Utah’s decision to give women the vote was later rescinded by the feds

 

Originally published in 2013 at StandardBlogs.

In the 19th century, Utah’s polygamy was often described as one of the twin barbarisms of society, slavery being the other. As historian Thomas G. Alexander writes in the Winter 1970 issue of the Utah Historical Quarterly, “Nineteenth century Utah appeared to non-Mormons or Gentiles, as they were called in the Mormon territory, to be a retrograde and barbarian place only slightly more advanced than the Moslem lands of the Near East, with which it was often compared.”

However, Utah’s leaders at that time were probably more progressive than many people suspect today. As Alexander notes in the JMH article “An Experiment in Progressive Legislation: The Granting of Woman Suffrage in Utah in 1870,” Mormon political leaders in Utah were more progressive than perhaps many have realized. In the Feb. 10, 1869 edition of the Deseret News Weekly, editor George Q. Cannon, also a counselor to LDS President Brigham Young, harshly criticized the capitalist structure that reduced the standard of living for most workers. From Alexander’s article:

“In an editorial he (Cannon) lamented the plight of the American workingman and the problems caused by the rapid centralization of wealth, (writing) ‘in the hands of the very few in this county {which} is unparalleled, and the unprincipled use of the power thus acquired, as witnessed during the recent Wall Street gambling operations {which} cannot but cause wide spread distress.

‘{This shows that} here as elsewhere, when power and wealth are acquired and exercised by the few who are not guided by principle, they are not used pro bono publico, but are made to answer private interests and to subserve selfish ends.’”

Polygamous Utah was presented to eastern audiences through the publication of scandalous “exposes,” hyperbolic penny novels, and smarmy travel accounts by authors who sought to mock the residents of Utah. The truth was far more complex. The LDS religion’s rationale for polygamy, outside of its doctrinal explanation, as Alexander writes, “was seen as a method of reforming society and eradicating social evils by contemporary Mormons. Church leaders saw this reform as a way of freeing women from slavery to the lusts of men and making them honored wives and mothers with homes of their own and social position.”

With this egalitarian theory of the sexes, it’s not surprising that Utah was one of the first states to grant women voting privileges. As Alexander notes, editor Cannon supported women’s suffrage in the Deseret News, arguing that women would do more to promote “legislation of such character as would tend more to diminish prostitution and the various social evils which overwhelm society that anything hitherto devised under universal male suffrage.”

In short, Cannon, and by extension the Mormon leadership, were arguing that a society which allowed both sexes to vote would be a better society. And universal suffrage occurred in Utah 143 years ago. It was the second state, behind Wyoming, to allow the vote in the still-young era of the suffrage movement. On Feb. 12, 1870, acting Gov. S. A. Mann, after receiving the suffrage bill from Speaker of the Utah House, and LDS apostle, Orson Pratt, signed the bill.

Mann signed it with reservations, and Utah Gov. J. Wilson Shafer, who was out of state at the time, said he would have vetoed the bill. The coolness with which these non-Mormon government officials received the suffrage bill underscores the unpopularity and suspicion that Utah was subject to. Nevertheless, on Feb. 14, 1870, women in Utah voted in a Salt Lake City municipal election. As Alexander notes, despite being to second to Wyoming in passing a suffrage bill, due to the timing, Utah women voted before Wyoming women.

There were many prominent women in Utah at the time whose influence extended beyond Utah or the Mormon Church. Emmeline B. Wells, as well as Sarah M. Kimball, were both active in national women’s rights organizations and held positions in the church’s Relief Society. In fact, as Alexander notes, after suffrage, “Relief Society meetings became classes in government, mock trials, and symposia on parliamentary law.” Also, women served on school boards in Utah, as well as a coroner’s jury, and Miss Georgia Snow, a niece to Mormon Judge Zerubbabel Snow, was admitted to the Utah bar, notes Alexander.

The fact is Utah women did not use suffrage as a tool to echo their husband’s or father’s opinions on an issue. By all appearances, they used the privilege of voting in an effective and patriotic manner. Nevertheless, in what was certainly an ironic move by the federal government, Utah women lost suffrage rights due to the Edmunds Tucker Act of 1887. The law disenfranchised all polygamous men and women. Yet, as Alexander notes, a provision to the law took voting rights away from all women in Utah Territory.

