THE “REIGN OF TERROR” IN UTAH:—THE REFORMATION OF THE SAINTS.
The people were now thoroughly excited. Their religious antipathy, their
political hatred—two of the most powerful passions which move individuals
or bodies of men—had been appealed to, and both in public and private
they had been stirred up to a pitch of frenzy which it is hardly possible
at the present time to comprehend.
There were whisperings now of a most fearful doctrine, calculated not
only to strike terror into the hearts of those whose faith was weakening,
but even to shock with a sense of horror those who only heard of it from
afar—I mean the doctrine of the BLOOD ATONEMENT.
The Saints had all along been taught to distinguish between murder and
the shedding of innocent blood—the former being spoken of as a crime for
which atonement might be made, but for the latter there was no repentance
on earth—it was an unpardonable sin. They were also taught to distinguish
carefully between sins which might be forgiven, and sins for which pardon
was impossible. Now the difference between murder and shedding innocent
blood is this:—the latter is the crime of killing a Saint, which can
never be forgiven, but by the death of the transgressor; but the former
is of quite a different character. To murder a Gentile may sometimes be
inexpedient, or perhaps even to a certain extent wrong, but it is seldom
if ever a crime, and never an unpardonable sin.
A friend of mine was in a state of apostacy. The Bishop went to her to
expostulate, and told her that, if he were her husband, he would get rid
of her and take away her children as well—he would not on any account
live with her.
“Perhaps,” she said, “you would not allow me to live at all?”
“Certainly not,” he replied. “I would think about as much of killing
you or any other miserable Apostate as I would about killing a cat. If
Brigham Young were to tell me to put you to death, I would do it with the
greatest of pleasure;—and it would be for your good, too.”
Thus, when the famous Revelation on Polygamy says that a man cannot be
pardoned for shedding innocent blood, it does not mean that he cannot be
pardoned for murdering a Gentile or an Apostate; for that, under some
circumstances, might even be meritorious; but that the murder of a Saint
by one of the brethren cannot under _any_ circumstances be forgiven on
earth, and that his only chance of forgiveness lies in his own blood
being shed as an “atonement.”
Certain sins cannot be forgiven here on earth—shedding innocent blood,
divulging the secrets of the Endowment House—marital unfaithfulness on
the part of the wife—Apostacy;—these are unpardonable. All other crimes
which Gentiles abhor may become even virtues, if done in the cause of
the Church. I do not, of course, mean to say that the mass of the Mormon
people act up to such atrocious doctrines; for although, when among
themselves, they would admit that the theory was correct, the better
instincts of their nature keep them from ever putting that theory into
practice. But what I do mean to say is, that such doctrines have, over
and over again, been distinctly taught in the plainest words in the
public hearing of thousands; that they _have_ been printed and reprinted
by authority; that they have been practised, and the very highest of the
Mormon leaders have applauded; and that, even at the present moment,
these doctrines form part of the dogmas of the Church. It is this day a
matter of fact, and not a matter of question, that if any Mormon Apostate
were to commit any of the unpardonable sins which I have mentioned,
and if he or she were to be assassinated by a private individual, all
zealous Mormons—all the leaders—would maintain that not only was the deed
justifiable but even meritorious!
This may seem bad enough, but it is not the worst. The doctrine of the
“BLOOD ATONEMENT” is that the murder of an Apostate is _a deed of love_!
If a Saint sees another leave the Church, or if even he only believes
that his brother’s faith is weakening and that he will apostatize before
long, he knows that the soul of his unbelieving brother will be lost if
he dies in such a state, and that only by his blood being shed is there
any chance of forgiveness for him; it is therefore the kindest action
that he can perform toward him to shed his blood—the doing so is a deed
of truest love. The nearer, the dearer, the more tenderly loved the
sinner is, the greater the affection shown by the shedder of blood—the
action is no longer murder or the shedding of innocent blood, for the
taint of apostacy takes away its innocence—it is making atonement, not a
crime; it is an act of mercy, therefore meritorious.
