Are The Essays Backfiring?

[Gray]

Absurd comparison.

 

Not really. Not nearly as absurd as an entire town destroying itself just to frame the Mormons. What a conspiracy theory!

[ALarson]

Sworn statement made by W.W. Phelps (emphasis added):

I went to the tavern late

at night when I found J. Smith Jr. Hyrum

Smith & others. I informed J. Smith that the

Clay troops had returned home some 40 or 50

in number, but told him that Genl. Parks

was in Far West and his troops just behind.

   There was a conversation among them as

to what they [ ] and they came to the conclusion

to send down to Lyman Wright at his house

for him to send an express to Genl Parks that

his troops were not needed.  Some time

before day I awoke and found Lyman

Wright & Capt. Fearnaught in the house – he said he had sent the

Express to Genl. Parks informing him that his

Militia was not needed – Wight asked J. Smith

twice if he had arms to the point now to resist

the law that he wanted  that matter now

distinctly understood-  he said he had succeeded

in smoothing the matter over with Judge

King when he was out, and that he defied the

U.S to take him, but that he had submitted

to be taken, because he Smith had done so-

    This was in reference to the examination

for the offence for which he and Smith had

been brought before Judge King in Davis.

Smith replied the time had come when he should

resist all law.

 

In the fore part of the night after my arrival

I heard a good deal of conversation about driving

out the mob from Davis.  I heard J. Smith remark

there was a store at Gallatin & a Grocery at Millport

and in the morning and in the morning after the

conversation between smith and Wight about

resisting the law a plan of operations was

agreed on which was that Capt Fearnaught

who was present should take a company

of 100 men or more and go to Gallatin and

take it that day-  to take the goods out of the

store at Gallatin bring them to Di-ahamon

and burn the store.  Lyman Wight was to take

a company and go to Millport on the same

day, and Seymore Brunson was to take a

company and go to the grind stone [fort]

on the same day.  This arrangement was

made in the house before day while I was lying

on the floor.  When I arose in the morning

some of the companies were gone.  But

I saw Lyman Wight parade a horse company –

and start off with it toward Millport – I

I also a foot company the same day go off

on the same day in the evening I saw

both these companies return.  The foot com-

pany had some plunder which appeared

to be [feed] and bed clothes &c.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     http://www.sos.mo.gov/archives/resources/findingaids/fulltext/rg005_01-B02_F25-30.asp?rid=b02_f26                                                      http://www.sos.mo.gov/archives/resources/findingaids/fulltext/rg005_01-B02_F25-30.asp?rid=b02_f26&ref=js 

 

 

Statement made by Parley P. Pratt:

It is said that some of our troops, exasperated to the highest degree, retaliated in some instances by plundering and burning houses, and bringing the spoil to feed the hungry and clothe the naked, whose provisions and clothing had been robbed from them; and upon the whole, I am rather inclined to believe it was the case; for human nature cannot endure all things.                                                                                                                                            http://www.boap.org/LDS/Early-Saints/PPratt-pers.html

 

 

Missouri War Letters (hopefully this link will work as this is interesting reading and history):

http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~livcomo/letters/mormon.html

Edited August 13, 2015 by ALarson

[ALarson]

Not really. Not nearly as absurd as an entire town destroying itself just to frame the Mormons. What a conspiracy theory!

Yes, that's pretty funny

[Scott Lloyd]

Not really. Not nearly as absurd as an entire town destroying itself just to frame the Mormons. What a conspiracy theory!

Who said the "entire town" destroyed itself?

 

I didn't say that. The source I provided (Jeff Lindsay) didn't say that.

[ALarson]

Who said the "entire town" destroyed itself?

 

I didn't say that. The source I provided (Jeff Lindsay) didn't say that.

The town was destroyed.  Homes, the Post Office, storehouses and so on all burned and plundered .  Have you even read the real history here?

 

Do you honestly believe they did this to themselves?

 

Read my quotes and sources above.

Edited August 13, 2015 by ALarson

[Scott Lloyd]

The town was destroyed.  Homes, the Post Office, storehouses and so on all burned and plundered .  Have you even read the real history here?

 

Do you honestly believe they did this to themselves?

 

Read my quotes and sources above.

I never said the entire town destroyed itself.

 

I said that it is not unbelievable to me that some of the mobbers (not the whole town) were so consumed with hatred they may have destroyed their own property to make the situation worse and inflict greater incrimination on the Mormons.

 

I'm not saying that's what happened, only that it is conceivable.

 

Did you read my source? Did you get that this was a wartime situation in which the Church members, left impoverished by atrocities committed against them, were obliged to forage for food and supplies and that they had been authorized to disperse mobs in the county?

