Wilford Woodruff, Intellectual Progress, and the Growth of an Amateur Scientific and Technological Tradition in Early Territorial Utah

Wilford Woodruff, 1853, USHS collections.

Wilford Woodruff, Intellectual Progress, and the Growth of an Amateur Scientific and Technological Tradition in Early Territorial Utah

BY THOMAS G. ALEXANDER

IN GENERAL, HISTORICAL WORKS THAT CONSIDER THE FULL RANGE oftOpicS on Utah's early development—the years from settlement in 1847 through Brigham Young's death in 1877 —seem to lack a satisfactory general framework for integrating the discussion of intellectual, scientific, formal cultural, and technological life into the broader picture. This condition seems to have resulted from the inadequacy of the prevailing general interpretation to include the broad extent of those changes in the usucd context within which scholars have placed Utah's historical development In general, historians have tended to see Utah society as isolated from the main currents of intellectual, scientific, high cultural, and technological change in the outside world and have assumed that Mormon leaders, who tended to dominate the community during those years, favored that isolation and were antagonistic to changes taking place in the world outside the Mountain West.1

There is, however, readily available evidence with which to fashion an alternate interpretation something like this: Building the Latter-day Saint kingdom in the Mountain West constituted the principal goal of virtually all of Utah's mid- to late-nineteenth-century community leaders. For that reason, in spite of the preference Utah leaders might have shown for isolation or local control in certain areas, particularly political and social life, in most fields having to do with economic innovation, technological development, and high culture, interaction rather than isolation was the norm. Moreover, in certain fields, particularly certain large-scale economic ventures, agricultural and technological innovation, high culture, and the growth of basic knowledge, leaders favored interaction and borrowing, not isolation.2

Some of the evidence for this interpretation can be culled from existing studies. At least since Leonard Arrington's Great Basin Kingdom historians have recognized that Utah leaders facilitated certain types of change long before the attack on their peculiar institutions forced them to do so. We have known, for instance, that the leaders brought in machinery for the manufacture of sugar and iron. They favored the development of a transcontinental stage line and a transcontinental telegraph, and they facilitated the construction of the transcontinental railroad. They introduced plants and animals from outside.3 In each of these and other efforts, they cooperated with non-Mormons.

Other innovations required outside borrowing as well. Architectural styles favored in Utah homes and public buildings tended to follow national and international trends.4 Moreover, the recent work on Mormon towns indicates that significant economic and spatial developments in the towns fit quite easily within the general market economy and that most towns followed a variety of patterns common to other areas of the United States and were not what we generally perceive as uniquely Mormon settlements.5

Instead of making these insights the basis for a reinterpretation of Utah's relationship with the outside world that could include discussions of scientific, intellectual, formal cultural, and technological patterns, scholars have continued to stress isolation. In textbooks including a broad range of activities, scholars have ordinarily tacked discussions of intellectual, scientific, technological, and high cultural topics on the end of chapters or treated them in separate chapters.6 This may be because they do not fit the pattern dictated by the isolationist thesis, or it may be that, following older models of what constituted history, they stressed political life and local economic development to the exclusion of technology and formal culture. Whatever the reason, it is my belief that a reexamination of generalizations based on the isolationist model is long overdue and that any interpretation that posits isolation as the norm in Utah life needs revision. If an interpretation based on the concept of building the kingdom were adopted, it would be quite easy to integrate cooperation, because anything that promoted the welfare of Utah citizens, whether borrowed from outside or involving cooperation with extraterritorial elements, would be perceived as legitimate.

Perhaps because intellectual, scientific, high cultural, and technological achievement do not fit within the isolationist model, historians dealing with such topics in nineteenth-century Utah have usually focused on single rather than multiple topics. That is, they are not ordinarily well integrated into the general history of the territory. Thus, we find an article on agriculture by Davis Bitton and Linda Wilcox, Lester Bush's work on medicine, and the studies of Peter Goss and Thomas Carter on architecture.7

We also have studies of the achievements of particular individuals— for instance, the intellectual role of Orson Pratt,8 the educational attainments of Lorenzo Snow, who studied at Oberlin College, and women physicians like Martha Hughes Cannon and Ellis Reynolds Shipp.9 Studies of education include considerations of John R. Park, president of the University of Deseret; German immigrants Karl G. Maeser and Louis Moench at Brigham Young Academy and Weber Stake Academy; and teachers like Orson Spencer, who held a D. D. from Hamilton Baptist Literary and Theological Seminary. 10

Beyond this, historians have given some attention to certain technological and scientific innovations and to the organizations designed to facilitate education and change. Articles have considered nurserymen such as Joseph E. Johnson of St George and Luther S. Hemenway of Salt Lake City in the context of agricultural development.11 Discussions have focused on the technology of iron and sugar manufacture and on the work of engineers like Frederick Kesler. Other authors have treated the influence of national and international architectural styles. Some studies have dealt with organizations such as the Deseret Agricultural and Manufacturing Society and the Polysophical Society. Some works have considered medical innovations.12 In general, articles dealing with formal culture have also focused on single topics, for instance, studies of the Wasatch Literary Society and the Salt Lake Theatre.13 Again, a common feature of these studies is that they treat single topics and that they do not generalize over the entire society, perhaps because they do not fit within the general interpretation of the isolation of Utah society.

There is, of course, considerable justification for the prevailing interpretation emphasizing isolation. After all, Utah leaders resisted the appointment of outsiders as territorial officials, the movement of federal troops into the territory, trading with non-Mormons, and reliance on consumer goods imported from outside. Sermons by Brigham Young, Daniel H. Wells, and Jedediah M. Grant called the gentiles wicked and discouraged trade with them.14 Leaders in the Mormon church went as far as to excommunicate some members, including leaders of the Godbeite movement who wanted to encourage free enterprise, facilitate cooperation with non-Mormons, and enter into various mining and merchandising ventures.15

Ideologically disposed to organize a separate community, the Mormons intended neither to set up a two-party system nor to relinquish political control to outsiders after Congress created Utah Territory in 1850. On several occasions Brigham Young emphasized that instead of offering two candidates for election, the Saints should meet together and agree on a single nominee for each political office. The two-party system, he said, was Satan's plan, inaugurated in the preexistence when Lucifer rebelled against the authority of God and Christ.16 Parley P. Pratt emphasized a similar point in December 1852 when he argued that priesthood authority was the only true basis for governments.17

The physical facilities for the territorial government reinforced the union of church and state that existed in nineteenth-century Utah. Shortly after arriving in Utah the Saints had constructed a Council House across the street south of the temple block They prepared a room in the building for the deliberations of the Council of Fifty about the affairs of the territory, and the First Presidency and Twelve also met in the building until December 1854 when they dedicated an upper room in Brigham Young's new offices, presumably in the building between the Lion and Beehive houses. 18

It should be noted, however, that in each of these cases, while Utahns resisted certain types of outside contacts, the contacts—often with accompanying conflict—came nevertheless. In some cases, especially in economic activity, the Mormons promoted the contacts themselves. In the 1850s some Mormons financed gold mining expeditions to California.19 Prominent Mormons like Salt Lake Mayor William Jennings were heavily involved in mining, milling, and smelting, and recent estimates by J. Kenneth Davies indicated that perhaps 40 percent of the miners working in representative districts were Mormons. Moreover, within four years of the Godbeite protest, after the immediate and economically wrenching changes wrought by the transcontinental railroad were over, Brigham Young and other church leaders had begun to urge Mormons to engage in mining as well.20

Thus, the significant interpretive question is not whether Utah's leaders favored insularity in certain cases. They most certainly did. It is, rather, whether these examples should serve as the basis for the general interpretation of Utah's relationship with the remainder of the world, whether the categories in which they favored contacts and interaction are really not more representative of the general condition, and whether the effort to build the kingdom did not require isolation in certain areas and extensive interaction in others.

