them an education for there is not a school in the city,'' (2) " t h e petty tyrants who have seized the government of the Mormon Church wish to keep the people in ignorance and b o n d a g e , " (3) " m y settled intention is to remain where I am, take care of my property, and educate my child r e n , " and (4) " I have never for a moment believed in what my husband called his apparitions and revelations, as I thought him laboring under a diseased mind. . . . " Such repudiation only a year and a half after the prophet's death was devastating (pp.

222-23). " W e did not know if she wrote it or not, but we knew we must find out. . . . O u r investigation took us to New

York City, Independence, Missouri, and back again. We could not find the original copy of the letter, only the one printed in the Sun. We found the name of the newspaper's editor and made a search for his papers, hoping a descendant or fellow worker had deposited them in some library or archive.

Nothing. We then turned to addressing two major areas: If E m m a wrote it, what could she hope to gain from it? If she did not, then who did and w h y ? " An obscure New Yorker named James Arlington Bennet was the writer. Seeking to gain favor with the leaders of the church, he submitted the letter to the Sun and then refuted it.

Emma's denial was published first in the Nauvoo Times and Seasons, J a n u a r y 15, 1846, and subsequently in the New York Sun. Mormon Enigma gives us "events as they occurred,'' in the words of Brigham H . Roberts, in "full consideration of all related circumstances, allowing the line of condemnation or justification to fall where it may; being confident that in the sum of things justice will follow truth [p. x i i ] . " And it does. The controversy over E m m a ' s relationship to the question of plural marriage no longer obscures " t h e accomplishments of a good and productive life" (p. 309).

ARLENE H . EAKLE

Woods Cross

Four Corners Country. Photographs by D I C K ARENTZ and text by (Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1986. 112 pp. $27.50.)

T h e Four Corners country is a unique, intriguing place. It is very close to me and has been all of my life.

At one time I was a part owner of a trading post at the foot of Navajo Mountain, and I have traveled exten-

IAN THOMPSON.

sively all through the region. The first time I was actually at the spot where the four states converge, there was nothing but a pile of rocks that marked Four Corners, and it was impossible to get there by car. I had to walk four or

Utah Historical Quarterly

92 five miles to accomplish it.

Four Corners Country is a beautiful production that does justice to its subject. The 55 photographs are absolutely superb. Being black and white, which is my favorite type of photographic work, they show with real depth and intensity the beauty of the country. Some of the most unusual scenery to be found anyplace in the world is concentrated in that area. The authors have succeeded admirably in depicting its essence.

Even the mythical dimension comes through. It is, of course, in the Four Corners country that the myths of the Navajos' coming are centered. To go

through the pages of this book is to imagine the land as it stood before the first people came and to see how it has changed through its years of habitation by both ancient and modern cultures.

I recommend this book highly to anyone. Whether interested in the Indian country, the rock formations, the legendary country of the Navajos, or the simple beauty of one of the most important and unusual spots to be found in our nation, the reader oi Four Corners Country will be well rewarded.

BARRY GOLDWATER

Phoenix, Arizona

J. E. Stimson: Photographer of the West. By M A R K Nebraska Press, 1985. iv + 210 pp. $29.95.)

If ever a photographer died and went to heaven part of the trip would have to include a beautifully produced, representative book of his camera work. This fine 10J4 x 10-inch tome would probably please the "artist" in J . E. Stimson.

Opening the book is a sensory delight. The strong and appealing format of mostly one image and caption per page allows the visual image and the photographer to speak first and most loudly for themselves, and they often do so eloquently. No small part of the power in the presentation of these images is derived from the translation of continuous-tone photograph into halftone lithograph. The gray-black duotones reproduce a range of tones that begins to bring up an almost three-dimensional depth (see plates 175, "Pavilion at Saltair"; 150, "Panoramic view of mining t o w n " ; 61, "Los Angeles Limited passing over Lane C u t o f f ) .

"Manufactured in J a p a n " speaks volumes to those of us who have had to engage their printers in constant battle

JUNGE.

(Lincoln: University of

for quality duotones even when willing to pay the " d o l l a r " price. For a striking comparison with halftones see The Utah Photographs of George Edward Anderson from the same publisher in 1979.

An introduction by Mark Junge, "Joseph E. Stimson: His Life and W o r k , " places the photographer's career in context. He worked during a transitional turn-of-the-century phase in western history when the "firsts" were past but industry and agriculture were flexing powerful new muscles and settlements were penetrating the last practical places. He ranged widely through Wyoming and the West, and his shutter slices should be widely viewed by people attempting to understand or appreciate the times and places he documented. Indeed, a Stimson look through the viewfinder was a strong and wide-ranging documentary view.

