Review: Convicting the Mormons: The Mountain Meadows Massacre in American Culture

 

Review by Doug Gibson

The Mountain Meadows Massacre of 1857 was a horrific atrocity. It was unfortunately not an uncommon occurrence in the western United States. Slaughters of innocents and the defenseless happened. Often the victims were Native Americans, or foreigners.

The Mountain Meadows Massacre was distinct. It involved white Americans orchestrating the slaughter of other white Americans. The guilty attempted to recruit Native Americans, but with limited success. A plot to blame the massacre on a tribe was unsuccessful.

The killers were located in southern Utah. Youngsters deemed too young to be murdered were kidnapped and assimilated among residents. Eventually, they were freed and returned to relatives. Yet despite many investigations, massive media and popular culture coverage of the massacre, it took nearly 20 years for only one man, John D. Lee, an active participant in the massacre, to be tried -- twice -- and executed. Why did it take so long? 

In "Convicting the Mormons: The Mountain Meadows Massacre in American Culture" 2023 The University of North Carolina Press (Amazon link here), Brigham Young University lecturer and historian Janiece Johnson argues that popular culture defined the massacre as an atrocity committed by the Mormons, and later the church's leadership, rather than by a group of individuals in southern Utah.

This near-complete focus of Mormonism as the villain, and guilty party in the Mountain Meadows Massacre, hampered the quality and success of the investigations. It was easier, and sold more print, to cast a religion, and a people, as the guilty, rather than to keep the focus secular and on the actual suspects.

Johnson has dug deep into 18th century archives and includes about two dozen reprints of then-contemporary media treatment of the LDS faith. The church was already unpopular due to its embrace of polygamy. The massacre was used to provide evidence that polygamy, and other Mormon mores -- including its "king-like" leadership, encouraged atrocities.

After news of the massacre was heard in California, Johnson notes, newspapers were quickly casting Mormons as the killers. Calls were made for the Mormons to be expelled from their territory. The suggested use of military force, or vigilantism, were met with approval. Going beyond periodicals, the Mountain Meadows Massacre was used to vilify Mormons in penny novels, more "respectable" literature, wild west shows, and "non-fiction" exposes of authors who claimed life experience among the Mormons, or had "witnessed" the massacre.

Few people today truly comprehend the power of print in the 19th century. It moved slowly but with a longer and deeper reach than digital has today.

Lest I give the wrong impression, Johnson is no apologist for the massacre. It is chilling that 120 innocents were slain, most after a white flag of truce was offered them in desperate straits. It was an evil act.

What makes this book so interesting is learning how the Mormon church became the de-facto defendant after the massacre, rather than the killers. Johnson explains how all Mormons were placed as failing 18th century conceptions of civilized behavior, citizenship, savagery, masculinity, manhood, and even whiteness. These assumptions, some recognized today as steeped in racism and misogyny, guided conventional thought, or respectability. Mormons failed to meet respectable mores, and the massacre provided the public evidence.

Mormons failed tests of citizenship; they were considered savage; this savagery was enhanced by the racist ideal that Mormons, being white, chose to be savage. There were even risible theories that the breeding of Mormons contributed to a deterioration in their physical and cognitive states.

Johnson writes how popular culture defined Mormons as failing the manhood, or masculinity, test. There were two preferred types of masculinity; the more violent "martial" southern version, or a more "restrained" "home and hearth" type of masculinity. Mormons failed both, because they allowed polygamy, and also because they failed to protect women and children killed at the massacre.

The focus through this 18th-century media was not to accuse just the actual killers of lacking masculinity, but the members of an entire religion. An interesting irony is included in which the killer of defenseless Mormon apostle Parley P. Pratt was widely lauded as a virtuous example of masculinity. The key to the killer's virtuous "masculinity" was that Pratt has married his wife. He was entitled to kill him any way he preferred.

Johnson points out the contradictions of masculinity assumptions and how they were fostered in bigotry. One example is boxer Jack Johnson deemed a savage, but his white challenger James J. Jeffries deemed noble. Another example was Chinese men in 1870s California having their masculinity maligned due to the number of Chinese women prostitutes.

