James T. Monk: The Snow King of the Wasatch

James T. Monk: The Snow King of the Wasatch

BY CHARLES L. KELLER

SOME PEOPLE ARE LIKE THE CLOUDS that form over the Wasatch Mountains, appearing out of nowhere, then drifting across only to disappear on the other side, leaving no indication of where they might have gone One such person was James T Monk, a native of Kentucky, who in 1875 surfaced as a prospector and miner in the Big Cottonwood Mining District. This slightly built man—at 5' 6H" and 120 pounds—became a prominent personality in the district, and later his brash independence won him even wider notoriety; for a short time his name was seen almost daily in Salt Lake City newspapers. He then drifted out of sight and vanished, leaving behind little more than a few legends.

When Monk's name first appeared, he was just another hopeful prospector. In January 1875 he recorded a claim, the Zodiac Lode, on the south side of Big Cottonwood Creek, just down-canyon from the town of Argenta.1 The books of the Big Cottonwood Mining District were kept at Argenta, making that town an important focal point, perhaps the most important place in the district. Monk remained in Argenta, filing four more claims in the immediate area.

In July 1879, Monk rose above his relative anonymity when Richard Maxfield, newly elected recorder of the Big Cottonwood Mining District, appointed him as a deputy recorder. Maxfield may have had a problem with penmanship—literacy never was a strong point among miners—for the books show no entries written by his hand; all entries carry his name as recorder, but were written by his deputy.

And Monk was a gifted penman. His script was possessed of sweeping loops and curves and much underlining, often in several colors. Some claim names were announced in great and ornamented block letters, heavily underlined every time they were repeated In fact, Monk wrote in many styles and characters. Sometimes his script was slanted heavily to the right, other times to the left, and sometimes it slanted not at all. Most of it was highly legible, nearly as good as if it had been typed, although sometimes his entries were difficult to read. Often he used several styles in a single entry. It is likely that the styles changed when he moved his pen from one hand to the other, for Monk was ambidextrous and could write equally well with either hand.2

Certainly the flamboyance and idiosyncracy of these recorder's entries suggest much about James T Monk's personality. These suggestions are reinforced by the fact that in November 1879 he represented himself to a Salt Lake Tribune reporter as the recorder of the mining district when, in fact, he was still only the deputy.3 However, that was soon to change, for in the next July's election, Monk scored an easy 125-16 victory over Thomas Braley and became recorder in his own right, establishing a reign that would last over sixteen years.

The Big Cottonwood Mining District became his district and Argenta became his town—literally. Argenta had been a significant, albeit small, community in previous years, but by 1880 it was well into its decline; in fact, in March 1880 Monk was reported to be the town's only inhabitant.4 He worked his claims around Argenta, developing his early claims through the old Dolly Varden tunnel, which he renamed the Monk Tunnel. He also expanded his holdings by recording new claims and relocating old ones, until he held much of the south slope of Big Cottonwood Canyon above Argenta and some area on the north slope. In July 1886 he recorded an indenture in which he sold to his brother, John H. Monk of New York City, the Universal Group, which included the Monk Tunnel and twenty-four claims encompassing almost 496 acres of ground, for $1,000.5

While he continued to work the claims, Monk also expanded his horizons. In 1886 he became the local agent for the Reed and Goodspeed Mining Company, which was operating the old Reed and Benson Mine in the south fork of Big Cottonwood Canyon. As mining recorder, Monk had in his possession all the mining records from years past The recorder's book for the old Argenta mining district, which had existed for a short time before being absorbed into the Big Cottonwood district, still had many blank pages, so Monk appropriated that book and used pages 64 to 77for his accounts with the Reed and Goodspeed Mining Company.6 In late 1887 he also became a contractor for the company. The Reed and Goodspeed tunnel was then at 2,350 feet, and Monk took a contract to drive it another 200 feet. He promised "to put an end to the loafing and make it a warm winter for the boys."7 The following July he filed an assessment notice for the Reed and Goodspeed Mining company, claiming that $5,170.09 was spent for work done on the Reed and Benson, Ophir, and Excelsior claims, and on the Reed and Goodspeed tunnel. He also filed three more claims as agent for the Reed and Goodspeed Mining Company and five more for himself and H. C. Goodspeed, all in the South Fork.