Two timelessly appealing self-portraits should be noted: " . . . in his Ford with favorite meerschaum pipe, ca. 1910" (plate 1) and "Loading up auto for fishing trip . . . July 1912"

Book Reviews and Notices (plate 13). It takes an inner fire for the medium and for history as well as a sense of humor to bother to make these kinds of photographs.

Thematic chapters represent the range of his work: People, Scenic Beginnings, The Union Pacific, The Agricultural West, The Industrial West, Western Towns and Cities, The Picture Book West, and Cheyenne.

Some deserve special comment. Stimson had a knack for standing in a dirt or brick-paved street, setting up his tripod, and exposing memorable images. I especially like plate 165, "Looking west on Ninth Street from Union Pacific Ticket Offices, Kansas City, Missouri, 1906," and plate 152, "Street scene, Dallas, South Dakota, 1908." Where are the "street scene" makers today? In fifty years such wellexecuted views as Stimson's should be just as telling of our lives and times.

With the technical limitations of his time and even today, some views can only be made well from one position.

Plate 174, "Bathing at Salt Lake Beach, Salt Lake City, Utah, 1906," was similarly shot by Detroit Photographic, G. E. Anderson, and others just after 1900. Utah readers may also appreciate plate 128, " C h i m n e y and flues for the large smelter at Garfield, U t a h , " a striking geometric composition, and plate 102, "Stacking hay, Ryan Ranch, 1903," a rare action view of the hay derrick and crew.

Some of Stimson's views are simply stunning in their seeming simplicity and subtle design. "Oakdale Park, Salina, Kansas, 1906" (plate 141), with a bicyclist and dog walker distant on a tree-shrouded, meandering meadow path, evokes feelings of warmth, stability, and beauty when the pace of life moved more slowly. " A lawn party, Columbus, Nebraska, 1905" (Plate 146), casually captures a bevy of white-dressed ladies at croquet.

The surrounding shade draws the

93 viewer into a deep nostalgia today. " M c D o n a l d ' s coal mine, 1903" (plate 129), a mine portal, shanty, and tipple with two men pushing a mine car amid an empty, arid expanse in the Big Horn Basin, lingers in the viewer's memory.

Stimson's views of the Tonopah and Goldfield rush are among the best to be seen. In "Gold seekers, 1905" (plate 1.21), a prospector with his feet in the raw aroma of his two burro charges holds the lead rope and displays a jaw set in the optimism of a strike "just 'round the corner." Headframes and sacked ore and muddy main streets filled with the bustle and goods of any respectable boom town are recorded by Stimson with a clarity unequaled by most of his contemporaries.

His agricultural scenes are very competent reporting, though not staged with the splendid theatricality of G. E. Anderson. Given his official access to the Union Pacific, his railroad views are a little disappointing, though their documentary power grows on you with familiarity.

Accustomed as we have become to viewing the wilderness West in black and white through the dramatic precision vision of Ansel Adams, here too we are left a little flat by Stimson's work, particularly when noting his " a r t i s t " logo with the prints. But then Adams was no great townscape and life-style documentarian.

Nothing in life is perfect and this book is no exception. The dust jacket picture of a large gathering of U P shop workmen seems to this observer a poor choice. It is uninteresting, unappealing, and unrepresentative. Do not judge the book by its jacket. Even with the care evident in photographic and lithographic printing, several cases of missed spotting were noted, and on too many occasions good images would have appeared superb were they not a dot or two out of registration. The

94 designers restrained themselves to about a half-dozen cross-gutter spreads, two of which even work (the panoramas of the natural bridge and smelter), but the rest were unnecessary at best. One, " Z i p train in Cheyenne yards, March 5, 1934" (plate 82), is a disaster as it bisects the locomotive nose focal point. The fine Stimson collection at BYU was overlooked. One can always be picky or curious about editingâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;what is left out, and in. But

Utah Historical Quarterly the sum of the book is far greater than its flaws.

J . E. Stimson deserves a wider audience. Researcher and printer and publisher all deserve thanks. This reader is anxious for a Wyoming State Archives visit and broader view of the collection.

The book provides both historic and visual pleasure.

G. B. PETERSON

Eureka, Utah

Chief Pocatello: The "White Plume. " By BRIGHAM D . MADSEN. (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1986. xii + 142 pp. Paper, $6.95.)