As the popular culture obsession with Mormonism continued, the actual legal machinations of the Mountain Meadows Massacre moved very slowly. John D. Lee's first trial ended in a hung jury. As Johnson notes from the transcript, prosecutors acted as if the defendant was the Mormon Church, more than Lee. LDS jurors were fed a long litany of supposed Mormon evil, many of the "evidence" gathered from popular media offerings. The Mormon jury members were essentially told they could redeem their "sins" with a conviction.

In a smaller, more subdued second trial, Lee was convicted and later executed. The iconic pictures of him sitting on his coffin just prior to being shot are powerful. As Johnson notes, by this time, prosecutors and media had moved toward wanting Mormon leader Brigham Young punished for the massacre. The evidence wasn't there, and Lee, to his credit, did not falsely implicate Young, despite heavy pressure: this despite Lee being thoroughly disillusioned with his one-time adopted father.

Yet, the idea that Young was the mastermind behind the massacre is one assumption that still lingers. Books and films published within the past generation push this theory.

In "Convicting the Mormons," Johnson notes predictions that the Mormon Church would eventually wither away. Some thought the extinction of Mormonism would occur as children rejected their parents' faith. Others thought the death of Brigham Young -- soon after Lee's execution -- would hasten the church's demise. It did not happen. Once the church officially ended polygamy, it soon became a state. As the book notes, this could be construed as Mormons ironically benefitting from white privilege. Mass violence, or expulsions did not occur. Establishment avenues were available for the church to gain respectability.

From Juanita Brooks on, there are several excellent books on the massacre. Even though I disagree with the late Will Bagley's contention Brigham Young was involved, his "Blood of the Prophets" is a valuable read. A new book on the massacre is being released. I'll be reading it with interest, eager to learn more. Transparency is always the best solution.

"Convicting the Mormons" provides valuable context on how the massacre influenced the popular culture. It's a must read.

John Corrill was an older Christian convert to the early Mormon church

 ---

The early years of the Mormon Church are distinct for its young converts, with 20-something apostles embracing the progressive, radical-for-its-time distinctions between Joseph Smith’s Mormonism and the traditional Protestant Christianity. However, there was another type of early LDS convert; an older generation who embraced Christian primitivism, which encompassed a desire to return to strict Biblical principles, disdained “priestcraft,” and had a libertarian streak, mixed with republican ideals, that opposed a centralized church leadership dictating to local church groups. Most importantly, this type of convert would never place a prophet’s opinion over his own personal beliefs.

Given the direction the Mormon Church took over its 14-plus years with Smith solely at its helm, it’s not surprising that a substantial number of the older-generation converts did not stick with Mormonism. Perhaps the best example of this type of early Mormon convert who enjoyed prominence in the young church but later abandoned it is John Corrill, who is mentioned a couple of times in the Doctrine of Covenants. In the book “Differing Visions: Dissenters in Mormon History,” University of Illinois Press, 1994, historian Kenneth H. Winn provides an interesting recap of Corrill’s life and tenure in Mormonism. A Christian primitivist, Corrill, who turned 36 in 1831, initially investigated Mormonism with a determination to expose its follies. However, Corrill, who admired the primitivist teachings of Alexander Campbell, was shocked when he heard Sidney Rigdon, a former Campbell advocate he admired, pitching Mormonism enthusiastically.

As Winn notes, Corrill, a Massachusetts native, read The Book of Mormon and decided he could not declare it a fraud. Also, Mormonism appealed to specific primitivists such as Corrill in that it contained a certainty of belief that they sought, whether with the Book of Mormon or a yearning for “a prophet who could speak for God.” He, as well as his wife and family, joined the church in 1831 in Ohio.

Soon after his baptism, Corrill, after serving a mission, was sent to Missouri to help develop the church’s growth there. He served under Bishop Edward Partridge. It was here that Corrill first clashed with Smith’s leadership. Both he and Partridge favored a more local control than Smith wanted, and both were criticized by the Mormon prophet. Also, Corrill foresaw the problems that would develop with mass migration of poor Mormon converts to land long dominated by non-Mormon Missourians. The combination of religious bigotry among Missourians as well as unwise boasting by saints of establishing a religious and political kingdom led to violence and conflicts that the Mormons would always lose over the years.