A key reason that Utah’s suffrage rights ended after 17 years was because it became clear that granting Utah women voting rights would not bring about an end to polygamy, or elect non-Mormons to office in the state. As Alexander notes, this came as a surprise to outsiders, who shared the near universal disgust of Mormons and the Utah hierarchy of the period. Those who made federal laws, and others with little knowledge of Mormonism, simply did not understand women such as Emmeline B. Wells or Eliza R. Snow, or Sarah M. Kimball, who saw no conflict between their belief in the LDS religion, polygamy and their efforts to better the lives of women.

Alexander dismisses those who believe Mormon men in Utah supported women’s suffrage as a way to consolidate its power in Utah. As he notes, there was a progressive sentiment among Mormon intellectuals in the latter half of the 19th century. In fact, based on the editorials of that era in the Deseret News, it can be argued that the church was far more liberal in that era than it is today. As Alexander writes, “Cannon’s editorials … are progressive and optimistic in tone. They speak of the perfectability of man, the need for equality in the community and the high place of women in Mormon society.”

In fact, several years later after universal suffrage in Utah was snuffed out by the feds, the people of Utah supported it via a huge majority in the 1895 state Constitution.

-- Doug Gibson

Brigham Young and the Expansion of the Mormon Faith, a review

Review by Doug Gibson

"Brigham Young and the Expansion of the Mormon Faith," 2019, University of Oklahoma Press, follow a more comprehensive biography a few years back from John Turner, "Brigham Young: Pioneer Prophet. (Reviewed here)

Thomas C. Alexander is the author of ... Expansion of the Mormon Faith, and despite not being as detailed as Turner's biography -- as part of the Oklahoma Western Biographies series, it lacks footnotes, for example -- it is a very valuable historical and biographical resource, offering insights and accounts of Young's time in Utah that may surprise readers.

The book moves rapidly through Young's life until events after Nauvoo, then it settles down into a much more detailed account of the Mormon prophet's life in Utah. Early in the book, Alexander provides life passages that underscore both Young's learned stances and philosophies on life. For example, he was amicably turned out of his home by his father at age 16 with the admonition to make his way in the world. Also, as a young man, Young was a more radical Methodist, insisting on baptism by immersion and a believer in talking in tongues. In fact, he joined the more radical Reformed Methodists, writes Alexander. For a while, early Mormonism included talking in tongues, of which Young participated in.

As mentioned, the meat of the biography is Young's 30-year tenure as ecclesiastical leader in Utah -- and for a while governor -- although he retained political power even after having to accept territory leaders sent by Washington D.C. Readers who are accustomed to hearing that Young was a forbidding autocrat who brooked no dissent or disobedience from church members will be surprised by Alexander's account. Not infrequently, church members ignored Young's advice. Some examples: Some members Young would call -- from the pulpit -- on missions chose not to serve; some members called to colonize new towns would either not go or return home after a short spell; some merchants would refuse Young's admonitions to not sell or trade with out-of-state, or non-Mormon, merchants; some of Young's ecclesiastical opinions, notably blood atonement and the Adam-God Doctrine, were disputed by members and high church leaders. The latter never gained acceptance, the former appears to be a possibly misunderstood remnant of the Mormon Reformation only.

However, this is not to intend that Alexander's biography is a harsh critique of Young.It's no hagiography either. Alexander notes Young's strong personality and organizational skills. He managed to settle hundreds of colonies through Utah and the rest of the Intermountain West. He retained great loyalty and devotion among members of the Mormon Faith during his tenure. Although he made his share of mistakes, he was enough of a diplomat to endure severe hostility from Washington D.C., non-Mormon territorial leaders, military officials, and dissident Mormons within Utah. His stature, diplomatic skills, and relationships with allies, such as non-Mormon Thomas L. Kane, occasionally assisted his efforts to sway U.S. officials to ease tensions. It's clear that without Brigham Young, the Utah Mormon Faith would likely have splintered apart.