Most people in southern Idaho and Northern Utah have heard of Chief Pocatello. But most of their knowledge comes from myths perpetuated over the years by friends, teachers, Indians, and historians. Thanks to Professor Madsen the story of Chief Pocatello is now told and myths dispelled. This well documented, short biography is proof that factual history can be as exciting as fanciful history.

Little is known about Pocatello's father, but in his prologue Madsen tells about the chief's mother. She was captured from her small Grouse Creek band of Northwestern Shoshoni by a raiding party of Assiniboin Indians.

Her escape and return to her band is an inspiring story of hardship, privation, perseverance, and triumph. Her son would be born some three or four years later. His perseverance in the face of white intrusion into his aboriginal territory mirrored that aspect of his mother's personality.

Madsen explains how Pocatello's band of Northwestern Shoshoni fits '' into the mosaic of the great Shoshoni Nation." By so doing, comparisons and contrasts between the various bands enlarge our understanding of culture, politics, and territoriality.

The first reference to Pocatello by a white man came from the journal of Dimick B. Huntington, " M o r m o n guide and Indian agent," who wrote in August 1857, about meeting "Koctallo." Huntington undoubtedly anglicized one of the Indian names for Pocatello. Two years later Col. Frederick W. Lander noted meeting " a n outlying party of the band of Po-ca-taro or the 'White Plume.' ' ' By the time Huntington and Lander came along, Pocatello, even though a young man, had attained a position of leadership among several Shoshoni bands. He established a reputation for aggressive action against Mormon settlers and travelers on emigrant trails through territory he claimed. This aggression culminated in 1862 with attacks on wagon trains at City of Rocks in southwestern Idaho and Massacre Rocks west of American Falls.

Completion of the transcontinental railroad through Pocatello's territory and establishment of Fort Hall Indian Reservation created transitions in Pocatello's life. The number of white men streaming into his ancestral land escalated. Of course, demands were made to remove the Indians to the reservation. Although Pocatello moved

Book Reviews and Notices to Fort Hall Reservation, he had had ample experience with promises of Indian agents and knew that to keep his band from starving he would need to leave the reservation to obtain food.

One perceptive method used to obtain food was to join the LDS church in mid-1875 and participate in the Indian farm program. This did not last long, however, because of the "Corinne Indian Scare," which resulted in Pocatello's return to Fort Hall Reservation.

Being a reservation Indian was difficult for the free-spirited chief. He never became a "contented resident of Fort H a l l , " although he lived there until his death in October 1884. His unique burial epitomized his unique life.

95 Madsen concludes his book with an essay on how Pocatello's name came to be attached to Idaho's second largest city. Once again, fact is separated from fiction.

The book contains numerous footnotes, many of which further explain the text. The book is well indexed.

Maps and pictures are included which enhance the story. Those with an interest in Idaho, Utah, and Indian history will enjoy this book as an especially interesting chapter in Madsen's larger study of the Shoshoni Indians.

DAVID L . CROWDER

Ricks College Rexburg, Idaho

Indian Self-Rule: First-Hand Accounts of Indian-White Relations from Roosevelt to Reagan.

Edited by KENNETH R . PHILP. (Salt Lake City and Chicago: Howe Brothers, 1986. xii + 343 pp. $21.50.)

In the late summer of 1983 historians, anthropologists, government officials, and, most import a n t , I n d i a n spokespeople from throughout the nation converged on Sun Valley, Idaho, to recall the preceding half-century of federal Indian policy under the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934. This book is essentially a transcript of that conference and serves as an insightful personal history of Indian-white relations and of Indian hopes for the future.

Indian Self-Rule is divided into four sections — the Indian New Deal, 1933-45; the drive to terminate federal services to the tribes, 1945-60; the era of self-determination, 1960-76; and the future of Indian sovereignty. Each section begins with an overview chapter which gives the reader a feel for the period about to be discussed. These excellent chapters by Floyd O'Neil, James Officer, Philip Deloria, and W. Roger Buffalohead, could be the basis

for a history of federal Indian policy in the twentieth century. Each overview is followed by a series of chapters considering the important aspects of each period. For example, the discussion of the termination era includes chapters on the Indian Claims Commission and the program of urban relocation.