It is in this context then that this paper seeks to demonstrate that the outside innovations, many of which Utahns warmly welcomed, had far more significant long-term consequences than the insularity they sought in certain cases. Moreover, I would argue that interaction aimed at building the kingdom rather than isolation from the outside world ought to be seen as the norm and that historians need to move to a revised interpretation emphasizing interaction when it facilitated development of the kingdom.

Since it would be impossible in the scope of a journal article fully to cover the instances of interaction and the rationale behind it, I intend to argue this thesis by the case study approach. I will do that by focusing on the activities of Wilford Woodruff who served as a leader in organizations designed to promote such contacts and such internal changes. In this regard, I would argue that his career can serve as a case study for the larger community because, far from being a marginal figure. Woodruff was an ultra-orthodox member of the Council of the Twelve Apostles and a close confidant of Brigham Young and other Utah community leaders. As such, his actions and attitudes represented something as close to an official point of view as one might imagine. As a noted community leader, in facilitating these changes he furthered what he and other LDS leaders perceived as the interests of Utah society in general and the LDS church in particular. In order to support the point, after I have detailed WoodrufPs activities, I will present several representative corroborating examples to show that Woodruff activities were typical of others in the community who joined the organizations in which he worked, accepted the innovations he and his associates made, cmd adopted the changes he promoted.

In the past, historical studies have focused on some of Woodruff s activities in isolation, without interpreting the broader patterns to which they belonged. Scholars have cited his fame as a gardener and horticulturalist within the topic of agricultural change, have pointed out that he served for a time as president of the Deseret Agricultural and Manufacturing Society, or have detailed the events surrounding the Manifesto of 1890 and the granting of Utah statehood as a watershed between the earlier isolationism and the later integration with the nation.21 Studies that have interpreted his actions in a broader context have ordinarily emphasized his role as missionary and church leader.22

In order to understand Woodruffs disposition to promote those outside contacts that allowed him to become a prime mover in facilitating cooperation in the interest of the kingdom, it is important to understand his background. Born in Avon, Connnecticut, on March 1, 1807, Wilford was the third son of Bulah Thompson and Aphek Woodruff, both of prominent Farmington River Valley families. Although Bulah died in a spotted fever epidemic shortly after Wilford's birth and financial reverses in the aftermath of the War of 1812 reduced Aphek's status from upper-class Avon entrepreneur to middle-class Farmington manager, the elder Woodruff and his second wife, Azubah Hart, daughter of another prominent family, expected education to improve their children's condition. Aphek and Azubah gave their offspring the best education the local community could offer, and the extended family shared a pro-educational attitude with Aphek's brother, Ozem, serving on the Farmington school cornmittee.23

Connecticut undoubtedly had one of the best educational systems in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century United States. To supplement local taxation Connecticut towns supported common schools through an endowment created by selling townships in the state and land from the Western Reserve in eastern Ohio.24 Closely associated with the religious establishment, school societies functioned as adjuncts of the local Congregational religious societies.25 Thus, in addition to the standard subjects of grammar, spelling, reading, writing, arithmetic, and geography, the students studied the Bible and heard lectures from ministers.26

Because of his own and his family's interest, Wilford enjoyed an educational experience uncommon in early nineteenth-century America. After beginning common (what we would call elementary) school in Avon, Wilford moved with his family to Farmington, following his father's financial reverses. There he continued his education until age fourteen, taking him through the eighth grade. Then Wilford moved into the home of George Cowles. Scion of one of the wealthiest families in Farmington, Cowles presided over extensive merchandising, farming, and promotional interests. He also served in the Connecticut General Assembly, and he helped to finance the Farmington Canal which created an inland waterway from New Haven, Connecticut, to Northhampton, Massachusetts. Cowles agreed to send young Wilford to school during the winter in return for work on his farm during the summer. For at least part of the time Wilford attended the Farmington Academy, as did his brother Thompson and his half-brother and half-sister, Philo and Eunice.27

Supported by a private endowment and tuition, the Farmington Academy provided advanced education for selected young men and women. It offered instruction in subjects such as chemistry, mineralogy, algebra, geometry, natural philosophy, rhetoric, history, surveying, Latin, and Greek. At its establishment in 1815 Wilford's uncle Ozem had signed as one of the incorporators in company with Gov. John Treadwell, Solomon Cowles (George's father), Timothy Pitkin (a Connecticut congressman), Noadiah Woodruff (a distant relative),28 and others. By 1828 George Cowles, Wilford's patron, was one of the academy trustees.29

Wilford continued his work-study program with George Cowles until June 1823. After that, Aphek arranged for Wilford to live with Andrew Mills of West Hartford, the town adjoining Farmington on the east Wilford did chores for Mills in the morning and evening for his board and room and spent his days at school. After a bout with homesickness, Wilford continued his education there through the spring of 1824. He again attended school during the winter of 1825-26 while at home recuperating from an accident.30

At age eighteen Wilford ended his formal schooling, though he was to participate in adult education programs at other times in his life. An uncommon formal education for a nineteenth-century American youth, his experience approximated the completion of high school. This schooling made him one of the best educated of the nineteenth-century Mormon leaders and better educated than any of the nineteenth-century LDS church presidents except Lorenzo Snow, who attended Oberlin College.31

In addition to his formal education Wilford gained basic technical training as a mechanic and agriculturalist Aphek and Ozem operated mills in Farmington and Avon and taught Wilford and his older brothers, Azmon and Thompson, to operate and repair the machinery. Wilford himself ran mills in Avon and ColHnsville, Connecticut, before moving to Richland, New York, to operate a farm with Azmon. Wilford and his brothers had worked on a farm their father owned in Avon; additionally, Wilford had farmed for both Cowles and Mills in his student days.32

Woodruff continued his education throughout the nineteenth century. As he moved from Connecticut to New York and on to Kirtland, Ohio; Liberty, Missouri; and Nauvoo, Illinois—and throughout his various missions—he read widely on both religious and secular topics. He carried a trunk mostly filled with books to Missouri on the Zion's Camp expedition, and on December 31, 1834, he dedicated the books together with his other property as part of his consecration to the United Order, "that I may be a lawful heir to the Kingdom of God even the Celestial Kingdom." Shortly thereafter, in 1835, he left for a mission in the upper South, principally in Tennessee and Kentucky. There he continued his self-education, reading, observing, and taking lessons in shorthand.