Young had a caustic tongue, and was a strong, talented public speaker who spoke off the cuff a lot. Alexander acknowledges that his rhetoric caused problems. The author accurately notes that Young did not order the Mountain Meadows Massacre, but points out the sharply inappropriate remarks Young made at the site,, talking about revenge being taken. Alexander writes that Young, for years after the massacre, urged federal officials -- to no avail -- to speed their slow investigation.

Alexander does a  great job describing the tension and dangers that swept through Utah during the Utah War in 1857 and the later Black Hawk War. The former inspired a palpable fear in Utah. Salt Lake City was emptied at one point. A tragic error by Young that allowed a Native American ally to be killed by Mormon settlers exacerbated the already deadly Black Hawk War. In both cases Young learned from mistakes, having the presence of mind to negotiate and make concessions in order to achieve peace, however uneasy it may have been.

Young had an idealistically contradictory viewpoints of Native Americans. Believing them as meant to be part of the restored gospel, he wanted to keep them close to settlers. This clashed with the goal of obtaining more land and resources for settlements. These conflicts flared into violence, with Young sometimes sanctioning the deaths of Native Americans. At the same time, he was angry at settlers who dealt harshly with Native Americans. Eventually, Native Americans were moved away onto reservations, with monetary promises from the federal government that were largely reneged on.

Young's discourses are covered well in the book. On issues, he was progressive for his times on women's role in society. He supported suffrage; Utah territory provided the vote to women. He also routinely granted divorce to women who requested it. Despite his own limited education, he implemented a strong education system, including BYU, University of Utah and LDS Business College. He also strongly supported the arts in Utah society, favoring concerts and stage productions. In fact, he called church members to be in the arts, prompting (appropriate) complaints that they needed to be paid for their time and efforts,

The book provides familial details of Young's family life among his many spouses and children. In the Beehive and other houses, daily family spiritual time was mandated. Alexander notes Young's occasional chagrin that some family occasionally missed those spiritual hours.

His final years, as Alexander notes, were accompanied by increasing health problems. One of his final public acts was the dedication of the St. George Temple. Too weak to stand during the ceremonies, Young was carried throughout the building and spoke seated. He also did a lot of church reorganization in the final years, including ranking apostle leadership by ordination rather than age.

Alexander's biography is relatively easy to read. There's much more than I summarized. I was surprised by some of the details of Young's mind and life that I learned from the book. The Young depicted, while flawed as any other man, is both pragmatic, eager to learn more, and learned from his mistakes.

Young was struck ill in the summer of 1877 and died soon afterward. According to Alexander, although his health was poor many today believe he died of appendicitis, which was not diagnosed as such in that time.

Parts of the biography that stand out are the accounts of the Utah War, the Mormon Reformation, the Mountain Meadows Massacre and its aftermath, the Black Hawk War, a section on Young's discourses, and accounts of the prophet's family life.

Charles Shuster Zane was a fair judge Mormons loved to hate

Ever heard of Utah territorial Chief Justice Charles Shuster Zane? He’s one of those fascinating footnotes in history. Appointed in 1884 to administer justice in Utah, the New Jersey Quaker was a respected Illinois lawyer who rubbed shoulders in the same circles that Abraham Lincoln inhabited. Zane was a circuit judge when appointed to the Utah bench by President Chester A. Arthur. 

His tenure was stormy. The dominant Latter-day Saints disliked Zane because he thoroughly enforced the laws against polygamy. He imprisoned men and polygamous wives that he discovered were living “the Principle.” Zane also was heard to publicly proclaim polygamy an abomination. The judge was enforcing the Edmunds law, which was designed to go after Utah Mormons on the polygamy issue. 

According to an article on Zane in the fall 1966 issue of Utah Historical Quarterly, then-BYU professor Thomas G. Alexander cited the following negative assessment of Zane from LDS historians B.H. Roberts and Orson F. Whitney: “Judge Zane ... will stand classed ... in that history as sharing in responsibility for the cruelty and injustice of that regime, which marks the saddest period of Utah’s history. ... Judge Zane never divorced himself from his deepseated prejudice and vindictiveness against ... [the Mormon] offenders and their religious faith, ... his object was the overthrow of Mormonism as a religion.”