In 1891 and 1892 he was filing claims in the upper part of Big Cottonwood Canyon but these as administrator of the estate of an old friend, Theophilus Hofer. Hofer was an old-time prospector who had filed many claims in the past and hence had frequent contact with the recorder A Swiss immigrant who was quiet, somewhat eccentric, and well-read, Hofer was frequently called "the philosopher." 8 On September 21, 1887, local miners and the residents of nearby Park City were stunned by the news of Hofer's death. He had been found in his cabin on the Big Cottonwood side of Scott Hill, having died several days earlier as the result of a fracture of the skull. By now, James T. Monk had become Justice of the Peace for the Argenta district—Big Cottonwood Canyon—and so was responsible for holding an inquest There was much speculation about Hofer's mysterious fracture. Many thought he had been murdered; others thought he fell against a rock and returned to his cabin to die. Unfortunately, Monk's inquest shed no further light upon the mystery, as his three-man jury came up with the "quaint" and "somewhat ambiguous" verdict that the deceased "came to his death by a fracture of his skull from some unknown cause."9 Although a rumor circulated that Monk was swearing out a warrant for the arrest of three men responsible for Hofer's murder, nothing further came of the investigation.

As it turned out, Hofer had designated Monk as administrator of his estate. Monk filed a $1,000 bond and took over his duties, which included custody of Hofer's mining claims. Monk probably found it too much effort to do the assessment work on all the claims, so he simply relocated them at the beginning of the year. This was a common practice when former claimants failed to fulfill their assessment obligations, thereby effectively abandoning the claim The person filing are location notice then became the new owner. This is what Monk did on January 1, 1891,relocating and renaming seventeen of Hofer's claims as administrator of the estate. It was an action that he repeated in 1892, but by 1893 his obligation to his late friend was apparently forgotten.

In the early 1890s two new canyon resources were becoming increasingly valuable: water power and home sites. Recognizing the trend, Monk got into the act. On March 31, 1891,he filed a notice of the "Home Sweet Home" town site at Mill G Flat at the mouth of South Fork. His new town site was more than one mile square in size and ran up the canyon to the mouth of Days Fork. He then filed the Home Sweet Home and Defiance Westerly Water and Power Claim. This claim encompassed most of the water in the main canyon above the Defiance Westerly, one of Monk's own mining claims near Argenta. In filing the water claim, Monk specifically included the right-of-way and the right to construct means of transmitting electrical or water power. This was a remarkably forward-looking step, as the use of water power to generate electricity was hardly more than a concept in Utah at that time Farther down the canyon, Robert M Jones was just taking preliminary steps toward the construction of the Stairs Power Station Yet here was James T Monk, keeper of the mining records in Big Cottonwood Canyon, taking action to tie up tremendous water and power resources in the upper canyon. But he was premature; it would be several more years before hydroelectric generating plants would appear in the South Fork, and then only small ones for the exclusive use of the mining companies that installed them Unfortunately, while the vision behind Monk's claims was impressive, the claims were allowed to lapse and amounted to nothing.

During all this time, James T. Monk hung on to his position as mining recorder. After his initial victory, annual elections for the recorder took place, but only for a few years did anyone challenge him In 1887 Monk sent a letter to the Salt Lake Tribune telling of the election results and throwing in a good word for himself: 'Jimmy lost control of the boys at 3o' clock in the afternoon and then black eyes and cut heads was the order of the day. The boys like grit, and Jimmy has got plenty of it." The Tribune editor added a sarcastic comment, 'We had no idea there were so many legal voters in Big Cottonwood, and are delighted at the showing made; we trust they may all show up on election day."10

If any of those "legal voters" did show up at the general election, they would have seen 'Jimmy" there too, as the county usually appointed him as election judge. But it was likely that only a small proportion of the 248 "voters" in the recorder election would have been there. More than ten years later an allegation was published in the Salt Lake Herald that suggested Monk had a way of perpetuating himself in office. He would post notices or file claims on his own ground, listing many people on the claim. Those whose names appeared on a filed claim were recognized as miners in the district and therefore were eligible to vote in the recorder election. But the names Monk put on his claims included wives and children of miners as well as miscellaneous acquaintances, and some of the names may well have been fictitious. The Herald charged that at election time, if any of these people were not willing to vote for Monk, he would see that they were disqualified because they were not valid miners.11 This was a serious charge, but a look at the number of the votes cast at the elections lends some credence to it. Also, on three claims filed in April and May of 1883 there were a total of 103 different names. Monk put 43 names on Lord Nelson Safety Valve Lode notice, 27 on Defiance Easterly, and 35 on the Defiance Westerly. Only his name appeared on all three. No other name was repeated, and only 27 of the individuals had posted other claims in the district Perhaps Monk was building his own little empire, making himself king of his own little mountain. If so, it worked. The Big Cottonwood Mining District was his—for a little while.

