New York Times archive is a Mormon history goldmine

Post by **_Mercury** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 2:28 pm

So the NYT has opened up the archives! Woohoo!

While fighting insomnia I was browsing this archive on my iphone as my wife was sleeping next to me last night. Paging through, I found an article talking about missionaries in 1889 taking a train back to the deseret dictatorship:

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1&res=9907EED6153AE033A25754C1A9649C94689FD7CF&oref=slogin

What is striking in this article is the sense that the missionaries were con men (which they were/are) leading these people to a life they had no idea was so bad. The missionaries did not share the true nature of Mormonism with the converts they had convinced to emigrate to the US and it seems like they motivated these poor people by promising land to farm. How many stories like this occurred? How many converts had no choice but to stay in Utah and accept the horrific life they were tricked into?

Post by **_karl61** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 2:51 pm

What's interesting is those trains that took converts to Utah took convicted polygamist to prison on the return trip.

Post by **_why me** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 4:50 pm

If I read this correctly, the two young women gave their permission to be married to the missionary. Perhaps the father did not like it. But then again, it seems that the problem came from intent. Since they all went off to seek their 'fortune'. perhaps this is why they came in the first place and needed an excuse to jump ship.

Post by **_moksha** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 5:31 pm

why me wrote:If I read this correctly, the two young women gave their permission to be married to the missionary. Perhaps the father did not like it. But then again, it seems that the problem came from intent. Since they all went off to seek their 'fortune'. perhaps this is why they came in the first place and needed an excuse to jump ship.

On the other hand, if they had known about polygamy ahead of time and that there was a habit among the escorting Elders to pick the most attractive women for their own wives, then this situation would not have arisen

Post by **_karl61** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 5:59 pm

moksha wrote:
why me wrote:If I read this correctly, the two young women gave their permission to be married to the missionary. Perhaps the father did not like it. But then again, it seems that the problem came from intent. Since they all went off to seek their 'fortune'. perhaps this is why they came in the first place and needed an excuse to jump ship.

On the other hand, if they had known about polygamy ahead of time and that there was a habit among the escorting Elders to pick the most attractive women for their own wives, then this situation would not have arisen

I read something I while back where I think Heber C. said that the elders in Europe needed to stop picking out the pretty wives for themselves and sending the rest to America.

Post by **_Blixa** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:00 pm

the historical NYT database is indeed fascinating. try looking at the coverage of the MMM or the Willam Hooper Young/Anna Pulitzer murder sometime. The second one is fascinating for a look at early 1900's church PR spin. Before the story has even been fully reported, a cabal of elders is adamant that blood atonement had nothing to do with it! No sir! We don't teach that!

If you can find a Harper's Weekly database, you'll also find interesting mormon-related material including the first national coverage of the MMM (Dr. Brewer's report).

Post by **_Blixa** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:06 pm

why me wrote:If I read this correctly, the two young women gave their permission to be married to the missionary. Perhaps the father did not like it. But then again, it seems that the problem came from intent. Since they all went off to seek their 'fortune'. perhaps this is why they came in the first place and needed an excuse to jump ship.

I see nothing in the article that supports this interpretation. On the other hand, missionaries, especially in England, were instructed to downplay, if not deny, the existence of polygamy in the Utah while proselityzing. One can read many diaries and journals of unhappy women who got the surprise of their lives upon arrival...if I have time/remember I'll try to cull some quotes from some of these as I come across them in my current research.

Post by **_Mercury** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:20 pm

why me wrote:If I read this correctly, the two young women gave their permission to be married to the missionary. Perhaps the father did not like it. But then again, it seems that the problem came from intent. Since they all went off to seek their 'fortune'. perhaps this is why they came in the first place and needed an excuse to jump ship.

that's a naïve assumption being that the missionaries were lucky they escaped alive. Pass the blame over to the convert, that's right. I guess it all makes more sense when you don't want to accept responsibility for a fraud perpetuated by scum.

Post by **_Jersey Girl** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:20 pm

Mercury,

At some point could you look to see if there is an announcement from the Met about finding the Book of Abraham papyrus or the transfer of it back to the LDS Church in the NYT archives?

Post by **_why me** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:37 pm

Mercury wrote:
why me wrote:If I read this correctly, the two young women gave their permission to be married to the missionary. Perhaps the father did not like it. But then again, it seems that the problem came from intent. Since they all went off to seek their 'fortune'. perhaps this is why they came in the first place and needed an excuse to jump ship.

that's a naïve assumption being that the missionaries were lucky they escaped alive. Pass the blame over to the convert, that's right. I guess it all makes more sense when you don't want to accept responsibility for a fraud perpetuated by scum.

Well that's how I read it. The two women gave permission but the dad didn't. Also they sought their fortune somewhere else. It does say that right?

And I do need to remind everyone that the NYT reporter was not an eyewitness as far as I can understand. Does everyone believe 'all the news that fit to print'?