After moving to Kirtland in 1836, he pursued his education further. Under instructions from Joseph Smith, church members concluded that to achieve salvation they had to educate themselves and their children.33 Thus, in addition to supporting common schools for the youth, prominent priesthood holders attended adult education classes themselves. These included the School of the Prophets, a seminary for missionaries and leaders that started in January 1833; the School for Elders, a training ground for missionaries and ministers that opened in November 1834; and a Hebrew School under Professor Joshua Seixas that began in January 1836. Participants in these classes coupled the study of religious topics with the learning of languages, grammar, writing, philosophy, government, literature, geography, and history.34

In 1834 church leaders started the Kirtland School, offering high school level education to adult men and women. Opened in December, the Kirtland School moved to the attic of the temple in November 1836. The curriculum paralleled the academic training Wilford had received in Farmington during the 1820s. This school initially offered instruction to about 100 scholars, about a third more than at the Farmington Academy, which served a population twice the size.35 Instead of benefiting the children of elite families, however, this bootstrap operation catered to impoverished Latter-day Saint adults. Taking advantage of this opportunity, Wilford returned to studying Latin and Greek grammar at the Kirtland School in December 1836. Absorbing the language study, he began to use some Latin phrases in his journal.36

While Wilford served a mission in the East, the Saints were driven from northern Missouri. He returned in time to move with them to Montrose, Iowa, and Nauvoo, Illinois. Then, responding to a call in 1840, Wilford left Nauvoo for England with the majority of the Council of the Twelve, to which he had been ordained in 1838.

On his mission in England he proselytized principally in Staffordshire, Herfordshire, and London. While preaching in Staffordshire from January through March 1840 he also took time to learn what he could about the region by touring a silk factory in New Castle and Copeland's Pottery works in Stoke.37 In addition, he observed the coal mines and iron foundries of the midlands around Birmingham.

In many ways, the most significant aspect of his missionary experience in London came from the numerous places the curious Woodruff visited and the things he learned about the world around him. For Woodruff and other nineteenth-century missionaries, proselytizing work did not consist of knocking on doors, passing out tracts, and holding cottage meetings. Rather, they made personal contacts in the streets, preached in large gatherings, or met prospective converts through introductions by friends. He and his colleagues also spent considerable time acquainting themselves with the cultural and intellectual life of the places they visited. Not incidentally, the missionaries walked a great deal, and, if Woodruff s experience is any indication, they thought and reflected while they trudged from place to place.

Time had a fundamentally different meaning to early nineteenth-century missionaries than it does to most late twentieth-century Americans. Walking long distances seemed routine, and visiting various sites and absorbing both secular and religious learning became an expected part of the missionary experience. While in London, Woodruff, who had always been an avid reader of secular as well as religious books, spent considerable time visiting and pursuing knowledge in such places as the British Museum (where he became intimately acquainted with the Keeper of Egyptian Antiquities), the College of Surgeons at Lincolns Inn Field (where one of the converts took the missionaries on a personal tour), St Paul's Cathedral (which he and Heber C. Kimball measured), other churches, the Tower of London, Buckingham Palace, the Queen's Stables, and the National Gallery of Art He spent time with Heber C. Kimball visiting sites in Woolwich where he was particularly interested in a device used to test the strength of anchor chains and cables.38

Most important, perhaps. Woodruff saw absolutely no incongruity in combining what we would see today as the separate spheres of religious and secular into a single component of his life. In Kirtland, for instance, the use of the temple for both secular education and deeply spiritual rituals and experiences symbolized the undifferentiated temporal and religious life devout Mormons lived. In a number of revelations Joseph Smith made clear the congruence of the temporal and the spiritual. Speaking for the Lord, he reported in September 1830: "verily I say unto you that all things unto me are spiritual, and not at any time have I given unto you a law which was temporal." Speaking of Adam, he said, "no temporal commandment gave I unto him, for my commandments are spiritual; they are not natural nor temporal . . ."39

Under these circumstances devoted converts like Woodruff lived in a psychically undifferentiated secular and religious world, a world we might call, for want of a better word, temporo-spiritual. No effective separation existed between religious and secular concepts. For instance, nearly 80 percent of the revelations announced by Joseph Smith contained some economic instruction.40 Thus, Woodruff and his colleagues found absolutely no incongruity in attending Latin and Greek classes in the temple on one day; lectures on the physical improvement of Kirtland on the next; and deeply moving mystical, prophetic, and charismatic experiences the following evening.

Given his educational, professional, and avocational interests, Wilford became a citizen of what Daniel Boorstin called "The Republic of Technology."41 Boorstin's analysis confined the scope of the republic to the United States. Woodruffs experiences, however, included the trans-Atlantic culture within its realm. Early literary, agricultural, and mechanical education prepared him to participate in the scientific and technological changes taking place in the Western world. Because Woodruff engaged in a nineteenth-century form of missionary labor, which included a heavy dose of cultural self-education at the same time that he worshiped and labored in the service of his God, he appreciated firsthand the technological changes spreading from Lancashire and the English midlands to the rest of the world and the ancient curiosities of the British Museum. His educational background, religious views, and curiosity gave him access to the spawning beds of change and a framework for incorporating the changes into his intellectual world.

Although he began to manifest some of these changes in his daily life in Nauvoo, where he belonged to the Nauvoo Manufacturing Society and where he and John Taylor edited and published the Times and Seasons, it was in Utah during the 1850s that he moved to the forefront in promoting education and in introducing scientific and technological change. In these activities he became both a prime mover and a model.

At first Woodruff s interests ranged over a wide area, but gradually his concerns focused on improving access to knowledge and in introducing agricultural change. Although other scientific and technological change belonged to his general world, he usually left other sorts of innovation to colleagues and friends. In this context we should not think of him as a scientist or inventor. Although he did propagate certain useful plants, he served principally as a transmitter of knowledge, innovations, and techniques that originated with others, often people living outside Utah. In addition, he facilitated the introduction of new ideas by helping to promote conditions conducive to change.

Woodruff belonged to a number of organizations through which he promoted educational, scientific, and technological change: the Board of Regents of the University of Deseret (later the University of Utah), the Universal Scientific Society, the Utah Horticultural Society the Deseret Agricultural and Manufacturing Society, the Deseret Typographical Society, the Deseret Theological Institute, and the Polysophical Society. He served as president of the USS, the UHS and the DA and MS.