These were the terrible teachings which the “Reformation” brought to
light:—they had been whispered before among the elect, and had been
acted upon by the “Avenging Angels,” but before this they had never been
publicly and intelligibly explained.
Jedediah M. Grant, an enthusiast of the wildest kind; a man without
education or mental discipline of any description; one of the First
Presidency and high in authority among the Saints, had occasion to attend
a meeting which was held at Kaysville, a place about twenty-five miles
distant from Salt Lake City, and he invited some of the Elders to meet
him there to take part in the proceedings. To one of these “Jeddy,” as
he was familiarly called, obligingly lent a mule; he himself did not
accompany the party, but went on before. These elders were pretty well
mounted, and one of them, being a good horseman, made the rest keep up
with him. In consequence of this, when they arrived at Kaysville, the
beasts were heated and tired. The Apostle “Jeddy” watched them but said
nothing.
Up to a certain point, the meeting passed off pleasantly enough; the
Elders present were “good at testimony” and strong in exhorting the
hearers to faithfulness. Jeddy was the last speaker. He began in his
usual way, but presently warmed up until he became quite excited, and
then proceeded to accuse every one present of all sorts of wrong-doing.
The Elders who had preceded him came in for their full share; he
denounced them for their inconsistency and hypocrisy, and bitterly
upbraided them for running his mule and their own beasts in such a
manner. The Bishop of the place and his counsellors he accused of
inactivity and carelessness; and he called loudly upon every one present
to repent and do their first works; threatening them with the speedy
judgments of Heaven.
All this was well enough if it had stopped there, for it might have
been taken for just what it was—an ebullition of temper on the part of
“Jeddy,” who was naturally vexed that his mule had been over-heated.
But, like many other manias and epidemics, this Mormon movement began
with a most insignificant trifle, and the spirit of fiery denunciation
became perfectly contagious. Another meeting was held in the course
of a few weeks, and then the mutual accusations of those who were
present became, if possible, more bitter than before; the “Saints” were
denounced as the vilest of sinners, and they were all commanded to be
re-baptized. Accordingly, after the meeting, although it was night and
the weather was cold, a considerable number were immersed by the Elders,
and Jeddy himself was so enthusiastically engaged in the performance,
and he remained in the water so long that he got a thorough chill, and
contracted the disease of which he died.
Sunday after Sunday similar scenes were repeated in the Tabernacle,
until, had it not been painful, the whole affair would have been
ludicrous in the extreme. Every one had strayed from the path of duty,
and the fact was announced in the strongest terms. People were called
upon by name to publicly confess their sins, and many were then and there
pointed out and accused of crimes of which they were entirely guiltless,
but which they dared not deny. In the midst of all this, the duty of
implicit obedience to the Priesthood and the payment of tithes was loudly
insisted upon.
The Missionaries were sent out all over the territory, armed with the
full authority of the Priesthood, and also a catechism which, on account
of its obscene character, has since been bought up so successfully by
Brigham that it is doubtful if there is a copy in existence. The Mormons
have a curious way of appointing Missionaries. If a man is weak in the
faith—a depraved, bad man—or if a youth exhibits a disposition to sow his
wild oats a little too luxuriantly, he is sent on his travels to preach
the Gospel; nothing strengthens a man’s faith, it is thought, more than
having to defend it from the opposition of unbelievers, and the enforced
good example which the Missionary is obliged to set will, it is said,
produce a salutary effect upon the exuberance of youth or the depravity
of more mature years. In the present instance many of the Missionaries
thus sent forth were known to be as immoral as they were grossly ignorant.
There was one terrible meeting at which Brigham himself was put to the
blush. Men of note were there; no one was present who did not belong to
the Priesthood. “Jeddy” held forth, and Heber and Brigham were strong
upon the occasion. In the midst of the proceedings, Brother Brigham,
full of confidence, in the plainest words called upon all who could not
plead guiltless of certain crimes to stand up. Three-fourths of those
present immediately arose. Utterly shocked, the Prophet entered into
explanations; but self-convicted these three-fourths of his hearers stood
conscientiously firm. Even Brigham saw the necessity of taking some
stringent measures. The Saints were told that if they were re-baptized
their sins would be washed away, and they could then say they were
not guilty of the crimes suggested in the catechism. Subsequently the
catechism itself was, as I said, bought up and burnt.