Despite the conflict with church leadership, Corrill mended his problems with Smith and according to Winn, had a very strong ecclesiastical relationship with the young prophet through the mid-1830s. In 1836, Winn notes, Corrill was appointed by Joseph Smith to head the completion of the Kirtland Temple. Corrill also developed a reputation of being the Mormon leader who was best able to negotiate with anti-Mormon elements in Missouri. By 1837, Corrill was a leading Mormon settler in Far West, Missouri, ”selected ... as the church’s agent and as the ‘Keeper of the Lord’s Storehouse,’” writes Winn.

But that was the peak that preceded the fall of Corrill’s tenure in the church. As tranquil as events in Far West were, an ill-fated banking endeavor in Kirtland by Smith and other church leaders was leading to apostasy and tense disputes between church leaders and native Missourians. Corrill, Winn writes, regarded the Kirtland monetary failure with “revulsion.” He saw the lust for wealth, and the subsequent fall, as evidence of “suffered pride.” Yet he was as critical of Smith’s dissenters as he was of the banking effort. Also, Corrill still believed that the overall church, with auxiliaries serving as checks and balances, could reform itself and maintain the better relations between Mormons and non-Mormons that still existed in Far West.

That was not to be. The turmoil of Kirtland followed the church to Far West. To cut to the chase, a speech by Rigdon, called the “Salt Sermon,” appalled Corrill. In it, Ridgon, comparing apostates to salt having lost its savor, argued that they could be “trodden under the foot of men.” In short, Rigdon said that the dissenters “deserved ill treatment.”

Corrill warned the dissenters that their safety was in danger. Later, the Danites, a Mormon vigilante group, was organized. The militant group frightened Corrill, who began to work against it in secret. As Winn explains, “The crisis that began in Kirtland and eventually swept Corrill up in Missouri marked a major turning point in early Mormon history, pitting the theocratically minded devotees of the prophet, who regarded opposition to the church leadership as opposition to God, against more libertarian minded dissenters, who rejected the First Presidency’s claim over their temporal affairs and the authoritarian demand for blind obedience.”

Corrill saw the Danites and Ridgon’s call for conflict in direct opposition to the Biblical belief that God is responsible for divine retribution. From this point on, 1838, Corrill was basically in wait to be excommunicated, no longer trusted by the Smith/Ridgon leadership of the church. Nevertheless, church leaders acknowledged Corrill’s reputation for honesty by electing him — with the Danites’ support — to the Missouri legislature. The final break between Smith and Corrill was over the church leadership’s call for a communal structure, which included church leaders being paid for work other than preaching. The communal structure was, Winn notes, allegedly voluntary, although pressure was exercised on members to contribute. “In any event,” Winn writes, “Corrill deeply disapproved of the revelation and readily shared his opinion with others.”

Despite his church status, Corrill worked without success in the Missouri legislature to push Mormon interests and even donated $2,000 of his own money to help the beleaguered saints. By the time his term ended, most of his constituency had fled the area. Ridgon’s rhetoric, and the Danites’ actions, had led to militias overwhelming the church and Smith, Rigdon and others being jailed. Corrill, now without a church and due to be excommunicated in early 1839, left his religion. He wrote a book, “A Brief History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints” in late 1839. It is an interesting read for its historical value. At the time though, it sold poorly and Corrill spent the last few years of his life in poverty. He died in 1842, leaving an estate of only $265.86. As Winn writes, “His integrity and basic decency were overshadowed by charges that he had betrayed the prophet and the church.” 

Corrill did offer testimony against Smith to Missouri court hostile to the Mormons. Richard Lyman Bushman, in his 2005 biography of Joseph Smith,also describes Corrill as a “the steady, clear-headed Missouri leader” who conflicted over how much free will he had to surrender to stay a faithful Mormon, and witnessing defeat after defeat, finally decided he had been deceived..

-- Doug Gibson

Originally published at StandardNet