Perhaps Woodruffs earliest organized effort at educational improvement in Utah came from his involvement as a member of the Board of Regents of the University of Deseret Between 1852 and 1869 the university remained largely dormant, so the board focused its attention on other educational matters that Utah leaders believed would improve conditions in the community, among them orthography.42

At the organization of the board in 1850 and at other times, including his annual message as governor in 1855, Brigham Young, like Benjamin Franklin and Theodore Roosevelt, expressed concern about the lack of phonetic consistency in English orthography. Efforts to deal with the problem seemed unsatisfactory to Young and other community leaders. In April 1853 the regents and others met to discuss spelling—or more correctly—orthographic reform. From November 1853 until February 1856, when a decision was made to prepare children's readers in the Deseret Alphabet, to 1868, when books were finally printed. Woodruff, other interested parties, and the regents worked on problems associated with the invention and introduction of a new orthography.43 The regents appointed Woodruff as chairman and Samuel W. Richards and George D. Watt as members of a committee to prepare the first reader in the Deseret Alphabet, and Woodruff chaired a committee that included Orson Pratt and Watt to prepare spelling books.44

This effort resulted in the introduction of an alternative alphabet of thirty-eight characters designed to represent each sound of the English language. The sounds were drawn almost entirely from the Pitman shorthand system, which was familiar to a number of members of the board, including Watt and Woodruff Scholars have not determined the origin of the letters chosen to represent the sounds, but the consensus seems to favor an adaptive borrowing from other alphabets, about which committee members read extensively, with Watt apparently devising the symbols actually used. Although it proved to be an "expensive failure," the Deseret Alphabet project indicated the extent to which Utah's leaders willingly borrowed from outside systems to meet a perceived need for phonetic orthography.45

Woodruff and the Board of Regents also undertook more productive projects. In the absence of a territorial school administration, which the legislature did not create until 1876, the regents governed the school system under a territorial act of 1854.46 Along with others. Woodruff and Robert L. Campbell conducted school inspections, applying standards familiar to Woodruff in his own education. Woodruff also worked on committees selecting textbooks, examining physicians who proposed to practice in Utah, and establishing high schools in the territory. During the late 1850s he observed surgical procedures performed under anesthetic to familiarize himself with current medical techniques.47

During the 1850s Woodruff and other church leaders cooperated with non-Mormons in other endeavors. For example. Woodruff, Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, Jedediah M. Grant, Daniel H. Wells, Almon W. Babbitt, and other prominent Mormons, together with non-Mormon federal office holders such as Judge George P. Stiles, John Fitch Kinney, Garland Hurt, and David H. Burr, promoted a transcontinental stage route.48 The effort eventually led to the organization of the Brigham Young Express and Carrying Company, operated principally by Hiram Kimball, which continued to function until its mail contracts were cancelled during the Utah War of 1857-58.49 Additionally, in 1855, with Brigham Young's approval. Woodruff rented his home in Salt Lake City to visiting non-Mormons associated with the expedition of Col. Edward J. Steptoe.50

Moving to raise the level of scientific, technological, and general education in the community, Woodruff and a group of associates founded voluntary organizations, which as Tocqueville observed as early as the 1830s had become a general means of promoting improvements in American society.51 Meeting in the Sixteenth Ward schoolhouse on the evening of December 19, 1854, Woodruff and his friends proposed the organization of what they first called the Philosophical Society. Brigham Young persuaded them to change the name to the Universal Scientific Society on the ground that "its name might be applicable to the universal diffusion of knowledge and science." The group formally adopted a constitution on February 3, 1855, electing Woodruff as president The USS membership eventually included eighty men and one woman (Cynthia Buel).52

In his presidential address to the society on February 17, 1855, Woodruff drew on his own temporo-spiritual background to emphasize that he and his associates had established the USS to acquaint the members as far as possible with every law, truth, and principle belonging to art, science, or any subject that might benefit God, angels, or men. Lectures and discussions, he said, could provide an exchange of views among interested parties. He outlined several possible areas of concern, ranging from the earth to the heavens, and as one illustration he provided a description of the mathematical formula used to calculate the orbit of planets. He expected that by learning the laws of nature human beings could banish the mysteries of the universe.53

In spite of these high hopes, the society appears to have functioned less than a year—until November 10, 1855. During that period Woodruff attended the regular Saturday evening meetings unless he was out of town on a church assignment Meetings consisted of lectures by the members on matters of common interest— both secular and religious— drawn from inside and outside of Utah. Beginning with the meeting of April 14, 1855, sessions often included band music Lectures included George D. Watt and Wilford Woodruff on the Deseret Alphabet; John Hyde on natural philosophy; George A. Smith on chopping wood and Saracen history; William W. Phelps on the Ten Tribes of Israel; John Lyon on poetry; Thomas Hawkins on conservation of natural resources; David Candland on public opinion, determining personal character through various methods including phrenology, and the Crimean War; Jonathan Grimshaw on music; Drs. Darwin Richardson and William France on the principles of generation,54 Gilbert Clements on the discipline of the mind; Orson Pratt on the operation of the planetary system; Almon W. Babbitt on the organization of the American government; Wilford Woodruff on home manufacture and horticulture; and William Paul and Brigham Young on the principles of architecture.55 From astronomy to zoology USS members lectured on topics that interested them and on which they had knowledge or expertise, drawing on both secular and religious sources and from reading and experience both in and outside Utah to enlighten one another. The society can best be considered an amateur organization for self-improvement Given the limited size of the intellectual community and the range of experiences, it is not surprising that it soon exhausted the expertise and interests of its members. Attendance then lagged and the society died.56

As interest in the Universal Scientific Society waned, members moved in other directions. Woodruff served as a director of the Deseret Theological Institute but was never particularly active in that orgartization.57 He also became assistant reporter for the Deseret Typographical Society but was not a frequent participant in its meetings.58 He did attend meetings of the Polysophical Society that a group of Mormon literati associated with Lorenzo and Eliza R. Snow organized the day after the initial meeting of the Universal Scientific Society. Although no Polysophical Society minutes have survived (if indeed such existed), research into the writings and journals of those associated with the society indicates that its meetings centered around the performing and literary arts rather than the physical, biological, and social sciences and technology that concerned the USS. Perhaps because of the popular appeal of the arts, the Polysophical Society lasted somewhat longer than the USS.59 It died during the Mormon Reformation of 1856 when Jedediah Grant, a counselor in the LDS First Presidency, who may have perceived poetry and literary readings as frivolous, called it "a stink in my nostrils!" Heber C. Kimball, also a counselor, concurred.60

Unable to sustain the universal scientific and technological interests anticipated in his message to the USS, Woodruffs preoccupations, paralleling those of others in the community, became both more narrow and more technologically sophisticated by late 1855. Unlike some who joined the Polysophical Society, his concerns had always been more practical, scientific, and technological than theoretical or literary. He had studied shorthand to record sermons and events in church history. His interest in education and the Deseret Alphabet had grown from a concern with improving training for youth. He enjoyed plays and musical presentations as diversions; and, although he read widely, his reading tended to focus on history, which he saw as a means of understanding the world he lived in, rather than on belles-lettres.