The Indian New Deal—the IRA and the other policies of Commissioner of Indian Affairs J o h n Collier which promoted tribalism and self-determination— marked a major shift in federal policy. The I R A reversed the assimilation programs epitomized by the Dawes General Allotment Act of 1887 and established modern tribal governments and business corporations. Collier's programs, however, met strong opposition from some Indians, and much of the discussion of the Indian New Deal is devoted to Collier and the wisdom and integrity of his policies. Rupert Costo, a Cauhilla

96 and a vocal opponent of Collier and the IRA since 1934, characterizes the commissioner as a "rank opportunist in politics," and the "Indian Raw D e a l " as the "last great drive to assimilate the American Indians" (p.

48). Costo charges that the IRA denied treaty rights and allowed the political colonization of Indian tribes through the great power the act vested in the commissioner of Indian affairs. Costo states that his view is disputed by most historians, and indeed, a much more benign view of Collier's policies emerges from the meeting. Kenneth Philp, the book's editor and an authority on the Collier era, agrees that the commissioner was often paternalistic and domineering but points out that any program which promotes the reservation as a permanent homeland cannot be deemed assimilationist. Thus the ultimate question remains, are the majority of American Indians better off because of the IRA? Benjamin Reifel, a Sioux and a former commissioner of Indian affairs, admits the act was not a panacea but argues that conditions have improved because of the act. The concerns of the participants regarding the other periods are just as broad, ranging from economic self-sufficiency to the preservation of traditional cultures. For each of the periods

Utah Historical Quarterly discussed, the contributors present important viewpoints and raise important questions.

The diverse opinions presented in Indian Self-Rule are also the source of the book's major weakness. As with all collections, the book suffers from some unevenness due to the divergent backgrounds of the contributors. A single chapter may contain the statements of a lawyer, an anthropologist, a federal administrator, and a tribal leader.

Their approaches may range from an analysis of national trends to a personal recollection of events on a single reservation. Both viewpoints are important, but this fact is often lost due to a lack of organization. A solution to this problem would have been to add a brief outline to each of the overview chapters detailing the major concerns about to be raised by the participants.

These criticisms are relatively minor, and the book remains a good reference and fascinating reading.

Moreover, the complete transcripts of this important conference are on deposit at the University of Utah library and should prove to be a boon to students of twentieth-century Indian history.

GREGORY E . SMOAK

Lacey, Washington

The Ignoble Conspiracy: Radicalism on Trial in Nevada. By SALLY ZANJANI and G U Y R O C H A . (Reno: University of Nevada Press, 1986. xvi + 209 pp. $16.50.)

Two trials took place in the Nevada mining district during the spring of 1907. They employed the same attorneys, judge, and jury. The defendants, paradoxically, were the same, yet different. On April 19, Morrie Preston and Joseph Smith, both members of the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), went on trial for the murder of one J o h n Silva. Simultaneously, those

LOUIS

opposed to the union's activities placed a vaguely defined anarchist plot, identified with radicalism, the red flag of socialism, and terrorism, on trial in the same c o u r t r o o m . This nebulous scheme, however, is not the "ignoble conspiracy" to which Zanjani and Rocha allude in their title. The phrase, used by Morrie Preston, suggests the "concocted" evidence and dubious

Book Reviews and Notices means employed to convict all the defendants in the Silva case.

The Ignoble Conspiracy^â&#x20AC;˘& authors have meticulously researched the events surrounding the Smith-Preston trial, which took place in the I W W stronghold of Goldfield, Nevada. Vividly, they illustrate how the mine owners, prosecuters, and even the judge manipulated the situation to make radicalism the true defendant in the case. Immediately after the shooting, area newspapers printed rumors about a diabolical plot of which Silva's murder was just one part. Mine owners then organized to combat radicalism. They hired a "private a r m y " of company guards, secured witnesses of q u e s t i o n a b l e credibility, and obtained the services of a special prosecutor. The judge, as shown by his often condescending language, seemed to have predetermined the defendants' guilt. Preston shot an armed J o h n Silva in apparent self-defense, and Joseph Smith took no part in the action. Yet, a jury convicted both men. Neither could secure a pardon, despite massive evidence produced later of their innocence and failure to receive a fair trial.

Had the Smith-Preston trial been merely an isolated incident on America's western frontier, the participants and the outcome would deserve considerably less notice. Zanjani and Rocha illustrate the case warrants the attention they gave it. They show how the trial of the Nevada I W W leaders conforms to a pattern repeated wherever a " W o b b l y " stood trial. Events and characteristics of the Goldfield case are compared to those involving more famous defendants, such as "Big

97 Bill" Haywood and Joe Hill. The union members' radical leanings, as much as their alleged criminal actions, contributed substantially to the indictments in every case. The trial that sent Smith and Preston to prison served to discredit radical unionism in Nevada.

