The Prophet and the Reformer

by Grow, Matthew J. ; Walker, Ronald W. ;

  Letter

  Great Salt Lake City, March 9 1858.

  Tuesday 8 O’clock P M

  Col. Thomas L. Kane

  Dear Sir,

  We have just learned through the Southern Indians that the troops

  are very destitute of provisions.

  7 . Johnston to Kane, March 15, 1858, in Message from the President of the United States to the Two Houses of Congress at the Commencement of the Second Session of the Thirty-Fifth Congress (Washington: James B. Steedman, 1858), 88.

  8. Kane to Johnston, March 16, 1858, in Message from the President of the United States, 90–91.

  9. Fitz John Porter, diary, March 16, 1858, Library of Congress.

  10. Kane to Buchanan, March 23, 1858 [draft?], Kane Collection, BYU.

  248

  the prOphet And the refOrmer

  Mr Gerrish,11 a Merchant formerly of this place and who is now sup-

  posed to be detained in Col. Johnson’s camp has quite a herd of cattle here

  and for which he would doubtless like a market.12 We know of none that

  would be equal to the Army of the United States now encamped within

  our borders, we have therefore concluded to send this herd consisting

  of near 200 head of cattle, a portion of which are tolerable good beef. In

  addition to the foregoing we shall send out fifteen or twenty thousand

  pounds of flour to the Army to which they will be made perfectly wel-

  come or pay for just as they choose, all of which will be forwarded in a few

  days so soon as the necessary arrangements can be made & the snow will

  admit. If after your arrival you learn that Col. Johnson will not receive the

  flour, we will be obliged if you will be at the trouble of communicating

  the fact to those who attend you that we may be saved the trouble.

  I send this by my son Jos. A. and George Stringham.13 Trusting that

  you are rapidly regaining your health, and that success may attend you,

  I remain, most respectfully

  Brigham Young

  11. W

  illiam Gerrish was a non-Mormon merchant in Utah of the firm Gilbert & Gerrish; he had previously played a role in the Brigham Young Express and Carrying Company. When Young earlier sent an offer of salt to Johnston, he suggested that Johnston allow his prisoner Gerrish to try the salt “to dispel any groundless suspicion” of its contents. See Hubert H. Bancroft, History of Utah, 1540–1886, The Works of Hubert Howe Bancroft, vol. 24 (San Francisco: The History Company, 1889), 763; Young to Johnston, November 26, 1857, BYOF.

  12. During the preceding autumn, Mormon raiders had seized this herd and brought it to Salt Lake, pending the outcome of the difficulties. Concerning its disposition, Johnston wrote, “If Mr. Gerrish desires to have his cattle sent to him, I will interpose no obstacle, no condition, further than I desire that they may be delivered to him on the Muddy, ten miles in advance of this camp.” Johnston denied that Gerrish had been detained: “Mr. Gerrish started for the eastern States some weeks since. He has at all times been at liberty to go wherever he pleased, as is every other American citizen, without question from any one, except to Salt Lake City, or some position occupied by an armed body of Mormons opposed to the government.” Johnston to Kane, March 15, 1858, Kane Collection, BYU.

  13. Likely George Ammon Stringham (1837–1906).

  42

  Kane to Young, ca. March 16, 1858

  Besides clAshing Over Young’s offer of supplies for the federal troops,

  Kane and Johnston disagreed over the treatment of a Mormon courier—Lewis

  Robison, the Nauvoo Legion’s quartermaster—waiting outside of Camp Scott

  for Johnston’s response to Young’s March 9 letter. On March 14, Kane com-

  plained to Johnston that the messenger (or, potentially, messengers, as Kane

  referred to a “horseman, or group of horsemen” and a “person or persons”)