The burden of every sermon was unquestioning obedience, repentance,
payment of tithing, and above all the taking of more wives. The
Missionaries, without the slightest ceremony, would visit the houses of
respectable Saints, examine them out of the abominable catechism, and
question husbands and wives in the presence of their children about even
their very thoughts, in a manner, and upon subjects, which would amply
have justified their being hung up to the nearest tree; Lynch law was in
fact too good for such atrocities. Wicked ideas, the utterance of which
would have called forth a blush, even if heard from the lips of a drunken
rowdy in a pot-house, were suggested and explained to young children;
while it would have been literally at the risk of life for their parents
to have expostulated; to do so would have shown want of faith, and want
of faith would have justified some fanatical scoundrel in using his knife
or his pistol for the loving purpose of cutting off his brother’s soul
from earth in order to save it in heaven!
Meanwhile Jedediah did not for a moment cease his exhortations; the work
must be done thoroughly: the Blood-Atonement must not be forgotten. On
one occasion, in the Tabernacle, this crazy fanatic said:—
“I would advise some of you men here to go to President Young, and
confess your sins, and ask him to take you outside the city and have your
blood shed to atone for your sins.”
...
“There are men and women that I would advise to go to the President
immediately, and ask him to appoint a committee to attend to their case;
and then let a place be selected, and let that committee shed their
blood....
“I would ask how many covenant-breakers there are in this city and in
this kingdom? I believe that there are a great many; and if they are
covenant-breakers, we need a place designated where we can shed their
blood.”
...
“We have been trying long enough with this people, and I go in for
letting the sword of the Almighty be unsheathed, not only in word but _in
deed_.”
Lest he should be mistaken, he said:—
“What ought this meek people who keep the commandments of God do unto
them? ‘Why,’ says one, ‘they ought to pray _the Lord_ to kill them,’ I
want to know if you would wish the Lord to come down and do all your
dirty work?.... When a man prays for a thing, he ought to be willing to
perform it himself.... Putting to death the transgressors would exhibit
the law of God, _no matter by whom it was done_.”
Heber C. Kimball, the “model Saint,” after a speech to the same effect,
in which, as usual, he made use of the most disgusting language, added:—
“Joseph Smith was God to the inhabitants of the earth when he was among
us, and Brigham is God now!”
But more shocking than any other was the language of Brigham Young
himself. On the 21st of September, 1856, in a discourse delivered in the
Bowery, Great Salt Lake City, and afterwards reprinted by authority in
the _Journals of Discourses_, vol. iv., pp. 53-4, he said:—
“The time is coming when justice will be laid to the line and
righteousness to the plummet; when we shall take the old broadsword and
ask, ‘Are you for God?’ and if you are not heartily on the Lord’s side,
_you will be hewn down_!”
...
“There are sins that men commit for which they cannot receive forgiveness
in this world or in that which is to come; and if they had their eyes
opened to see their true condition, they would be perfectly willing to
have their blood spilt upon the ground, that the smoke thereof might
ascend to Heaven as an offering for their sins, and the smoking incense
would atone for their sins; whereas, if such is not the case, they will
stick to them and remain with them in the spirit world.
“I know, when you hear my brethren telling about cutting people off from
the earth, that you consider it is strong doctrine; but it is to save
them, not to destroy them....
“I do know that there are sins committed of such a nature that, if the
people did understand the doctrine of salvation, they would tremble
because of their situation. And, furthermore, I know that there are
transgressors who, if they knew themselves, and the only condition upon
which they can obtain forgiveness, would beg of their brethren to shed
their blood, that the smoke thereof might ascend to God as an offering to
appease the wrath that is kindled against them, and that the law might
have its course. I will say, further, I have had men come to me and offer
their lives to atone for their sins.