*Year Monk Opposition

1880 125 Thomas Braley, 16

1881 91 Luke McGlue, 4

1882 45 R.C. Whitney, 17

1883 Reelected, no counts

1884 137 Unopposed, 0

1885 137 Unopposed

1886 152 Unopposed

1887 248 Unopposed

1888 129 Unopposed

1889 221 Unopposed

1890 340 Unopposed

1891 234 Unopposed

1892 243 Unopposed

1893 223 Unopposed

1894 226 Unopposed

1895 112 Unopposed

1896 136 Unopposed

*Mining Recorder Election Results. Source: Big Cottonwood Mining District books M, D, E, E

In 1896 Utah became a state, an event of eventual importance to the audacious James T. Monk. In a sweeping revision of the old Territorial Statutes, the new legislature made some significant changes to the mining laws. Section 8, Chapter XXXVI, of the 1897 Laws of Utah gave to the county recorders the responsibility for recording mining claims and gave the mining district recorders thirty days after the law took effect to turn their records over to the county recorder. Any mining recorder failing to do so would be guilty of a misdemeanor. 12 The law was passed, over the governor's veto, on Friday the 13th of March 1897, and took effect on May 10 This was not a happy turn of events for Monk or for the mining community at large. Many miners objected to the fact that they would have to travel to the office of the county recorder, often a considerable distance from the mining district, to file claims or gain access to the books. They declared that the right to maintain their own books was given them by federal statutes and that the state could not take it away from them There was much talk of asking the Supreme Court to rule on the constitutionality of the new law, and until that was accomplished, it was not likely that the books would be surrendered.

Meanwhile, other events were taking place in Big Cottonwood Canyon Word came into the city in the form of a note dated "Argenta, Utah, Feb. 6, 1897, at 6:05 am." It wasfrom Monk, who wrote, "Hell is popping up here. Been snowing since January 28th , and this morning at the above hour the biggest snowslide that was ever seen in Big Cottonwood Mining District came down like a flash of lightning against the Recorder's office and over the mouth of his tunnel, carrying everything before it." The avalanche came down what is today known as the Argenta slide path, which originates in the upper reaches of what was known as Glacial Basin, on the northwest side of Kessler Peak.13 It crashed into the canyon bottom and turned toward Argenta, smashing and crushing everything there except the recorder's office. The next day, at dawn's first light, Monk emerged from his recorder's office/home and took a look at Argenta flat but hardly recognized it. There had been a splendid growth of timber on the mountain sides, he wrote, but the avalanche broke it off and brought it down to the creek. The slide completely plugged the stream, backing water up a long distance, and so restricted the flow that the Stairs Power Station farther down the canyon had to shut down, as there was not enough water to drive the generators.

This was not the first time that Monk and Argenta had been assaulted by snowslides; during the night of Friday the 13th of February 1885, after a week of heavy snowfall, an avalanche crashed down over the Monk Tunnel then struck the recorder's office, knocking down all the pots, pans, dishes, and anything else moveable. He later wrote, "It made me think when it struck the house that Gilmore's Band was playing inside." Monk then had to dig through fifteen feet of snow to reach a miner who had been working the night shift in the tunnel When he finally broke through, he found the miner sitting in the tunnel smoking his pipe—but the air was getting bad, as he had been in there for nine hours.14 Incidentally, the man was Dick Williams, one of those few valid miners whose names appeared on the three claims Monk filed in 1883.

The 1885 slide must have been minor compared to the big one in 1897; Monk was obviously excited when he wrote his note to the Tribune. But he still tried to make light of the situation. He closed his note with a postscript: "Everything is knocked hell west and crooked, but the Snow King of the Wasatch is all right." 15 And with that little comment, he gained himself a measure of notoriety, for the news media seized it with relish, and he became "The Snow King of the Wasatch" in the newsworthy events that followed.

On May 10, 1897, the state's new mining law went into effect, and the miners had to put up or shut up, as the saying goes. Their threats to defy the law appeared to have been little more than talk, for while the thirty-day period counted down, the records of mining districts began to dribble in, first from Little Cottonwood, followed by Hot Springs, West Mountain, and, at the last minute, Draper district. Only the Big Cottonwood district defied the law. James T. Monk stood alone.