Following these more practical interests. Woodruff met in the Social Hall in Salt Lake City in September 1855 with a group calfing themselves the Pomological Society to organize the Horticultural Society of Utah or the Deseret Horticultural Society.61 Leaders of the society included Wilford Woodruff as president, William C. Staines as vice-president, George D. Watt as corresponding secretary, Thomas Bullock as home secretary, and Samuel W. Richards as treasurer. Woodruffs opening address as president contrasted quite sharply with the breadth of his speech to the Universal Scientific Society. Instead of taking the universe of knowledge as the scope of the organization, he emphasized the need to locate and plant trees and bushes that would bear excellent and productive fruit within the constraints of Utah's climate and soil. Using his own work as an example. Woodruff exhibited two varieties of peaches he had produced through bud grafting that met those conditions.62

At the heart of these efforts was an attempt to import and experiment with the latest in agricultural technology and genetic improvement to increase production and quality. In accomplishing this, community leaders were not limited by the expertise of their associates as they had been in the USS. Rather, given the extensive contacts outside facilitated by mail service and overland travelers, they took the world as their stage.

Woodruff moved to take advantage of this opportunity. In May 1856 he began corresponding with Sir William J. Hooker of London, chief director of Her Majesty's Royal Gardens, or Kew Gardens. Writing to open correspondence with Woodruff, Hooker proposed to obtain any "specimens, seeds, or plants of any trees, shrubs, flowers, or vegetable" in Utah. In return, he would forward any similar plants Woodruff wanted from Kew Gardens. Taking advantage of this offer. Woodruff secured some strawberry plants from Hooker.63 In July 1856 Woodruff also corresponded with Dr. Asa Fitch of New York, who was conducting research on insects and other plant pests, and sent him an assortment of insects and pests indigenous to the Salt Lake region.64

During 1856 Woodruff secured grafts of a number of fruits and information on horticultural and gardening practices from the eastern states and California, including some from his brother Thompson, an orchardist of Richland, New York.65 Thompson drew upon twenty years of horticultural experience to share his knowledge with his brother.66 In addition, John M. Bernhisel, then delegate to Congress, sent copies of pamphlets from horticultural and gardening societies in the eastern United States,67 and Woodruff subscribed to a number of agricultural publications. By June 1857 Wilford could report that through importation and grafting he had 71 different kinds of apples, together with a large variety of apricots, peaches, grapes, and currants, growing in his garden plot on temple block. 68

Where the USS had been too ambitious for the interests and expertise of the Utah community, the Deseret Horticultural Society proved far too small in scope to meet the needs of a growing technological and economic base. Thus, Utah's community leaders created the Deseret Agricultural and Manufacturing Society, which subsumed the Deseret Horticultural Society. The Utah Territorial Legislature chartered the DA and MS in January 1856.69 Like the Horticultural Society, the DA and MS drew upon the outside world for expertise, plants, animals, and seeds. When the leaders of the society said they planned to encourage native production, they did not mean that the plants, animals, and technology were to be indigenous to Utah. Rather, the society encouraged their importation, since members believed they could adapt them to local needs. The DA and MS also conducted fairs to stimulate industrial and agricultural pursuits and to exhibit numerous domestic products, the bulk of the technology for which came from outside the territory. 70

Society officers promoted the dissemination of knowledge and improved plants and animals by encouraging the establishment of branch organizations throughout the territory. Working through correspondents and the LDS church organization—especially the Relief Society— they found representatives in each county to whom they distributed seeds, plants, and information on agricultural technology gathered from across the nation and around the world. 71

At its incorporation in January 1856 DA and MS officers were elected by the territorial legislature; nevertheless, the society operated as a corporation with a self-perpetuating board of directors. LDS Presiding Bishop Edward Hunter served as president until 1862. Woodruff, a member of the board of directors from 1856 until 1861,72 became president of the society in July 1862 with directors John R. Winder, Thomas W. Ellerbeck, Elijah F. Sheets, Enoch Reese, F. A. Mitchell, and Robert L Campbell.73 In April 1877, following his call as president of the St George Temple, Woodruff resigned as president,74 and John R. Winder succeeded him.75

The DA and MS took as its task nothing less than the improvement of all aspects of agriculture and the promotion of other useful arts in Utah Territory. The society established two experimental farms in Salt Lake City, one at the Old Fort— now Pioneer Park—between Third and Fourth South and Third and Fourth West and the other at the mouth of Emigration Canyon, which they first called the Quarantine Gardens and later Deseret Gardens.76 The uses of the two gardens varied, but they had one thing in common, experiments with imported plants. At the Old Fort garden, the society conducted experiments with madder, normally used as a dye, which they hoped to perfect as an animal feed. They also planted fruit trees and several varieties of wheat In trying to find suitable productive wheat strains, they also relied on private experiments throughout the territory. Experimental strains included Siberian and blue stem wheat, the latter test planted by a correspondent in Kanab.77 The most important projects at the Deseret Gardens consisted of experiments with various types of cane for producing sweetener. For a time the society operated the farm on shares with George B. Wallace and John Gunn, who experimented with imported Imphee cane which produced excellent syrup but took too long to mature in Utah's temperate climate. They achieved more success with sorghum, or Chinese cane, the seeds for which they obtained from the United States Agricultural Bureau, predecessor of the Department of Agriculture.78 With the ultimate goal of making the seeds of improved plant varieties—what it called "pure seeds" — and the latest agricultural technology widely available, the DA and MS distributed seeds grown on these experimental plots, together with those secured from the federal government and correspondents in other states and foreign nations, to representatives and organizations throughout the territory.79

In addition, the society promoted experimentation with improved breeds of animals imported from other parts of the United States and from abroad. In 1869, for instance, the legislature appropriated $5,000 for the society to import quality sheep into the territory. Stockmen had already experimented with merino sheep in the late 1850s, and most favored an improved breed of Kentucky sheep instead. The society commissioned Abraham O. Smoot to import the sheep which were then sold to Utah ranchers to improve their stock.80 Later, the society imported the British Cotswold sheep and in 1872 undertook the improvement of cattle by introducing the Durham breed.81 Experiments with cashmere goats and fish culture proved less successful.82

To provide an exchange of information, publicize the work of improvement, and reward those who produced the best crops and products, the society held a fair. Judges awarded prizes for various products. Since the mandate of the society included more than agriculture, prizes were awarded for such things as locally manufactured machinery, minerals, literature, artistic products, and handicrafts. In general, products in each of these fields relied on information, culture, or technology that the people of Utah imported from or shared with those outside the territory. The exchange of knowledge was clearly a two-way process. The U.S. Agricultural Bureau furnished seeds and plants, for example, while the society collected agricultural statistics and forwarded them to Washington. The society also exhibited Utah products at agricultural fairs in places like Boston and Philadelphia.83

The society corresponded with those who requested information on Utah technological innovations. In that connection, by the 1860s Utah had become world famous for its irrigation achievement The British government requested information on the reclamation of salt impregnated lands, intending to use similar processes in the provinces of northwestern India. In response, drawing on correspondents throughout the territory, the society prepared a report which it forwarded to the British government.84 A similar request for information on irrigation came from Nathan C. Meeker, leader of the Greeley colony in Colorado.85

Along with other progressive farmers in Utah, Woodruff introduced some innovations, and his name often appeared as a prizewinner at the territorial fair for his peaches, his garden, or his imported Ayrshire cattle. He also imported such mechanical devices as a McCormick reaper and an evaporator used in producing syrup from cane.86