“It is true that the blood of the Son of God was shed for sins through
the fall and those committed by men, yet men can commit sins which it can
never remit. As it was in ancient days, so it is in our day; and though
the principles are taught publicly from this stand, still the people do
not understand them; yet the law is precisely the same. There are sins
that can be atoned for by an offering upon an altar, as in ancient days;
and there are sins that the blood of a lamb, of a calf, or of turtle
doves cannot remit, but _they must be atoned for by the blood of the
man_.”
One would have supposed that even Brigham had now reached the culminating
point of horror and blasphemy. But no;—a month or so later he even
surpassed himself when in a Tabernacle sermon he said:—
“When will we love our neighbours as ourselves? In the first place, Jesus
said that no man hateth his own flesh. It is admitted by all that every
person loves himself. Now if we do rightly love ourselves, we want to be
saved, and continue to exist; we want to go into the kingdom where we can
enjoy eternity, and see no more sorrow nor death. This is the desire of
every person who believes in God. Now take a person in this congregation
who has knowledge with regard to being saved in the kingdom of our God
and our Father, and being exalted, one who knows and understands the
principles of eternal life, and sees the beauties and excellency of the
eternities before him compared with the vain and foolish things of the
world, and suppose that he is overtaken in a gross fault, that he had
committed a sin that he knows will deprive him of that exaltation which
he desires, and that he cannot attain to it without the shedding of his
blood, and also knows that by having his blood shed he will atone for
that sin and be saved and exalted with the gods, is there a man or a
woman in this house but would say, ‘Shed my blood that I might be saved
and exalted with the gods?’
“All mankind love themselves: and let those principles but be known by
an individual, and _he would_ be glad to have his blood shed. This would
be loving ourselves even unto an eternal exaltation. Will you love your
brothers or sisters likewise when they have a sin that cannot be atoned
for without the shedding of their blood? Will you love that man or woman
well enough to shed their blood? _That is what Jesus Christ meant._ He
never told a man or woman to love their enemies in their wickedness,
never. He never meant any such thing; His language is left as it is for
those to read who have the spirit to discern between truth and error; it
was so left for those who can discern the things of God. Jesus Christ
never meant that we should love a wicked man in his wickedness.
“_I could refer you to plenty of instances where men have been
righteously slain in order to atone for their sins._ I have seen scores
and hundreds of people for whom there would have been a chance (in the
last resurrection there will be) if their lives had been taken and their
blood spilled on the ground as a smoking incense to the Almighty, but
who are now angels to the devil, until our elder brother, Jesus Christ,
raises them up and conquers death, hell, and the grave.
“I have known a great many men who have left this church, for whom there
is no chance whatever for exaltion, but if their blood had been spilled
it would have been better for them.
“The wickedness and ignorance of the nations forbid this principle being
in full force, but the time will come when the law of God will be in full
force. This is loving our neighbour as ourselves; if he needs help, _help
him_; if he wants salvation, and it is necessary to spill his blood on
the earth in order that he may be saved, _spill_ it.
“Any of you who understand the principles of eternity, if you have sinned
a sin requiring the shedding of blood, except the sin unto death, should
not be satisfied or rest until your blood should be spilled, that you
might gain that salvation you desire. That is the way to love mankind....
Light and darkness cannot dwell together, and so it is with the kingdom
of God.
“Now, brethren and sisters, will you live your religion? How many
hundreds of times have I asked that question! Will the Latter-Day Saints
live their religion?”
And so, according to Brigham Young, their Prophet, this was the religion
of the Saints! And the people acted up to the “religion” thus taught: and
the story is so terrible that one dare not even whisper all its details.
It is no secret that all this was understood _literally_. The wife of one
Elder, when he was absent on a mission, acted unfaithfully towards him.
Her husband took counsel of the authorities, and was reminded that the
shedding of her blood alone could save her. He returned and told her, but
she asked for time, which was readily granted. One day, in a moment of
affection, when she was seated on his knee, he reminded her of her doom,
and suggested that now when their hearts were full of love was a suitable
time for carrying it into execution. She acquiesced, and _out of love_ he
cut her throat from ear to ear.