It did not take long for the authorities to act. Salt Lake County Recorder J. C. Jensen swore out a complaint, and on June 13,only the third day after the deadline, Deputy Sheriff Andrew Burt went up Big Cottonwood Canyon, arrested Monk, and brought him into town for arraignment before Justice of the Peace McMaster. Either Monk or his supporters posted a $500 bond, and he was released pending a hearing, which was held four days later. There he was found guilty and fined $50 plus $17.50 for costs, but since it was the intention of the defense to make this a test case, a notice of appeal was given. In his testimony at the arraignment and hearing, Monk denied he had the books, saying that he had left them in the office and had suggested that some of the "boys" should see that they disappear, and disappear they did. He denied knowing where they were.16 County officials were not amused. The county attorney, thinking he could prosecute Monk separately for each day that he withheld the books, brought a second charge against him, again for failing to deliver the books, but in court Monk's attorneys claimed that his former conviction of the same offense was a bar to the present trial.Judge Margetts agreed and dismissed the complaint.17

About this time, some mine owners were expressing apprehension as to the missing records, and it appeared that not all miners in the district were solidly behind the ex-recorder. Both Captain Goodspeed of the Reed and Goodspeed Mining Company and William F. James, superintendent of the Maxfield Mining Company, expressed concern about the missing records; James said that he had heard rumors of "doctored" records but declined to express an opinion on the subject. As for the effort to test the constitutionality of the new law, L.R. Rhodes, Monk's attorney, said that a fund to finance the test had been raised through contributions from nearly all of the district mining recorders in the state.18 The sides were being drawn for a battle that had barely begun.

On July 16 County Recorder Jensen fired the next shot when he filed for a writ of mandate in the Third District Court requiring Monk to show cause why he should not deliver the records as required by law. On the 26th Judge Cherry of the district court, after examining a number of witnesses, granted the writ and gave Monk until the 31st to produce the records.19 When the end of the month passed without the appearance of the books, Judge Cherry found Monk guilty of contempt and committed him to the county jail where he was given a cell just off the inner corridor on Monday afternoon, August 2 This was pretty much what Monk and his supporters wanted, for now his attorneys could apply for a writ of habeas corpus and thereby bring the matter before higher courts on the question of the constitutionality of the law.20

Meanwhile, to make his stay in jail more pleasant Monk's attorneys arranged for the Salt Lake Tribune to be delivered to him for his daily reading pleasure. Unfortunately, Monk did not long enjoy his newspaper. The following Sunday he was told he had to attend church services with the rest of the prisoners, this being one of the rules of the county jail He had not attended religious services since he was thirteen years of age and, he said, he was too old to start now. For this indiscretion, his newspaper privileges were revoked. When his attorney visited him the following week and learned of the state of affairs, he wrote a letter of protest to the sheriff, Thomas P. Lewis. The sheriff sent the letter to the county attorney, who gave the opinion that the sheriff had the right to set reasonable rules and enforce them The following Sunday Monk again refused to attend church, so Lewis placed the defiant prisoner into solitary confinement.

This fact did not become known outside the jail until the following Wednesday when Monk's friend, C.J.O Irwin, tried to visit him Irwin had tried to see Monk the previous Thursday but was told that Wednesday was the only day he could visit a prisoner. When Irwin appeared on the proper day, he was again denied a visitation, this time because the prisoner was in the "hole," or the "sweat-box," as the dungeon was known Irwin immediately contacted Monk's attorneys and wrote a letter to the editor of the Tribune, who published it the following morning.

"Is It Russia?" the headline read "Will the proper authorities see whether it is true or not, and if it is see that the outrage is stopped?"21 With this bombshell thrown before the public at large, the authorities addressed the matter immediately; that very morning the county commission held a hearing with the sheriff in attendance. While the commissioners were reluctant to censure the sheriff's actions, they did pass a resolution recommending that the sheriff modify his rule to make church attendance optional for the inmates.

When the sheriff was interviewed that evening, he expressed regret that he had found it necessary to discipline Monk and added, "The old man 22 is quiet and inoffensive in spite of his stubbornness. ..." The sheriff indicated just how stubborn Monk could be by saying that confinement in the "dark cell" had always been an effective punishment; only one man had stayed there as long as four days before giving up to jail house discipline But Monk had now been in the cell for five days and was as determined as ever. The sheriff also defended his decision to withhold the prisoner's newspapers. The papers would not be of any use to Monk anyway, the sheriff said, for the cell was in the basement, and was in complete darkness. But the pressures on the sheriff demanded action Reluctant to grant prisoners any freedom of choice, he took a bold step and abolished religious services in the jail. As the same time, he released Monk from the "dark cell" and returned him to his former quarters.