 

ETA:

 

This is from Church History in the Fullness of Times:

 

As hostilities in Daviess County increased, General Parks authorized Lyman Wight, a colonel in the militia, to organize a force of Mormon men and use them to disperse all mobs found in Daviess County. General Parks addressed the assembled troops: “I have visited your place frequently, [and] find you to be an industrious and thriving people, willing to abide the laws of the land; and I deeply regret that you could not live in peace and enjoy the privileges of freedom.”²¹

Guerrilla warfare raged between Mormon and anti-Mormon forces for two days as both sides plundered and burned. Members of the Church considered taking from the Gentiles to be a necessity laid upon them because their own goods had been stolen. A young Mormon militia officer, Benjamin F. Johnson, said, “We were being hemmed in on all sides by our enemies and were without food. All the grain, cattle, hogs, and supplies of every kind were left in the country, or so far from home they could not be obtained except with a strong guard. So our only possible chance was to go out in foraging companies and bring in whatever we could find, without regard to ownership.”²²This matter was magnified by the non-Mormons in the court proceedings that followed the Mormon War. For their part, the anti-Mormons often set fire to their own haystacks and property and then blamed it on the Saints. Rumors soon spread to the rest of Missouri that the Mormons were either stealing or destroying all the property of their neighbors.

Edited August 13, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[ALarson]

I never said the entire town destroyed itself.

 

Then who do you believe destroyed it?

 

Read W.W. Phelps sworn statement as it's pretty clear what happened.

 

And, as far as the need to burn homes and plunder because church members were left destitute,  you can't really believe that was necessary (and destroy their places of business, the Post Office and so on).

 

Read the real history and the records I linked to above.

Edited August 13, 2015 by ALarson

[Thinking]

It would be nice if the Antis didn't hold all the cards.

 

The cards are what they are. Faithful LDS actually hold the same cards.

[ALarson]

The cards are what they are. Faithful LDS actually hold the same cards.

The cards are the truth and it is getting out there to members (slowly and hopefully all will see it eventually).  The church leaders are now making efforts towards this and I think that's great.  The essays and the recent press conference to show pictures of Joseph's seer stone are steps in the right direction.

[Scott Lloyd]

Then who do you believe destroyed it?

 

Read W.W. Phelps sworn statement as it's pretty clear what happened.

 

And, as far as the need to burn homes and plunder because church members were left destitute,  you can't really believe that was necessary (and destroy their places of business, the Post Office and so on).

 

Read the real history and the records I linked to above.

In the midst of a wartime situation, there were depredations on both sides.  I've not denied that. That's the nature of war.

 

There were even some inexcusable acts carried out by individual Church members, namely the Danites.

 

But I've seen nothing so far to persuade me that the Mormons were the aggressors in the conflict. You're giving the impression you think this was just a sad situation where neither side was more to blame than the other. I don't buy that.

Edited August 13, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

The cards are the truth and it is getting out there to members (slowly and hopefully all will see it eventually).  The church leaders are now making efforts towards this and I think that's great.  The essays and the recent press conference to show pictures of Joseph's seer stone are steps in the right direction.

Give me a break.

[JulieM]

Great links and information ALarson (I'm still looking up and reading more from your links too). I had read some about the conflict in Missouri but not those admissions and statements from active members of the church. Of course this doesn't justify in the least what took place at Hauns Mill or all the other horrible things done to the faithful saints. But it gives some perspective I guess.

[Joshua Valentine]

To say that he was peaceable and conciliatory until he was set off by the Rigdon speech strikes me as a stretch indeed.

Quite right, and thus why I never said any such silly thing.

[ALarson]

Thanks Julie for the kind words

 

I just think it's important for people to read the real history and read statements & histories from all sides.  To think that the people in Missouri would burn their own homes (and put themselves and their children out into the cold) or destroy their own businesses is a pretty absurd theory.

 

The Mormon War is an interesting study for sure (and tragic for most all involved really).  But, if one will take the time to read what's available, it helps explain a lot of what happened and how things escalated on both sides.

[jkwilliams]

The overall history of the oppression against the Latter-day Saints by Missouri mobs strikes me as incredible. I can scarcely imagine decent, civilized men and women behaving that way. As familiar as I am with it, I am still appalled whenever I read of it.

 

So, once it is established that they did, it is not much of a stretch for me to conceive that a number of them would be so consumed by hatred that they would damage their own property just to frame the Mormons. This was a contentious and hateful lot. Hatred can do strange things to a person.

 

Yes, the behavior of the Missourians was appalling. No one thinks it wasn't. The account Jeff Lindsay cited was from someone who heard it secondhand and was not anywhere near the house-burning incidents. I would give it a smidge more credence if there were any other accounts by eyewitnesses saying these people burned their own houses. On the face of it, the story is not believable, even less so because it's secondhand. It may not be a stretch for you to conceive of it, but that doesn't mean there's solid evidence for this happening. That Warren Foote heard a rumor of this does not mean it happened. Nor does saying so mean the Mormon "brought this on themselves." My own family was driven out of Missouri at that time, and they suffered greatly, and they had done nothing to deserve it. But does anyone seriously believe a secondhand rumor that Missourians burned their own houses down?