In many instances the outrages committed against persons who were known
to be innocent were so revolting that no woman—nay, even no right-minded
man—would venture to more than just allude to them. _A few_, however, and
only a few, and they _by no means the worst_, of the milder cases I will
just mention.
There was the murder of the Aikin party—six persons—who were killed
on their way to California. The same year a man name Yates was killed
under atrocious circumstances; and Franklin McNeil who had sued Brigham
for false imprisonment and who was killed at his hotel door. There was
Sergeant Pike, and there was Arnold and Drown. There was Price and
William Bryan at Fairfield; there was Almon Babbitt, and Brassfield,
and Dr. Robinson; there was also James Cowdy and his wife and child,
and Margetts and his wife; and many another, too—to say nothing of that
frightful murder at the Mountain Meadows.
Besides these there is good reason to think that Lieutenant Gunnison and
his party were also victims, although it was said that they were shot by
“Indians.” The Potter and Parrish murders were notorious; Forbes, and
Jones and his mother, might be added to the same list; the dumb boy,
Andrew Bernard; a woman killed by her own husband; Morris the rival
Prophet, and Banks, and four women who belonged to their party; Isaac
Potter, and Charles Wilson, and John Walker. These are but a few. The
death list is too long for me to venture to give it.
One instance I can give from my own personal knowledge. A sister, who
occasionally does a little work at my house, on one occasion said to
me: “Mrs. Stenhouse, when first I came to this country I lived in the
southern portion of Utah. One day I saw a woman running across the fields
towards our house, pale and trembling. When she came in she looked round
her as if she were frightened, and she asked if any one besides our own
family were present. On being assured that there was no one present whom
she might fear, she said:—‘Two men came to our house late last night
and asked to see my husband, who had already retired. He was in bed,
but they insisted that he must get up, as they had a message from “the
authorities” for him. When they saw him they requested him to go with
them to attend, they said, to some Church business. I became very much
alarmed, for my poor husband had been known to speak rather freely of
late of some of the measures of the Church, but he tried to reassure me,
and finally left the house with the two men. In about an hour after they
came back, bearing between them his lifeless body. They laid him upon the
bed, and then one of them pulled aside the curtain which constituted our
only cupboard, and took therefrom a bake-kettle and stood it beside the
bed, in order to catch the blood that was flowing from a fearful wound
in his throat. They then left the house, telling me to make as little
noise about it as possible, or they might serve me in the same way. The
men were masked, and I cannot tell who they are, but I spent a fearful
night with my poor dead husband.’” This sister added: “Sister Stenhouse,
in those more fearful times we dared not speak to each other about such
things for fear of spies.”
These were all well-known and notorious instances. I say nothing of
those of whose fate nothing—not even a whisper—was ever heard; and I say
nothing of the frightful “cuttings off” _before_ the Reformation and in
recent years.
Gentile men and women were _killed_, for hatred; and _that_ “killing” was
no murder, for theirs was not innocent blood. Apostates, and Saints of
doubtful faith, and those who were obnoxious, _had their blood shed_—all
_for love_—and that “cutting off” was also no murder, because to secure
their salvation by cutting their throats was an act of mercy. Can it be
possible that men should thus act and say—and _believe_—that Jesus, the
gentle and merciful Saviour, commanded it when He said: “Thou shalt love
thy neighbour as thyself”?
All through this Reign of Terror, marrying and giving in marriage was
the order of the day. It mattered not if a man was seventy years of age,
according to Brother Brigham he was still a boy—“the brethren are all
boys until they are a hundred years old”—and some young girl of sixteen,
fifteen, or even younger would be “counselled”—that is, _commanded_—to
marry him. She might even have a sister no older than herself, and then
as likely as not he would take the two to wife, and very probably both
on the same day. The girls were told that to marry a young man was not
a safe thing, for young men were not tried—it was better to marry a
well-tested patriarch, and then their chances of “exaltation” in the
kingdom of heaven were sure and certain. In this way the life-long
happiness of many a girl—little more than a child—was blighted for ever.