The matter was not yet closed; the next morning the Salt Lake Tribune published along editorial, concluding that had the matter not been called to public attention, the prisoner might have been tortured indefinitely. It then suggested that "sheriff Lewis should resign." On another front, the Free Lance Society took an interest in the case and adopted a resolution denouncing compulsory attendance of prisoners at religious services in jails of Utah.23

About two weeks later, Saturday, September 11, Monk filed a suit against Sheriff Lewis and the six men who were sureties for the bond posted by Lewis when he took office. The suit complained that the sheriff, without just cause, had placed Monk in a dungeon for five days with nothing to eat or drink except bread and water and with only a dirty, wet blanket on which to rest. As restitution Monk demanded $25,000.24 This suit, however, did not come before the court for several months, and by that time it had been obscured by later events.

On the same day that the suit against Sheriff Lewis was filed, Monk's attorney filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in district court, seeking Monk's release on the premise that the law under which he had been convicted was unconstitutional. When Judge Cherry handed down his decision that the law was constitutional, an appeal was filed with the state supreme court. On October 4, that august body upheld the opinion of the lower court, saying that Monk had to produce the records or remain in jail. 22

Having carried the proceedings to this disappointing conclusion, Monk and his attorney saw no further reason to withhold the books of the mining district.25 Arrangements were made with the county attorney, and on October 6, Monk, his attorney, and some others went up Big Cottonwood Canyon to Argenta The group took a look at one of the mine workings nearby, and when they returned Monk was waiting for them with several boxes of records. The group returned to the city, where the prisoner was returned to jail. The next day the records were turned over to the county recorder. On October 8, Monk appeared before Judge Cherry and was released from custody. He still had one or more charges against him, but it was the opinion of his attorneys that, now that the records were delivered, the charges would be dropped.26 After sixty-eight days of confinement, the Snow King of the Wasatch was again free.

Monk returned to Argenta, where he undertook to compose a long letter to the Tribune outlining the circumstances of his arrest and confinement and reaffirming his belief in the unconstitutionality of the new law. He asked for those in sympathy with his cause to donate to a fund to support his taking the case to the Supreme Court of the United States.27 The newspaper for the Tintic Mining District, the Tintic Miner, applauded his actions and noted that Monk's spirit had not been broken by his confinement or by the ill treatment he had suffered injail.28

Monk's respite from legal entanglements did not last long. On November 11, on his return from one of his frequent trips into town, he found that the Monk Tunnel had been taken over by others; the lock on the door to the tunnel had been removed and replaced with another When a man in Monk's employ went to work on the tunnel, he was driven away at gunpoint Monk returned to Salt Lake City to institute legal proceedings to regain possession of his tunnel It was, after all, the focal point of his life. He had held it for over seventeen years and worked on it until it now was some 1,200 feet in length. It was his, he claimed, because of a lien he had put on it for work he had done and also because he had relocated the claim. But the new possessors, including William C. Hall, Franklin Webb, Joseph Davis, George A. Lowe, and three others, said that they had paid for some of 25

the work Monk claimed to have done and that they held a patent on the Dolly Varden, the same claim.29 And indeed they did, or at least three of them did, for Mineral Certificate No 227 had been issued to Joseph Davis, William C. Hall, and George A. Lowe on February 20, 1878.

An interesting coincidence is that Hall, his wife, and his daughter were three of the twenty-seven people whose names Monk had attached to the Defiance Easterly claim back in May 1883. Hall, an attorney who specialized in mining law, had come to Utah in 1872 from Kentucky, which was also Monk's native state. Perhaps their common background, combined with their interest in mining, had brought the two men together in the early 1880s It is not likely that Hall would intend to defraud any man of a mining property, for he was an outstanding member of society, a man who had served several terms in the territorial legislature and had been secretary of state for Utah Territory during the Cleveland administration Later, he served for four years as a judge in the Third District Court. He was known as a gentle, big-hearted and generous man who was respected by all who knew him.30

But Monk, feeling that he had been wronged, filed suit in the Third District Court.31 However, as with his earlier suit against Sheriff Lewis, court proceedings moved at their own ponderous pace, and by the time the case was called it had been overshadowed by other events. Nothing ever came of the suit, but over the years that followed, Hall and his associates filed and held the Argenta and Argenta Numbers 1 through 18 claims on the south side of Big Cottonwood Canyon, encompassing most of the area formerly held by the Snow King of the Wasatch.