  had been “approached by a party of the soldiers . . . and fired upon.”1 Johnston

  chided Kane for not informing him of the messenger(s). Nevertheless, he

  promised to “ensure them protection and take care that they suffer no moles-

  tation” if reported to him, but emphasized his orders: “armed parties in

  approaching should be careful to make known by signal or otherwise that

  they desire to communicate on business.”2 Kane complained of the “Strictness

  of your Orders,” but asked Johnston for a pass to leave the camp to search

  for Robison.3 Kane apparently found Robison (or possibly other Mormons

  nearby) on March 17, and he sent the featured letter, which only exists as a

  draft, via Robison or the others to Young. In the letter, he acknowledged the

  “wanton firing” on Robison, and commiserated that he felt “with respect to it

  no less a degree of indignation than yourselves.” On the copy of the letter that

  he retained, Kane indicated that he had read it to Governor Cumming on the

  morning of March 16.

  Kane also expounded to Young for the first time the narrative he created

  to convince the Saints to accept a peaceful solution. Kane explained Mormon

  actions to the federal government by referring to the division of the Saints

  1. Kane to J

  ohnston [draft?], March 14, 1858, Kane Collection, BYU.

  2. Johnston to Kane, March 15, 1858, Kane Collection, BYU.

  3. Kane to Johnston [draft?], March 15, 1858, Kane Collection, BYU.

  250

  the prOphet And the refOrmer

  into a peace party and a war party, with Young as the head of the more pacifist

  Saints. To the Mormons, Kane emphasized the animosity between the military

  officials and the civilian officers, particularly Cumming. He thus blamed the

  shooting at Robison “solely on the military power unauthorized” and praised

  Cumming as a “faithful and determined exponent” of Buchanan’s policy. After

  asking Young to send William Kimball (a militia brigadier leader who had

  met Kane in 1846) to meet with him, Kane advised the Mormons to remain

  calm. Kane also gave the Mormon courier other information about his stay

  at Camp Scott. When the report arrived in Salt Lake City on March 19, Hosea

  Stout recorded that Kane had stated “he was kept close had to pay six dollars

  pr day for board can not see his friends who are in camp and so forth but did

  not say what progress he was making as to what he went there for.”4 Indeed,

  Kane avoided telling the Mormons the most important information. Likely

  fearing that it would harden the Latter-day Saints, he neither stated that the

  army had rejected Young’s offer of supplies, nor did he speak of the rampant

  anti-Mormonism in the camp.

  Even though Kane urged calm, the arrival in Salt Lake City of his ini-

  tial report, with little encouraging news, spurred the Mormons to action.

  Throughout the winter, Young had alluded to possibly abandoning Salt Lake

  City and the settlements in northern Utah. Eastern press reports specu-

  lated regarding a variety of destinations, including Mexico, Central or South

  America, Vancouver Island, Washington Territory, and Russian Alaska. For

  his part, Young primarily looked for a destination closer to home, with a par-

  ticular interest in Nevada’s White Mountains.5 Such a move, Young believed,

  would protect the Saints from the invading army and a judicial crusade from

  the aggressive federal judges. He also hoped it would influence public percep-

  tions on a grand scale. The image of the suffering Saints, again driven from

  their homes, could possibly
turn American sentiment against Buchanan and

  the army.6

  The day before the arrival of Kane’s report, a council meeting in Salt

  Lake approved Young’s proposal to abandon the city. Reflecting a strategy

  similar to the Saints’ exodus from Nauvoo in 1846, Young pursued a policy

  that would avoid battle. Three days after the council, Young proclaimed

  the Move South, instructing all Mormons in northern Utah to leave their

  4. Brooks,

  On the Mormon Frontier, March 19, 1858, 2:655.

  5.Clifford L. Stott, Search for Sanctuary: Brigham Young and the White Mountain Expedition (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1984).