At the time of which I speak, every unmarried woman, or girl who could
by the utmost stretch of possibility be thought old enough to marry, was
forced to find a husband, or a husband was immediately found for her,
and without any regard to her wishes was forced upon her. Young men,
and even boys, were forced, not only into marriage, but even polygamy,
and none dared resist. The marrying mania, in fact, was universal and
irresistible—everyone _must_ marry or be given in marriage. So evidently
was this the case that women in jest said that, if one were to hang a
petticoat upon a fence-pole, half a dozen men would flock at once to
marry it! Absurd as this may seem, it was not very far from the truth.
Young men and maidens, old men and children, widows, virgins, and
youths—in fact, every one, whether married or unmarried, it mattered not,
was “counselled”—commanded—to marry.
There is above fanaticism a stronger law which, despite every effort of
the deluded victim, _will_ occasionally make itself heard—the voice of
Nature. Even during that strange time in which every Saint seemed to
have gone stark crazy mad, the frightful anomaly of men of fifty, sixty,
and even seventy, marrying mere children—girls of fourteen, and even
thirteen—forced itself upon the attention of some of the leaders. The
question arose—an odd question to Gentile ears—“At what age is a girl
old enough to marry?” Considerable discussion ensued, and even in the
Tabernacle the subject was taken up. The voice of authority, however,
eventually answered the matter, but not in the way that any ordinary
civilized person would expect.
In those times, unmarried girls were very scarce—in the settlements it
was difficult to find any at all. Not infrequently it happened that a
brother was “counselled” to marry, but could not obey, as there was no
unmarried woman in the place where he lived. In that case he generally
paid a visit to Salt Lake City. But business at the Endowment House
nevertheless was pretty lively; in fact, so much so that it was deemed
necessary to set apart certain days for the various Settlements. Once,
when the “Provo day” was fast approaching, two old brethren from that
town who had been counselled to enlarge their families, but who had been
unsuccessful in finding partners, began to despair of being able to obey
“the word of the Lord!” The day before that appointed for the Endowments
and Celestial Marriage arrived, and they were as far from success as
ever. Being neighbours, the two old gentlemen met and mingled their
griefs, and considered what might be done. It then occurred to them that
there was a certain brother who had two daughters, respectively _twelve_
and _fourteen_ years of age, and they resolved to call upon him about
these children. As might be supposed, the father at first refused them,
giving as a reason that the girls were too young. The old men explained
that if they could not marry the children it was impossible for them to
“obey counsel,” and the father then agreed. The next morning the marriage
ceremony was performed in the Endowment House. One of these wretches was
sixty years of age, and the other a few years younger. The father of
the children was about forty. I am really afraid that the reader will
think that I exaggerate or misrepresent facts. I wish it were so, for
the case is so outrageously atrocious; but I am sorry to say that scores
and hundreds of instances similar to this, which occurred during the
Reformation, might be given.
There are before me as I write, letters, papers, documents of various
sorts relative to marriage and the matrimonial affairs of the Saints, at
the time of which I speak, that I wish the reader could peep at. I would
not like him to read them—in fact, I dared not read them all myself, for
some of them are so shameful that the mere knowledge of having read them
through would make any right-minded person blush. Taking more wives was
the order of the day—_how_, was of little matter.
The work of “Reformation” was in full progress; the people were excited
to frenzy; the Federal troops were expected; men were marrying and
maidens were given in marriage; every one in Utah was looking forward to
the time when the Prophecies of Joseph, the Seer, should be fulfilled,
and the Son of Man should come:—and then, when one would have supposed
that every man would have wished that his hands should be pure, was
perpetrated a deed which is unparalleled in modern civilized times—a deed
at which angels and men have stood aghast with horror.
[Illustration: BISHOP JOHN D. LEE, Mormon Commander in the Mountain
Meadow Massacre.]
[Illustration: JOHN TAYLOR, Acting President of the Mormon Church.
_Born in Westmoreland, England, in 1803._]