The role of the DA and MS as facilitator of change and expeditor of contacts with those outside Utah began to change in about 1872 as individuals began to develop their own contacts. In market economies, governmental or quasi-governmental bodies promote those ventures that community leaders believe to be important only as long as the private sector cannot or will not do so. By about 1872 private entrepreneurs seem to have begun to import innovations on their own. Thereafter, the minutes of the DA and MS indicate an almost exclusive interest in sponsoring the territorial fair rather than serving as prime mover in the introduction and development of new plants, animals, and technology. By then Utah's economy had changed to such a degree that business and agricultural leaders had begun undertaking such ventures without public assistance. These changes probably resulted from the increased economic specialization made possible by the transcontinental railroad and the capital generated by Utah mines.87

Throughout this period others followed the same path as Woodruff in improving Utah's economy through outside contacts. In 1858, for instance, Brigham Young sent Frederick Kesler and Horace S. Eldredge east to purchase equipment for the manufacture of nails and paper, and carding machines and looms for processing wool and cotton.88 Young also contracted with Western Union in 1861 to construct parts of the transcontinental telegraph and with Union Pacific to build sections of the transcontinental railroad.89

One might ask whether such developments did not end with the death of Brigham Young in 1877 and rise to power of John Taylor. In fact, they expanded. By 1882 ZCMI imported fully one-third of the merchandise consumed in Utah Territory.90 Taylor abandoned the boycott of gentile businesses in 1882; and in 1887 a group of Mormon and gentile businessmen including Heber J. Grant of the LDS Council of the Twelve, and Patrick H. Lannari, publisher of the Salt Lake Tribune cooperated to form the Chamber of Commerce in Salt Lake City.91

With this information it is possible to stand back and interpret the changes in Utah society during this period. Far from promoting isolation from the remainder of the nation and the world, community leaders, especially those with education and outside interests, facilitated such contacts in certain areas. They drew upon the scientific and technological information they gathered and exchanged it with others to promote what they perceived as building the kingdom and improving their territory. It was precisely in those areas in which they failed to gather sufficient technological information from outside the territory, such as iron and sugar manufacture, that their enterprises failed.

In fields where they maintained outside contacts they achieved considerable success. Along with the introduction of new medical techniques, railroading, international architectural styles, and traveling theatrical groups, they improved agriculture by introducing the reaper and new varieties of fruits, sheep, and catde. As Woodruff and others understood, given the limited agricultural expertise of the Utah community, isolation was a drawback rather than an advantage, and they used many means to overcome it.

In view of these conditions it is important to revise a commonly held view about Utah society. A recent article argued that the Americanization of Utah agriculture took place in the 1890s.92 In fact, Americanization— indeed internationalization— not only of agriculture but of other enterprises was a process and not an event Moreover, it began during the 1850s and continued throughout the territorial period as organizations like the DA and MS and progressive farmers and ranchers introduced machinery, plants, and animals from outside to improve their farms and ranches and the general level of agricultural technology and practice. In addition, it included two-way borrowing as others outside the territory drew upon Utah technological innovations in irrigation to enhance their own development.

In practice, then, while Utah citizens shunned political control from outside the territory, they welcomed intellectual, scientific, and technological contacts and the importation of scientific and technological innovations that facilitated local development and improvement Moreover, the encouragement of innovations and outside contacts resulted not from the need to compromise principles in order to promote local development but from a set of ideas that saw such contacts as a basic good because of the improvements they promised for building the kingdom in a growing community.

NOTES

Dr Alexander is professor of history and director of the Charles Redd Center for Western Studies at Brigham Young University The author expresses his appreciation for the assistance in the research for this paper of Ian Barber, Jenny Lund, Bryan Taylor, and Rick Fish, as well as secretarial and editing assistance from Kris Nelson, and the financial assistance of the College of Family, Home, and Social Science and the History Department at Brigham Young University and of Gary Bergera and George Smith of Signature Books This paper is part ofa larger study commissioned by Signature Books, which is expected to lead to a biography of Wilford Woodruff. Documents from the LDS Church Archives are used by permission.

1 This, for instance, is the general framework underpinning the latest study of the early years of Utah territorial development See Eugene E Campbell, Establishing Zions The Mormon Church in the American West, 1847-1869 (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1988), especially chaps \2 and 13 In summarizing Brigham Young's "hard-headed practicality," Campbell argues that Young was determined "to achieve economic independence," p 329.

2 In this discussion, I would differentiate between i he normal activities of everyday life for the average Latter-day Saint villager, such as subsistence farming, community social events, and church activities, and major developmental projects requiring technological innovations, such as stage lines, the telegraph, improvement of milling techniques, iron and sugar manufacture, and the railroad.

3 See, for instance, Leonard ]. Arrington, Great Basin Kingdom: A n Economic History of the Latter-day Saints, 1830-1900 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1958), pp 116-20, 236; and Davis Bitton and Linda Wilcox, " The Transformation of Utah's Agriculture, I847-I900," in Thomas G Alexander and John F. Bluth, eds.. The Twentieth Century American West: Contributions to an Understanding (Provo, Ut: Charles Redd Center for Western Studies, 1983), 62-65.

4 Thomas Carter and Peter Goss, Utah's Historic Architecture, 1847-1940 (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1988); and Peter Goss, ed., "Toward an Architectural Tradition," Utah Historical Quarterly 43 (1975): 208-327; Bitton and Wilcox, "The Transformation of Utah's Agriculture."

5 Michael S Raber, "Family Life and Rural Society in Spring City, Utah: The Basis of Order in a Changing Agrarian Landscape," in Jessie L Embry and Howard A Christv', eds. Community Development in the American West: Past and Present, Nineteenth and Twentieth Century Frontiers (Provo, Ut.: Charles Redd Center for Western Studies, 1985), pp 135-62; and Lowell C Bennion, "A Geographer's Gradual Discovery of Great Basin Kingdom" [paper presented at a symposium on Great Basin Kingdom, Utah State University', May 1988), copy in author's possession.

6 The fullest treatment of these topics in comparison with the size of the book is found in Dean L May's Utah- A People's History (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1987) See the chapters on culture in Richard D Poll, Thomas G Alexander, Eugene E Campbell, and David E Miller, eds Utah's History (Provo, Ut.: Brigham Young University Press, 1978).

7 Bitton and Wilcox, "The Transformation of Utah's Agriculture, pp 57-83: Lester Bush, "Brigham Young in Life and Death: A Medical Overview," Journal of Mormon History 5 (197 S): 79-103; Carter and Goss, Utah's Historic Architecture; and Goss, ed., "Toward an Architectural Tradition."

8 Breck England, The Life and Thought of .Orson Pratt (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1985), pp. 10, 11, 13, 15-16, 100-102, 72-73

9 Eliza R Snow, Biography and Family Record of Lorenzo Snow (Salt Lake City: Deseret News Printers, 1884), pp 4-6; Claudia L Bushman, Mormon Sisters: Women in Early Utah (Cambridge, Mass.: Emmeline Press, 1976); Vicky Burgess-Olson, ed Sister Saints (Provo, Ut: Brigham Young University Press, 1976).