  6. Richard D. Poll, “The Move South,” BYU Studies 29.4 (1989): 65–88.

  Kane to Young, ca. March 16, 1858

  251

  homes; eventually 30,000 Saints obeyed, temporarily gathering at Provo.7

  In Nephi, 85 miles south of Salt Lake City, one Mormon recorded in his

  journal the explanation he received: “this sudden move is on account of the

  news from the armey Col. T L Kane went out and came back to the boys . . .

  he told them that the soldiers had had fresh supplies and were determined

  to come.” Since Kane “did not return with the bretheren,” Young decided to

  “save the effusion of blood” by allowing the army to occupy a deserted Salt

  Lake City.8

  Kane’s visit with the Mormon scouts aroused further suspicions of his

  loyalties among the federal troops. Kane had arranged to fire his weapon as a

  signal of his return to the camp; however, a stormy night created confusion,

  and the pickets misunderstood Kane’s firing as a precursor to a Mormon

  attack. As a consequence, the “whole of the garrison of Fort Bridger were

  aroused and called to arms by an alarm from the sentinels of the Fort.”

  Soldiers soon surrounded Kane, who was fired upon at “two paces.” A bullet

  grazed his collar, but he escaped unscathed. One officer scoffed that Kane

  was the “most astonished man you ever heard of . . . a more frightened indi-

  vidual I never saw.” He concluded, “The military authorities think him a spy

  and there is no doubt about it, and the sooner he gets out of our reach the

  better.”9 Johnston’s adjutant, Fitz-John Porter—who considered Kane “an ass

  though a gentleman”—similarly wrote, “Pity they did not rid him of life—it

  would have saved one fool from troubling us.”10 Kane tried to smooth over the

  uproar by giving the shooter a “present of five dollars” and “money enough to

  treat the whole guard.”11

  This gesture notwithstanding, Kane may have believed that the

  shooting had been intentional as it seemed too close for an honest mis-

  take. Perhaps as a result of this intense hostility, Kane soon prepared

  dispiriting reports to President Buchanan, writing that he could no

  longer advise the Mormons to admit the army into the Salt Lake Valley,

  7 . Poll, “Thomas L. Kane,” 129.

  8. Samuel Pitchforth, diary, March 25, 1858, CHL.

  9. See Jesse A. Gove, The Utah Expedition, 1857–1858, edited by Otis G. Hammond (Concord, NH: New Hampshire Historical Society, 1928), 135–136; Fitz-John Porter, diary, March 17, 1858, LOC; New York Tribune correspondent, March 24, 1858, letter published as “Highly Important from Utah: Arrival of Col. Kane at Ft. Bridger,” New York Semi-Weekly Tribune, May 25, 1858.

  10. Porter, diary, March 20, 1858, LOC.

  11.Robert E. Stowers and John M. Ellis, “Charles A. Scott’s Diary of the Utah Expedition, 1857-1861,” Utah Historical Quarterly 28 (April 1960), 169–170, entry for March 18, 1858.

  252

  the prOphet And the refOrmer

  as he doubted the officers “will be able to control their soldiers—much

  less their disorderly retinue of Camp followers and attendants.”12

  Source

  Kane to Young, undated, ca. March 16, 1858, box 14, fd 14, Kane

  Collection, BYU.

  Letter

  (a)

  To Brigham Young and those around and near him:

  My friends:

  I have heard of the wanton firing on Robinson13 <“and others,” or

  “and his party if there were Mormons with him> and believe me experi-

  ence with respect to it no less a degree of indignation than yourselves

  or any of your people. It was the act solely of the Military power unau-

  thorized and as I am of opinion directly contrary to the instructions

  issued by the General Government. As far as I have had an opportunity

  of examining too I am confident that there is no reason whatever for

  believing that the man who you were told provoked the Salmon R. out-

  rage was an authorized agent of the United States or of any authorized

  and commissioned Agent for Indian affairs or other Government offices

  of any kind.14 Since my arrival here I have been in constant communica-

  tion with Governor Cummings who makes no secret

  from me of his instructions, and I give you my word without reservation

  that I can reiterate my confident assurance to you that he is the faithful

  and determined exponent of the views of yr. friend the President of the

  United States. He has force of character enough too to cause his wishes

  and opinions to be obeyed and respected by others Be calm. There is no

  change. and J Justice will be done you in due time.

  12. Kane to B

  uchanan, March 23, 1858 [draft?], Kane Collection, BYU.