Those are harsh words, and they come from Roberts’ “Comprehensive History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints” and Whitney’s “History of Utah.” But they’re also not true. In his Utah Historical Quarterly article, Alexander takes a long look at Zane’s judicial philosophy while in Utah, and discovers a tough but fair judge who was scrupulously following the law. In other words, Zane was not the judicial activist many Mormons had hoped would look the other way at laws designed to hamper their religious beliefs.

In fact, Zane made many lower-profile decisions that helped the Mormon church, which was constantly facing nuisance lawsuits from the energetic anti-Mormon “gentile” faction of Utah, which had as its mouthpiece “The Salt Lake Tribune.” For example, Zane ruled in favor of local, Mormon public schools receiving tax monies, rejecting lawsuits that they sectarian schools that taught treason. Zane was a big believer in public education, and the rights of local communities to make educational decisions. 

Also, Zane resisted efforts by gentiles in Utah to swing elections through malicious efforts. He sided with the People’s Party, an LDS party, in its accusation that members of the gentile Liberal Party had tried to stuff ballots in an 1890 school election. In fact, Zane even allowed, over gentile objections, voting by Mormon men who had engaged in obviously sham “spiritual divorces” from their polygamous wives. That shows a lot of tolerance for the Mormon religious mores.

In fact, when Zane finally jailed men and polygamous wives, it was only after every effort to prosecute, or resolve, the situation, had been attempted. There’s no doubt that Zane’s judicial decrees ailed many prominent Utah Mormons. Zane had the — perhaps — misfortune of assuming the bench when enforcement of the anti-polygamy laws was at its most intense. And he was determined to obey the letter of the law. Alexander adds that whenever a guilty plea came in, Zane was likely to fine, rather than jail the polygamist.

Another ruling, disliked by the LDS majority, was Zane’s decision to allow lawyers to question Mormons on naturalization, or citizenship, protests. As Alexander notes, this was a big issue as the Mormons were energetic missionaries overseas and the converts migrated to Utah. However, Zane did offer the Mormons an olive branch by requiring that the district attorney question prospective citizens, rather than anti-Mormon lawyers, explains Alexander.

After the 1890 Manifesto against polygamy, Zane’s attitude on the practice became more relaxed. Alexander recounts that he accepted the promise by LDS Church President Wilford W. Woodruff and later published an article in Forum magazine where he stated, according to Alexander, “that the Mormon problem (polygamy) was at an end because the Mormons had resolved to obey the law.”

The tenure of Zane was an example of a judge diligently following the law in a rugged, still frontier-like territory and angering both sides. Because the high-profile cases went against the majority Mormons, he was vilified long after his death in 1915. It would be fascinating to read a more in-depth look at his tenure as Utah territory’s chief justice.

--- Doug Gibson

-- Originally published at StandardNET

Mormon Reformation included the highs, and lows, of religious fervor

The most interesting bits of news I garnered from one conference long ago was not news of a temple in Provo or disapproval at calling ourselves “Mormons.” It was the now-late Apostle Boyd K. Packer assuring young members of the LDS church that the second coming of Jesus Christ is a long time coming. 

That’s a big shift from the early years of 19^th century Mormonism, where blessings that promised recipients that they would witness the second coming of Jesus Christ were not uncommon.  The church Joseph Smith initiated was pure millennialist.  I recall my father telling me that I would likely see Christ’s return and – remembering that fondly – I’ve mentioned the same to my children.

One bit of history that underscored the Christ’s-return-is-near doctrine of the 19^th century LDS church was the Mormon reformation of the middle 1850s in Utah.  What began as an effort to re-energize the spirituality of Utah saints via “home missions” to members degenerated into harsh denunciations of local church leaders, blood atonement speeches, and accusations of adultery, fanaticism from guilt-obsessed members, and finally, a counter-productive surge of interest in polygamy.  It took the untimely death of a fire-breathing apostle to allow future church leader Wilford Woodruff to cool the Mormon Reformation down.