The other proceedings produced similar outcomes.

The Ignoble Conspiracy conveys a troubling message as it narrates the events connected with the trial, conviction, and appeal process of two advocates of syndicalism in early twentiethcentury Nevada. Evidence of perjury and judicial bias raise important questions about the American legal system and the right of radical dissent. Zanjani and Rocha have done an excellent job of presenting one incident in a disturbing chapter of American history. Their work is both informative and enjoyable.

At a time when far too many books go directly from personal computer to published edition, the University of Nevada Press has produced a high quality volume. This reviewer can only wish the economics of printing permitted publishers to place footnotes on the bottom of the page where they belong. Other than this minor criticism, he found The Ignoble Conspiracy to be a work of superior quality. It should have special appeal for scholars, students and members of the general public interested in the history of labor, radicalism, and the Great Basin region.

ROBERT F . ZEIDEL

Northern Montana College Havre

â&#x20AC;˘/mm

The Passing of the Great West: Selected Papers of George Bird Grinnell. Edited

by J O H N F . REIGER. (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1985. vii + 182 pp. Paper, $7.95.)

Some Reminiscences about Fray Junipero Serra. Edited by FRANCIS J . WEBER. (LOS Angeles: California Catholic Conference, 1985. xii + 132 pp. $13.00.)

H u n t e r , outdoorsman, scientist, ethnographer, and conservationist, George Bird Grinnell (1849-1938) founded the Audubon Society, edited the forerunner to Field and Stream, and advised his hunting companion Theodore Roosevelt on conservation. Grinnell's papers, now at Yale University, form the basis of Reiger's edited narrative, originally published in 1972.

Anyone interested in the West of enormous bison herds and vast wilderness areas and their passing will find this book absorbing reading.

Inasmuch as none of the authors was a contemporary of the legendary Franciscan missionary, a more apt title for this collection of twelve essays might be Reflections on Fray Junipero Serra and the Missions He Founded. The collection was inspired by the 1984 celebration of the 200th anniversary of the friar's death. A major achievement of the essays is to lead the reader toward a view of the missions and life in and around them that is more reflective of their time, instead of seeing them merely as quaint little buildings to photograph on a vacation visit.

Sand in a Whirlwind: The Paiute Indian War of 1860. By FEROLEGAN. (Reno:

Brigham Young University: A House of

University of Nevada Press, 1986.

XX + 316 pp. Paper, $10.00.)

Faith. By GARY JAMES BERGERA and RONALD PRIDDIS. (Salt Lake City:

Fremont: Explorerfor a Restless Nation. By

Signature Books, 1985. xiii + 513 pp. Paper, $19.95.)

FEROL EGAN. (Reno: University of

Nevada Press, 1985. xxiii + 582 pp.

Paper, $14.00.)

Originally published in 1972 {Sand) and 1977 {Fremont), these paperback reprints in the University of Nevada Press Vintage West series incorporate new forewords, minor corrections, and in the case of Sand in a Whirlwind a new conclusion to the author's epilogue.

More than a fourth of this weighty paperback is used to document the authors' "warts and all" history of Brigham Young University. Their research is impressive, and because they declared no topic taboo the narrative quickly catches the interest of even the most casual browser. It is the kind of institutional history that one loves to readâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;because it names names and

Book Reviews and Notices

99

explores controversies—and that any institution (not just a church-sponsored university) would like to keep in a locked file or expunge from the record entirely. It certainly makes a contribution to the history of BYU and balances the four-volume history of the university published in 1975-76 in connection with the institution's celebration of its 100th year, but it does not, by itself, provide a full history of the university. Despite its willingness to explore controversies, Brigham Young University: A House of Faith may raise more questions than it answers, and that may be its greatest contribution.

The book could well serve as a basis for provocative discussions of religious orthodoxy and intellectual (as well as spiritual) freedom not only at BYU but in publicly funded institutions as well.

The River of the West: The Adventures of Joe

Meek.

By

FRANCES

FULLER

VICTOR. Vol. II: The Oregon Years.

Edited by Lee Nash. (Missoula, Mont.: Mountain Press Publishing Co., 1985. 382 pp. Cloth, $24.95; paper, $9.95.)