10 Ralph V Chamberlin, The University of Utah-A History of Its First Hundred Years, 1850-1950, ed Harold W Bentley (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1960); Ernest L Wilkinson, ed., Brigham Young University: The First One Hundred Years, 4 vols (Provo, Ut: Brigham Young University Press, 1975-76); Richard W Sadler, Weber State College: A Centennial History (Salt Lake City: Publisher's Press, 1988); England, Orson Pratt, p 74.

11 Bitton and Wilcox, "The Transformation of Utah's Agriculture," p 64-65.

12 Leonard J Arrington, "The Deseret Agricultural and Manufacturing Society in Pioneer Utah" Utah Historical Quarterly 24 (1956): 165-70; and Maureen Ursenbach Beecher, "The Polysophical Society: A Phoenix Infrequent," Encylia 58 (1981): 145-53 A number of articles have considered various technological innovations. See Morris A. Shirts and William T. Parry, "The Demise of the Deseret Iron Company: Failure ofthe Brick Furnace Lining Technology," Utah Historical Quarterly 56 (\9%%): 23-35; Chariest Schmalz, "The Failure of Utah's First Sugar Factory," ibid., pp 36-53; and Kimberly Day, "Frederick Kesler, Utah Craftsman," ibid., pp 55-74; Robert T Divetl, Medicine and the Mormons: An Introduction to the History ofLatterday Saint Health Care (Bountiful, Ut: Horizon Publishers, 1981); Bush, "Brigham Young in Life and Death," pp 79-103; on the architectural tradition see Goss, ed., "Towaird an Architectural Traditioa."

13 Ronald W Walker, "Growing Up in Early Utah: The Wasatch Literary Association, 1874-1878," Sunstone 6 (November 1981): 44-51; and Therald Francis Todd, "The Operation of the Salt Lake Theatre, 1862-1875," (Ph.D diss. University of Oregon, 1973).

14 Journal of Discourses, 26 vols (Liverpool and London: F.D Richards, et al., 1855-86): 2:312, 3:234, 9:301-3, 11:300.

15 The best treatments of the Godbeite movement are Ronald W Wadker, "The Godbeite Protest in the Making of Modern Utah" (Ph D Dissertation, University of Utah, 1977); and idem., "The Commencement of the Godbeite Protest: Another View," Utah Historical Quarterly 42 (1974): 217-44.

16 Woodruff, Journal 4: 25, 51.

17 Woodruff Journal 4: 162-70.

18 It is not always clear in Woodruff s diary whether the Council he referred to was the Council of the Twelve or the Council of Fifty On February 21, 1851, however, he reported the "Elders [W.I.] Appleby, [Daniel H.] Wells, [James] Allen, &[F A.] Hammond was Admitted into our Council." Since these were not members of the Council of the Twelve, I assume he meant the Council of Fifty Woodruff, Journal 4: 14 See also 4: 52 On the dedication of the room in Young's office see ibid., 4: 295, December 17, 1854.

19 J Kenneth Davies, Mormon Gold: The Story of California's Mormon Argonauts (Salt Lake City: Olympus Publishing, 1984).

20 Interview with Davies who sampled the backgrounds of miners; Walker, "The Godbeite Protest," p 239; Thomas G. Alexander and James B. Allen, Mormons and Gentiles: A History of Salt Lake City (Boulder, Colorado: Pruitt Publishing Co., 1984), pp 70, 90-91.

21 Bitton and Wilcox, "The Transformation of Utah's Agriculture," p 62; Arrington, "The Deseret Agricultural and Manufacturing Society," p 167; Edward Leo Lyman, Political Deliverance: The Mormon Quest for Utah Statehood (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1985).

22 Matthias F Cowley, Wilford Woodruff: History of His Life and Labors (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1964); Francis M Gibbons, Wilford Woodruff- Wondrous Worker; Prophet of God (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1988).

23 School Society Record Book Vol 1st, .January 19, 1796", "Record Book of the First School Society from 1795 to 1855 (MS, Farmington Room, Farmington Town Library, Farmington, Connecticut), pp 1, 29, 30, 49.

24 Mabel S. Hurlburt, Farmington Town Clerks and Their Times (1645-1940) (Hartford: Finlav Brothers. 1943), p. 120; Christopher P. Bickford, Farmington in Connecticut (Canaan, New Hampshire: Phoenix Publishing, 1982), p. 214.

25 Mabel S. Hurlburt, Farmington Church and Town (Stonington, Conn.: Pequot Press, 1967), p. 46.

26 Julius Gay, Schools and Schoolmasters in Farmington in the Olden Time, Connecticut School Document Number 13 (n p., 1892), p 12; "School Visitors Records," First School Society, Regulations MS, 1805-1846, no pagination, Farmington Room, Farmington Town Library.

27 Wilford Woodruff, "Autobiography of Wilford Woodruff" (photocopy of MS furnished by Signature Books), p 16; Simeon Hart, Jr." An Account of Scholars in the Schools Taught by S Hart,"(MS, Farmington Room, Farmington Town Library), entries for various terms commencing Mav 1823, November 1823, May 1824, November 1824, February 1825, May 1825, August 1825, November 1825, February 1826, and November 1826; ending April 1827; commencing May 1827; ending September 1828; commencing September 1828; ending April 1829 During this period Wilford and Thompson attended only one quarter each Unfortunately, the currently surviving records of the academy do not extend earlier than May 1823 when Cowles was supporting Wilford's education Eunice and Philo attended regularly.

28 Catalogue o fthe Trustees, Instructers (sic), and Students of Farmington Academy, January 8, 1829 (n.p., n.d.); "Report of Committee re Society & School house, and Society meeting December 1, 1815 Read, accepted and approved" MS file, CSLRG69:25, Farmington Academy, 1815, 1849 Bickford File, Farmington Room, Farmington Town Library.

29 Catalogue of the Trustees, Instructers, and Students of Farmington Academy, February 6, 1828 (n.p., n.d Farmington Room, Farmington Town Library).

30 Woodruff, "Autobiography," pp 17-18.

31 Leonard J Arrington, ed The Presidents of the Church {Salt Lake City. Deseret Book, 1986), p 148 Joseph Smith and Brigham Young had very little formal education; John Taylor attended school to age fourteen before apprenticing as a cooper and later as a wood-turner Ibid., pp 76-77.

32 Wilford Woodruff, Journal of Wilford Woodruff, ed Scott G Kenney, 9 vols (Midvale, Ut: Signature Books, 1983-85), 1:16.

33 Milton V Backman, Jr The Heavens Resound: A History of the Latter-day Saints in Ohio, 1830-1838 (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1983), p 263.