As Thomas G. Alexander recounts in the Summer 1992 Dialogue article, “Wilford Woodruff and the Mormon Reformation of 1855-57,” by 1855 the LDS prophet Brigham Young and other church leaders worried that “many Church members and leaders had fallen spiritually asleep, becoming more enamored of materialism and other trappings of Babylon than building the kingdom.” Besides Young, apostles Heber C. Kimball and Jedediah Grant preached that recent crop failures were punishment from God directed at the Saints. In the 1855 October general conference, Young proposed home missions – designed to bring members back to reactivity – rather than prostlyting to Utah non-members. The effort, Alexander explains, also broke with the church tradition of local congregations enjoying autonomy in many decisions. Instead, apostles were sent to direct the home missions effort.

By March 1856, Young realized that the home missions efforts had failed. At that point, Young, with the enthusiastic support of Kimball and Grant, decided to go “fire and brimstone” on Utah members.

Efforts to bring the Saints back to repentance evolved into fierce denunciation of church members as “working wickedness” by church leaders as they fanned out through the Utah territory.  Young preached in September 1856 espousing the now-discredited doctrine of blood atonement, which denied Christ’s atonement for certain sins. Other apostles, particularly Grant, preached the same during the reformation. As Alexander relates, it’s assumed that the murder of the Parrish family and some friends in Springville, Utah, in 1857 was in part due to local members’ diehard belief in the blood atonement doctrine that had been stressed. No one was ever punished for murdering the victims, who had apostatized and were seeking to leave Springville.

As is the case with many fundamentalist-type purges, the arts also suffered. Apostles Grant and Kimball dissolved the Polysophical Society, an arts and humanities appreciation group that met at the home of future church president Lorenzo Snow. In fact, apostles Woodruff, Amasa Lyman, and Parley P. Pratt, as well as poet and lyricist Eliza Snow were members. However, according to Alexander, Grant described the society as “a stink in my nostrils” and “filled with an adulterous spirit,” writes Alexander. The Polysophical Society was no more.

Church leaders during the Mormon Reformation accused members and lesser leaders of adultery and demanded their repentance. Again, Grant was a particularly enthusiastic accuser. However, even Woodruff, a far more milder man, joined in these attacks. The most prominent charge of adultery was leveled at several presidents of the First Council of the Seventy on Oct. 7, 1856, in the old Salt Lake Tabernacle. After a rancorous meeting, the presidents were urged by Woodruff to “repent”. Later, a prominent bishop, Abraham Hoagland, came under condemnation for his efforts to assist and serve non-members. Woodruff told Hoagland, writes Alexander, that “sending priesthood holders to them ‘was like casting pearls before swine.’” Although Hoagland defended himself for a while, he soon repented.

The unexpected death of Grant on Dec. 1, 1856 was the beginning of the end of the extreme stage of the Mormon reformation. Woodruff, who assumed greater responsibility from Young, moved the reformation into a third phase, which stressed love and forgiveness, writes Alexander. The emphasis turned to pleas for personal improvement, rather than severe denunciations and unfounded charges of adultery. Members were urged to better themselves before preaching to other members. A series of rebaptisms that indicted renewed covenants occurred.

Nevertheless, as Alexander writes, the effects of the fundamentalist, accusatory phase of the reformation took a while to ease. One effect was an increase in members wanting to enter polygamy. This was not necessarily a positive for church leaders, who were aware that increases in polygamy tended to up the divorce rate. Indeed, as Alexander accounts, “…the 65 percent increase in the new plural marriages during the Reformation led to a subsequent escalation in the divorce rate…” However, even Woodruff was caught up in the plural marriage rage. He married a plural wife during the reformation and even offered his 14-year-old daughter to Young, who prudently refused Woodruff’s offer. Alexander also writes of Young’s denying “Old Father Allred” permission to marry three girls, ages 12 and 13.”

The reformation probably did prepare the saints to unite against outside adversaries. By the mid-1850’s, it was clear that the federal government would soon be a part of Utah life, and for 35-plus years the LDS Church would face the threat the termination at the hands of the feds. Gentiles, and by extension the feds, were a target to call wicked.

Also, as Alexander writes, the church was successful, with the final emphasis on renewed love and charity, to bring members back to executive authority.

doug1963@gmail.com

Posts are authored by Doug Gibson. Cartoon is by Cal Grondahl. This post and cartoon was originally published on the now-defunct StandardBlogs website from The Standard-Examiner website, which this post is credited to.