A photoreproduction of the first edition (1870), this volume offers a new

introduction, map, notes, bibliography, and index. It is the concluding volume of the Meek biography—the first volume having been reissued in 1983 — and is the third in Mountain Press's Classics of the Fur Trade Series under the general editorship of Winfred Blevins.

A Papago Traveler: The Memories of James McCarthy. By JAMES M C C A R T H Y : edited by J O H N G . WESTOVER, (Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1985. xxiv + 200 pp. Cloth, $22.50; paper, $11.95.)

Believed to be the first book-length autobiography ever published by a Papago Indian man, this memoir carries the reader along on McCarthy's lifelong adventure into Indian schools, American homes, prisoner-of-war camps, hobo jungles, and the factories, fields, and villages of the western United States, Europe, the Philippines, and China. Born in 1895, McCarthy, who was entering his ninetieth year when his book was published, has created a story that transcends the particulars of one individual's life journey.

Membership in the Utah State Historical Society is open to everyone We invite you to join.

If you are already a member you may use the blank or piece of plain paper to purchase gift memberships, or fill in the "Share the Wealth" coupon and we will send those you list a special invitation to join the Society.

MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION

Membership Secretary Utah State Historical Society 300 Rio Grande Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 Please enter my membership in the category below for the calendar year 19 . I understand that I will receive Utah Historical Quarterly, the Newsletter, and Beehive History for that calendar year. I have enclosed a check or money order in the amount indicated: n Individual, $15.00 D Senior Citizen (65 or over), $10.00

D Institution, $20.00 D Sustaining, $25.00 D Business, $100.00 D Patron, $50.00 D Contributing, $20.00 D Student, $10.00

Name Address City

State

Zip.

SHARE THE WEALTH

Please invite the following persons to join the Historical Society: Name

Address

Name

Address

Name

Address

U T A H STATE H I S T O R I C A L SOCIETY D e p a r t m e n t of C o m m u n i t y a n d Economic Development Division of State History BOARD O F STATE H I S T O R Y T H O M A S G . ALEXANDER, Provo, 1987

Chairman L E O N A R D J . ARRINGTON, Salt Lake City, 1989

Vice-Chairman M A X J . EVANS, Salt Lake City

Secretary DOUGLAS D . ALDER, St. George, 1989 PHILLIP A. BULLEN, Salt Lake City, 1987 J . ELDON DORMAN, Price, 1987 H U G H C . GARNER, Salt Lake City, 1989 D A N E . J O N E S , Salt Lake City, 1989 DEAN L . M A Y , Salt Lake City, 1987 WILLIAM D . OWENS, Salt Lake City, 1987 AMY ALLEN PRICE, Salt Lake City, 1989

ADMINISTRATION M A X J . YNA^S, Director J A Y M . RAYMOND, Librarian STANFORD J . LAYTON, Managing Editor D A V I D B . M A D S E N , State Archaeologist A . K E N T P O W E L L , Historic Preservation Coordinator P H I L L I P F . N O T A R I A N N I , Museum Services Coordinator C R A I G F U L L E R , Administrative

Services Coordinator

T h e U t a h S t a t e H i s t o r i c a l Society w a s o r g a n i z e d in 1897 b y p u b l i c - s p i r i t e d U t a h n s t o collect, p r e s e r v e , a n d p u b l i s h U t a h a n d r e l a t e d h i s t o r y . T o d a y , u n d e r state s p o n s o r s h i p , t h e Society fulfills its o b l i g a t i o n s b y p u b l i s h i n g t h e Utah Historical Quarterly a n d o t h e r historical m a t e r i a l s : collecting historic U t a h artifacts; l o c a t i n g , d o c u m e n t i n g , a n d p r e s e r v i n g historic a n d p r e h i s t o r i c b u i l d i n g s a n d sites; a n d m a i n t a i n i n g a specialized r e s e a r c h l i b r a r y . D o n a t i o n s a n d gifts t o t h e S o c i e t y ' s p r o g r a m s , m u s e u m , o r its l i b r a r y a r e e n c o u r a g e d , for only t h r o u g h such m e a n s c a n it live u p t o its responsibility of p r e s e r v i n g t h e r e c o r d of U t a h ' s p a s t .

This publication has been funded with the assistance of a matching grant-in-aid from the Department of the Interior, National Park Service, under provisions of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 as amended.

This program receives financial assistance for identification and preservation of historic properties under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The U.S. Department of the Interior prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, or handicap in its federally assisted programs. If you believe you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility as described above, or if you desire further information, please write to: Office of Equal Opportunity, U . S . Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. 20240.