34 Ibid., pp 264-72.

35 Ibid., pp 272-73.

36 Woodruff, Journal, 1: 111, 112, 119, 125, 141.

37 Ibid., 1: 412, 414-15.

38 Ibid., 1:511, 533-36, 544, 553, 555-67, 569-77; 2: 38, 104.

39 Doctrine and Covenants, 29: 34-35.

40 Arrington, Great Basin Kingdom, pp 5-6.

41 Daniel Boorstin, The Republic of Technology: Reflections of Our Future Community {New York Harper and Row, 1978), p 3.

42 The best article on the subject is Douglas D Alder, Paula J Goodfellow, and Ronald G Watt "Creating a New Alphabet for Zion: The Origin of the Deseret Alphabet," Utah Historical Quarterly 52 11984): 278-86 Utah Territory, Governor, "Governor's Messages, 1851-1876," p 42, bound typescripts, Utah State Archives, Salt Lake City, Utah, RGTE-I 00.19 One commentator argued "of the Deseret Alphabet was not a vehicle for isolation it was at least a radical departure from the national mainstream." Personal correspondence in my possession That is irrelevant to the question of the motivation of those who developed the Deseret Alphabet Efforts by Benjamin Franklin and Theodore Roosevelt were also outside the national mainstream, but no one to my knowledge has accused them of favoring isolation.

43 Woodruff, Journal 4: 225, 399 Although Woodruff s journal indicates that he was a member of the board throughout the period it is not at all certain that he was An annual list of regents from 1850 on is included in the minutes of the board, and Woodruff is listed only for 1857 The minutes, however, indicate that the information was drawn from notes taken by Robert L Campbell and copied much later. "Minutes of the Board of Regents of the University of Deseret, March 13,1850 to April 12, 1906," pp 6,17, microcopy of MS, Utah State Archives, RG SE-32 01.1

44 Hosea Stout, On the Mormon Frontier: The Diary of Hosea Stout, 1844-1861, ed Juanita Brooks, 2 vols (Salt Lake City: University of Utah and Utah State Historical Society, 1964), 2: 590; Journal History ofthe Church (JHC), February II, 25, 26, 1856, LDS Church Archives, Salt Lake City This information does not square entirely with Minutes, Board of Regents, pp 14-17, but the diary entries were made at the time and the minutes were prepared afterward by Robert L Campbell from notes he took on a lecture by George.

45 The term "expensive failure" is the judgment of Alder, Goodfellow, and Watt The term expensive failure seems warranted, since in addition to the volunteer time spent by the members of the various committees, the Board of Regents spent $5,576.74 to have a firm print the first and second Deseret Readers in New York and ship them to Utah and $414 to Orson Pratt for translating the readers and catechism from English orthography into the alphabet Board of Regents Minutes, pp. 34, 35, and36. On Watt" s invention of the letters see JHC, November 29, 1858.

46 Minutes, Board of Regents, p 20.

47 Utah Territory, Laws of Utah (1876), p. 247. Woodruff, Journal, 5: 308-09, 314, 435, 547, 556, 562, 6: 50-51, 113.

48 Woodruff, Journal 4: 384 and 397.

49 Arrington, Great Basin Kingdom, pp 163-168.

50 Journal of Discourses, 2: 312.

51 Alexis DeTocqueville, Democracy in American, ed Richard D Heffner( New York City: Mentor Books, 1956), p 198.

52 Universal Scientific Society, "Minutes, 1854-1855," 19, MS 5942, LDS Church Archives.

53 Ibid., loose pages, February 17, 1855.

54 This was probably a discussion of genetics.

55 Universal Scientific Society Minutes, passim.

56 The meeting of November 10, 1855 the last recorded — indicated that few attended and those in attendance adjourned without holding a lecture.

57 JHC, April 7, 1855.

58 Woodruff, Journal 4: 403, 407; JHC, February 22, 1856.

59 The best treatment of the Polysophical Society is Beecher, "The Polysophical Society," pp. 146-53; Woodruff, Journal 4:333, 398, 403, 407.

60 Beecher, "The Polysophical Society," p. 145.

61 Woodruff used the first term in his journal The latter term comes from Bitton and Wilcox, "The Transformation of Utah's Agriculture, 1847-1900," p. 65.

62 JHC, September 13, 1855; Woodruff Journal 4: 337 Board members included Jesse C.'title, Edward Hunter, Charles H Oliphant, and Lorenzo D Young.

63 Wilford Woodruff to George A Smith, May 28, 1856, Wilford Woodruff unprocessed correspondence. Box 7, folder 6, LDS Church Archives; Woodruff, Journal 4: 446, 5: 345. WoodrufftoAsaFitch,July31, 1856, Woodruff unprocessed correspondence, Box7, folder6 LDS Church Archives; JHC, July 31, 1856; Woodruff, Journal 4: 446.

64 Woodruff to Thompson Woodruff, Salt Lake City to Holmesville, Oswego County, New York, July 31, 1856, Woodruff unprocessed correspondence. Box 7, folder 6, LDS Church Archives.

65 Thompson Woodruff to Wilford Woodruff, November 23, 1856, Wilford Woodruff unprocessed correspondence Box 1, folder 2, LDS Church Archives.

66 Woodruff, Journal 4:418.

67 Woodruff to Thompson Woodruff, June , 1857, Wilford Woodruff unprocessed correspondence Box 7, folder 7, LDS Church Archives; JHC, July 4, 1857.

68 Bitton and Wilcox, "Transformation of Utah's Agriculture," p. 65; Utah Territory, Compiled Laws, 1876, p. 184..

69 See the articles of incorporation, January 17, 1856, in Deseret Agricultural and Manufacturing Society, Minutebook, 1863-1874, p 1, typescript, LDS Church Archives.

70 DA and MS Minutes, September 15, 26, 1863, pp 9, 15; April 3, 1864, p 17; June 18, 1864, p 26; March 13, 1865, p 38; November 1866, p 45a; p 48.

71 Woodruff, Journal 5:554.

72 Ibid., 6: 67.

73 Ibid., 7: 345; DA and MS Minutes, p p 48, 82.

74 Arrington, "DA and MS Society," p. 167.

75 DA and MS Minutes, pp. 4, 10, 13.

76 Ibid., pp 12, 14, 25, 26.

77 Ibid., pp 13, 15, 26, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 43, 46.

78 See, for instance, ibid., pp 5, 13, 17, 45.

80 Ibid., p. 50.

81 Ibid., pp 66, 71.

82 Ibid., pp 72 and 73.

83 Ibid., pp 8, 33, 40, 45a, 160, 161.

84 Ibid., pp 66-69, 74-75, 80, 81.

85 Ibid., p 171.

86 JHC, October 12, 1861; Woodruff, Journal 4:430, 432, 5:106, 594.

87 William Jennings, a leading entrepreneur, won prizes at the fair for his imported animals.

88 Day, "Frederick Kesler," p 63.

89 Arrington, Great Basin Kingdom, pp 199-200, 261.

90 Alexander and Allen, Mormons and Gentiles, p 91.

91 Arrington, Great Basin Kingdom, p 384; Alexander and Allen, Mormons and Gentiles, p 105.

92 Charles S Peterson, "The 'Americanization' of Utah's Agriculture," Utah Historical Quarterly 42 (1974): 109-25.