On December 9, 1897, Monk's appeal from his conviction finally came up in the district court; the original verdict was upheld. On December 20Judge Norell sentenced Monk to pay the original $50 fine plus the costs in both the justice and district courts, for a total of $138.95. But the show was not yet over. During the trial the county attorney said that he had not called attention to Monk's denials that he knew where the records were, because he intended to prosecute Monk for perjury. And so he did. Immediately after the sentence was pronounced, Monk was arraigned in Judge McMaster's court on two counts of perjury Bond was fixed at $500 on each count; since Monk could not raise that amount, he was sent to the county jail.32

By the time the case came up for preliminary hearing, there had been time for the county recorder to examine the books of the Big Cottonwood Mining District. Perhaps the innuendos about irregularities in the records were behind this action; whatever the reason, questions were raised about several items, some serious enough for the charge against the Snow King to be changed to perjury and forgery. Based upon the testimony, Monk was bound over to await the action of the district court, but the bond was reduced to $250 on each count. By this time, however, Monk's financial resources were nonexistent. In an affidavit he filed in the Third District Court in mid January he said, "I, James T Monk, do solemnly swear that owing to my poverty I am unable to bear the expense of the above entitled proceeding ."33 Unable to raise the amount for the bonds, Monk returned to county jail.34

The trial began on March 9, 1898.The Snow King of the Wasatch was said to look somewhat paler than usual due to his long stay in the county jail. He was first tried on the perjury counts. The proceedings lasted three days; after four hours of deliberation, the jury returned a verdict of guilty on March 12.35 The penalty for perjury was one to ten years in the penitentiary, but the jury recommended the mercy of the court.

Immediately the trial for the second charge of forgery began. This revolved about the location notice of the Safety Valve claim, one of the claims mentioned earlier that had a large number of names as locators. In fact, this one had forty-three names. The notice did not describe a physical location, making it what was known as a floating claim. And it had a curious format in that following the names of all the alleged locators there was a cryptic comment, "Adjoins D Wly W.SL James T Monk 1500 feet."36 This comment was the basis of the forgery charge, a charge that stood knee-deep in speculation and innuendo and was cloaked in a long-festering antagonism between Monk and William F. James, the superintendent of the Maxfield Mining Company.

Monk's Defiance Easterly and Defiance Westerly claims bracketed the Dolly Varden on the east and the west. Just a short distance down the canyon, Mill A Gulch came down from the north. It was up this gulch that the original Maxfield claim and the Maxfield mine were located As the mine gained considerable depth, the owners decided to drive a tunnel from a lower elevation to drain the mine and facilitate the working of it. To this end, on july 27, 1886, W. F. James located the SeaView claim, which took in the width of the canyon bottom at the mouth of Mill A Gulch and extended down-canyon from there It was on this claim that the portal of the Maxfield Tunnel was located and where the company erected a power house and other supporting structures

The prosecutor charged that on October 26, 1896, Monk, with intent to defraud the Maxfield company, had added to the end of his "floating" Safety Valve notice the comment "Adjoins D Wly W.SL James T Monk 1500 feet" and had changed the title to "Lord Nelson Safety Valve." The comment allegedly meant, "Adjoins Defiance Westerly west sideline," which would place Monk's Safety Valve Claim to the west of the Defiance Westerly claim and therefore overlapping the Sea View claim. Since the Safety Valve claim was dated April 20, 1883, and the SeaView July 28, 1886, the former would probably have had seniority in the view of a court. The prosecutor further accused Monk of adding 'James T Monk 1500 feet" in order to establish his ownership of the entire claim, the other forty-two names on the claim notice notwithstanding.

There were a few other matters that were not stated in the newspaper accounts of the trial and that may or may not have been brought out in court. Monk applied for a patent on his Defiance Westerly and Safety Valve claims at about the same time, or just before W F James applied for his SeaView patent A surveyor acting for the U.S. Surveyor General's office made the field survey for the Defiance Westerly on October 26, 1896, the very day Monk was alleged to have made the changes to the Safety Valve claim notice.37 Between December 14 and 17, 1896, the field survey for the Safety Valve claim was made, keeping the original name even though it was alleged to have been changed by this time.38 Between December 23 and 25 the field survey for the Sea View claim was made.39 The official plats for the Defiance Westerly and Safety Valve were signed off by the Surveyor General of Utah on September 30, 1897, and for the Sea View on October 13, 1897.