 

But let's accept the hearsay account at face value. The reason these folks were so angry that they burned their own houses down was that armed Mormons had robbed them of food, livestock, and other supplies. I'd be pretty upset at anyone who did that. Upset enough to burn down my own house? No, because that would be insane.

[jkwilliams]

Who said the "entire town" destroyed itself?

 

I didn't say that. The source I provided (Jeff Lindsay) didn't say that.

 

The source was secondhand rumor reported by someone who wasn't there.

[Calm]

So in effect, you're saying you wouldn't put it past the Church members in Missouri to have lied about it.

Well I wouldn't put it past murderous and violent Missouri mobbers of the 1830s to do whatever they thought necessary to frame the Latter-day Saints.

I guess we're at an impasse.

What kind of houses were they? (deleted question as I had missed ALarson's account of the area) Perhaps those who did this (assuming it happened) had crappy houses and little property and anticipated they would get better built and larger plots off the Mormons if they claimed it. It could have been an idea shared and then spread among a community of low income families who didn't see another way to move up, so to speak.

There is also the possibility that a fire was started, spread to other homes and it was assumed that each was intentional.

Edited August 13, 2015 by calmoriah

[JulieM]

The source was secondhand rumor reported by someone who wasn't there.

And we do have an eyewitness's sworn statement who was there and heard the plans to destroy these towns (WW Phelps). The other statements and letters I'm part way through reading (from the links given here) also support what Phelps stated.

[jkwilliams]

And we do have an eyewitness's sworn statement who was there and heard the plans to destroy these towns (WW Phelps). The other statements and letters I'm part way through reading (from the links given here) also support what Phelps stated.

 

Yep.There is no corroboration for the story, and the source wasn't anywhere near the events, so I tend to think it was just a repetition of a rumor. 

[JulieM]

What kind of houses were they? Was it a boom town area by any chance? Perhaps those who did this (assuming it happened) had crappy houses and little property and anticipated they would get better built and larger plots off the Mormons if they claimed it. It could have been an idea shared and then spread among a community of low income families who didn't see another way to move up, so to speak.

There is also the possibility that a fire was started, spread to other homes and it was assumed that each was intentional.

Have you read WW Phelp's statement? Also, businesses were destroyed and looted not just homes.

[jkwilliams]

What kind of houses were they? Was it a boom town area by any chance? Perhaps those who did this (assuming it happened) had crappy houses and little property and anticipated they would get better built and larger plots off the Mormons if they claimed it. It could have been an idea shared and then spread among a community of low income families who didn't see another way to move up, so to speak.

There is also the possibility that a fire was started, spread to other homes and it was assumed that each was intentional.

 

As Julie mentioned, we have eyewitness testimony from WW Phelps. The other source is secondhand. 

[Calm]

See above edit

It seems unlikely to me as well that a whole community would do it, more likely if true at all, it was information that was exaggerated. That could have happened as well from the other side. Given the anger present in the area, I don't really trust any account to be accurate.

[jkwilliams]

See above edit

It seems unlikely to me as well that a whole community would do it, more likely if true at all, it was information that was exaggerated. That could have happened as well from the other side. Given the anger present in the area, I don't really trust any account to be accurate.

 

I think we can agree that an uncorroborated, secondhand account cannot be trusted to be accurate. I'm a little shocked that Jeff Lindsay used such a questionable source or that anyone is sticking with it.

Edited August 13, 2015 by jkwilliams

[Calm]

A secondhand account from someone who has been demonstrated to be trustworthy reporting a firsthand report from someone else trustworthy seems to me credible enough it should be considered.

Not saying this is the case here though it might be. Haven't looked at it closely enough to tell, reading between appointments today and helping Mom so not even sure I am keeping this thread straight.

I would expect a widespread event would have multiple independent reports though. I am not a historian so may be wrong.

Edited August 14, 2015 by calmoriah

[jkwilliams]

A secondhand account from someone who has been demonstrated to be trustworthy reporting a firsthand report from someone else trustworthy seems to me credible enough it should be considered.

Not saying this is the case here though it might be. Haven't looked at it closely enough to tell, reading between appointments today and helping Mom so not even sure I am keeping this thread straight.

I would expect a widespread event would have multiple independent reports though. I am not a historian so may be wrong.

 

It's not the case, as Foote doesn't cite a firsthand report from anyone. My guess is that Foote is reporting what he heard. Reading through the rest of his account, it's clear rumors were swirling around Far West at the time, as we would expect.