  13. Lewis Robison (1816–1883), the quartermaster general of the Nauvoo Legion, was well-acquainted with the countryside around Camp Scott. MacKinnon, At Sword’s Point, 340.

  14. On the Fort Limhi attack, see Young to Kane, March 9, 1858.

  Kane to Young, ca. March 16, 1858

  253

  If you can send me William Kimball I will converse with him in per-

  fect confidence. I greatly desire to do so.15

  I remain in haste

  Your friend to serve you

  Thomas L. Kane

  Read to Gov C. before going out starts in early morning

  Mar. 16. 1858.

  15. W

  illiam Kimball was soon sent to meet with Kane. After traveling through a fierce winter storm and becoming disoriented by snow blindness (and temporarily losing a mule and a horse), Kane met with Kimball, a brigadier general in the Utah militia, at Quaking Asp Hill, more than a dozen miles outside Camp Scott. Kane wanted Mormon permission for Cumming to enter Salt Lake City and a heavy Mormon guard to protect the governor from any wayward shooting. Kane had first met Kimball, the eldest son of Heber C. Kimball, in the Mormon camps in 1846; Kimball had also stopped at the Kane home in Philadelphia in 1856. See Kane to Robert Patterson Kane, April 4, 1858, Kane Collection, BYU; Kane to John K. Kane, ca. April 4, 1858, Kane Collection, BYU; Kane, diary, March 1858, Kane Collection, BYU; Elizabeth W. Kane, journal, March 8, 1856, Kane Collection, BYU; Marlin Kent Larsen, The Forgotten Son: William Henry Kimball (Hyrum, UT: Downs Printing, 2011), 146–149, 220.

  43

  Young to Kane, April 17, 1858

  in this incOmplete draft letter, Young expressed his thoughts on the Utah

  Expedition soon after the arrival of Kane and Cumming at Salt Lake City. The

  situation had changed dramatically since Kane’s March 16 letter to Young. For

  the past several months, Cumming and Johnston had been feuding, espe-

  cially over future Utah policy. Cumming hoped for a peaceful settlement and

  Johnston advocated a firmer hand.
As a result of assurances given by William

  Kimball at their meeting outside Camp Scott, Kane felt he was in a position to

  offer Cumming a suggestion that appealed to the governor: Cumming should

  travel without an army escort to Salt Lake City as a sign of reconciliation to

  the Saints and to work out a truce. Kane’s private writings demonstrate that

  he used several arguments to persuade the governor. Cumming could engage

  in “peace negotiations,” neutralize the Saints’ fears about the army, and “rally

  my friends & the peace party generally.”1 In a private account three months

  later, Kane stated that Cumming agreed that “I should order him in every

  respect as I thought fit, and that until I brought him back to camp, he would

  obey me in every respect in all things implicitly. He did so as became a gallant

  gentleman who had given his word.”2 Kane believed that a resolution to the

  conflict would come through an alliance between Cumming and Young that

  would legitimize a truce, ensure tranquility in the coming years, and protect

  the Mormons from more domineering officials.

  During his conference with Kimball, Kane instructed Kimball to keep

  Cumming’s plan secret, to ensure that only “reliable men” would be stationed

  along the route, and to arrange for a “Guard of Honor” to escort Cumming

  1. Kane, diary

  , March 1858, Kane Papers, Stanford.

  2. Kane, statement, Kane Papers, APS, as quoted in Poll, “Thomas L. Kane,” 130–131.

  Young to Kane, April 17, 1858

  255

  into Salt Lake City.3 After returning to Camp Scott, Kane and Cumming kept

  their decision confidential until April 2, when Cumming informed Johnston

  and asked for necessary supplies. Johnston complied, though he, other army

  officers, and most of the civilian officials besides Cumming opposed the deci-

  sion. Fitz-John Porter, Johnston’s adjutant, wrote in his diary:

  Too late Governor to give the impression you are heroic. You run no

  more risk in going—if as you said you were invited—than I do staying

  here—unless injured by outsiders. To give this impression Mr Kane