Even though patents had not yet been issued for any of the three claims, the earlier date for Monk's application gave him reason to believe that the land claimed in the Safety Valve survey would ultimately be his. Indeed, on January 15, 1898, the case 'James T Monk vs Maxfield Mining Company" was filed in the Third District Court In it Monk stated that since 1883 he had owned two claims known as the Defiance Westerly (17.383 acres) and Safety Valve (17.07 acres) Lodes. But, he complained, the Maxfield Mining Company's Sea View Lode had been surveyed to overlap the Defiance Westerly. Maxfield Mining Company had applied for a patent, but Monk wanted to be adjudged rightful owner. 40 Monk was in jail in January 1898, but the suit had been initiated some time before the date it was filed in Third District Court, probably shortly after the Surveyor General of Utah had signed the plats of the claims the previous fall

At Monk's forgery trial, many witnesses testified both for and against the defendant. Some handwriting experts testified that the comment had been added to the claim notice sometime after the original writing of the claim, while other experts testified to the contrary. However, the fact that the Defiance Westerly claim was not filed and therefore did not even exist until more than a month after the Lord Nelson Safety Valve claim seemed to be the strongest argument that the "Adjoins D Wly" comment was not part of the original record. At 4:30 P.M on March 17 the case was given to the jury, which took only half an hour to find Monk guilty The penalty for forgery was one to twenty years in the penitentiary, but again the jury recommended the mercy of the court. The Snow King of the Wasatch was returned to the county jail to await sentencing.41

It may seem strange that the jury in the perjury trial took four hours to return the guilty verdict, when all evidence, including the court transcripts, pointed to Monk's guilt, but in the forgery trial, where the evidence was strong but not overwhelming, the verdict was returned in only half an hour. Apparently Monk had a friend on the first jury, for in its first vote the jury stood 7 to 1 for a guilty verdict. Despite four hours of deliberation, the final vote was the same. In the case of the forgery trial, only two ballots were taken, the first being 7 to 3 for conviction, the second being unanimous.42

During his first sojourn in the county jail Monk had seemed to enjoy taunting the county officials; he seemed to hold all the advantages, and public opinion was with him. He was certain that when the mining law was declared unconstitutional, or if its constitutionality were confirmed and he gave up the mining records, all charges would be dismissed He would then go back to Argenta, free to roam the Wasatch mining territory as he had before. But during this second period in the county jail, matters were quite the opposite; this time the county officials held the upper hand, and the situation appeared increasingly dark. Still, when his friend C.J.O. Irwin visited him in jail the day before his sentencing, Monk remained defiant When Irwin advised him to conform to the prison rules, Monk replied, "But I'm not going to the pen. I'm an innocent man." When Irwin repeated his warning Monk said, "I'll not go to church. You can depend on that. I'll seen them in h-1 first."43

On Saturday, March 26, 1898,Monk went before Judge Norrel for sentencing The prisoner was stolid and indifferent, and when asked if he had anything to say, he replied in the negative .Judge Norrell then sentenced him to two years in the penitentiary for each charge, but the two sentences were ordered to run concurrently. When Monk was taken to the penitentiary the county jailer said that he was rather sorry to lose his prisoner In spite of the trouble Monk had caused by refusing to attend the religious services, the jailer said, "He was one of the best prisoners I ever had."44

At the penitentiary Monk was given a striped suit and prison number 1022.When his admission record was being filled out and he was asked what his religion was, he replied: "Free Thinker."45 The prison walls placed Monk out of sight but not quite out of mind. There was still some curiosity about what would happen when Sunday rolled around and church services were held. But in his last chance for notoriety, Monk failed the press. He was reported to have asked one of the guards if he was required to go to church The guard replied, "Oh yes, we all go to church here." The Snow King said no more but promptly fell in line when the church bell rang.46

What goes on behind prison walls is generally not newsworthy, nor is the release of a prisoner after his term is served. As a result, nothing more was heard about James T. Monk, the Snow King of the Wasatch. The patents on his claims were never granted, but the Maxfield Mining Company received its patent for the Sea View on June 3, 1899.47 To this day, however the Safety Valve survey, No. 3322, appears, overlapping the SeaView claim, on the mineral survey maps for the Big Cottonwood district. And in later years, miners in the Wasatch were still swapping stories about the legendary James Monk. While the stories varied, they all agreed that, like the clouds drifting off the lee side of the Wasatch Mountains, Monk disappeared and was neither seen nor heard of again.

NOTES

Charles Keller is a writer-historian living in Salt Lake and currently working on a book on the human history of the Wasatch Mountains

1 Zodiac Lode, January 18, 1875, Big Cottonwood Mining District, Book C, p. 110, Salt Lake County Recorder Archives Argenta was a mining camp located eight miles up Big Cottonwood Canyon on the flatsjust above Mill A Gulch.

2 Salt Lake Herald, March 13, 1898.

3 Salt Lake Tribune, November 12, 1879.

4 Salt Lake Tribune, March 21, 1880.

5 Indenture, July 1, 1886, Big Cottonwood Mining District Book D, p. 539.

6 Argenta Mining District recorder's book, Salt Lake County Recorder Archives.

7 Salt Lake Tribune, November 4, 1887.

8 Park Record, September 24, 1887.

9 Salt Lake Tribune, September 25, 1887.

10 Salt Lake Tribune, July 20, 1887.

11 Salt Lake Herald, March 15, 1898.

12 Salt Lake Tribune, March 11,1897.

13 Salt Lake Tribune, February 7, 1897 It was an avalanche on this same slide path that cleared a wide swath of trees during the winter of 1995-96.

14 Salt Lake Tribune, February 20, 1885.

15 Salt Lake Tribune, February 7, 1897.

16 Salt Lake Tribune, June 14, 18, 1897; Salt Lake Herald, June 14, 18, 1897.

17 Salt Lake Tribune, June 29, 1897.

18 Salt Lake Tribune, June 30, 1897.

19 Salt Lake Tribune, July 17, 21,27, 1897; Salt Lake Herald, July 17, 27, 1897.

20 Salt Lake Tribune, August 3, 1897; Salt Lake Herald, August 3, 1897.

21 Salt Lake Tribune, August 26, 1897.

22 Monk was about fifty years old at this time.

23 Salt Lake Tribune, August 27, 28, 30, 1897.

24 Salt Lake Herald, September 12, 1897;Third District Court case #1416, November 21, 1897.

25 Salt Lake Tribune, September 18, 23, 26, 1897; Salt Lake Herald, September 12, 18, 26, 1897, October 5, 1897.

26 Salt Lake Tribune, October 7, 8, 9, 1897; Salt Lake Herald, October 6, 7, 8, 9, 1897.

27 Salt Lake Tribune, October 23, 1897.

28 Quoted in Salt Lake Tribune, October 30, 1897.

29 A claim only gave a miner possession of the land as long as he worked the claim; but when a miner filed a patent, a surveywas performed, after which the Land Office gave actual title to the land.

30 Salt Lake Tribune, May 8, 1909; Deseret news, May 8, 1909.

31 James T. Monk v. Frank A Webb et al, Third District Court case #1670, January 7, 1898.

32 Salt Lake Tribune, December 10, 11, 19, 21 1897; Salt Lake Herald, December 10, 19, 21, 1897.

33 fames T. Monk v. Maxfield Mining Co., Third District Court case #1690,January 15, 1898.

34 Salt Lake Tribune, January 22, 27, 1898; Salt Lake Herald, January 22, 1898.

35 Salt Lake Tribune, March 10, 11, 12, 13, 1898; Salt Lake Herald, March 10, 11, 12, 13, 1898.

36 Lord Nelson Safety Valve Lode, April 20, 1883,Big Cottonwood Mining District Book D, p. 389.

37 Mineral Survey No. 3317. Defiance Westerly, Bureau of Land Management office (BLM), Salt Lake City.

38 Mineral Survey No 3322 Safety Valve, BLM, Salt Lake City The newspapers never explained why Monk would have changed the name.

39 Mineral Survey No 3340 Sea View, BLM, Salt Lake City.

40 fames T. Monk vs Maxfield Mining Co., op cit.

41 Salt Lake Tribune, March 13, 16, 17, 18, 1898; Salt Lake Herald, March 15, 17, 18, 1898.

42 Deseret News, March 18, 27, 1898.

43 Salt Lake Tribune, March 27, 1898.

44 Ibid.

45 Department of Corrections, Inmate Prison Commitment Register, p 105,Utah State Archives.

46 Salt Lake Tribune, March 28, 1898.

47 Mineral Certificate No 2360, Sea View, BLM, Salt Lake City.