Letters

Editor:

It is unfortunate that Ronald W Walker's recent article on the origins of Utah statehood ("Thomas L Kane and Utah's Quest for Self-Government, 1846-51," Summer 2001) charged James K Polk with religious bigotry, an accusation based on a purported "secret and never-disclosed Polk administration plan."

Professor Walker asserts that President Polk was an "anti-Mormon" without pointing to a single act, save this "secret" plan The lack of any clear explanation of this tale is unfortunate, since B H Roberts pointed out decades ago that the historical record lacks any credible documentation that President Polk had such a plan

James K Polk stoutly defended Mormon religious rights and even contributed cash to "begging missionaries" for the relief of the refugees at Winter Quarters On January 31, 1846, Polk told Illinois senator James Semple that he "could not interfere with them on the grounds of their religious faith, however absurd it might be considered to be; that if I could interfere with the Mormons, I could with the Baptists, or any other religious sect; & that by the constitution any citizen had a right to adopt his own religious faith. "While ignoring this evidence, Walker points to a purported Thomas L Kane memo "detailing the Polk administration's anti-Mormon activity." No such memo exists

The claim that the Kane family won permission from the federal government for the Mormons to winter on Indian lands is also inaccurate Brigham Young reported in July 1846 that Capt James Allen guaranteed "the privilege of staying anywhere we please on Indian lands" in exchange for the services of the Mormon Battalion

As his primary source Walker points to a typescript of Kane's correspondence with Mormon authorities at LDS Church Archives. After years of work on Kane related subjects, I was surprised I'd never found this typescript. Since church archivists can't find it either, could Professor Walker provide a more complete citation?

Finally, since Thomas L. Kane spent most of his six decades believing he was at death's door, I would suggest an alternative diagnosis to tuberculosis for his chronic bad health: hypochondria.

Will Bagley

Ronald Walker's reply to Will Bagley:

Readers interested in the issues raised by my friend Will Bagley should read carefully my article and consult the information contained in my citations as well as those existing in the broad literature

Mr. Bagley may be one of the few historians to suggest that a statement made by a U S president (Polk to James Semple) must be taken at face value Or that such a statement necessarily explains a president's long-term, complex, and perhaps changing policy. Moreover, I hope readers will understand my purpose. My point when writing my article was not necessarily to examine Polk's policy, but Kane's characterization of it

Bagley misreads my treatment of Kane's suggestion that there may have been a hidden Polk administration strategy regarding the Mormons during their exodus west. My hope was to bring Kane's allusion to light and thereby suggest the possibility of a wider variety of interpretations of the issue Are we supposed to dismiss Kane's comment out of hand? I think a better approach is to introduce the evidence, qualify it by noting that Kane's promised memo does not seem to be extant (he may have destroyed his memo or never written it), and give Kane's suggestion the credence of Polk's reputation for conspiracy, "weaving intrigue within intrigue" (pp 101—102) This has been my approach My words were careful and reflect the evidence that currently exists.

We have another Bagley misstep on the issue of Mormon use of Native American land during the LDS exodus west. While Capt. James Allen gave the Mormons his permission to settle on Native American land during the LDS exodus, his "permission" had limited value He -was a military man -with no authority over Indian lands The historical record attests that the Mormons understood that Allen's promise was tenuous, that local U.S. Native American agents and subagents challenged Allen's action, and that Washington officials eventually reviewed and temporarily ratified Allen's promise—after Judge John Kintzing Kane, Thomas Kane's father, had intervened in their behalf (see W Medill [?] to John K Kane, September 3, 1846, Kane typescripts; and Thomas Kane's report of the event, Thomas L Kane to Brigham Young, September 22, 1846, ibid.) Without this intervention, it is problematic that the Mormons would have been able to remain at the Winter Quarters camp, a matter of crucial importance That Mr Bagley is unaware of the complexity of this issue, or chooses to ignore it, is puzzling. Perhaps he has spent "years of work on Kane-related subjects," as he says,but the issue should not have escaped him; nor is its documentation difficult to find. In addition to Mormon-held documents, the readily available papers of the Bureau of Indian Affairs tell the same story.

While not a doctor skilled in the diagnosis of hypochondria, I do know that the historical record contains a great deal of evidence that Kane's illnesses went beyond the psychological. Normally, hypochondriacs do not run dangerously high fevers, hemorrhage heavily, or bear the result of battle wounds, which in Kane's case came from his CivilWar service. Surely, here, Mr. Bagley isjesting.

Mr. Bagley's comments may be well meaning, and they may be colorfully phrased, but they have little substance.

Ronald W.Walker

Editor:

In the article on orchards in the Summer 2001 issue of the Quarterly, on page 227 is a photo titled "Harvesting apples in GrandValley,Uintah County."

Having lived in Uintah County from 1930 through 1960, I never heard of a GrandValley in the county; is this perhaps a typo, and should be Utah County?

Uintah County was not very well represented as a commercial orchard area; there were only primarily small family orchards that sold mainly to nearby residents. Nearly all the commercial fruit came into the Uintah Basin from the Provo area and from Grand Junction, Colorado.

If I am incorrect, please let me know Thank you

R. Neil Thorne Silver City, New Mexico

Th e editor replies:

You are right. There is no Grand Valley, Uintah County, according to the United States Geographical Survey.We relied on the label on a photo in, our collection to write the caption, and we regret the error.

However, there may be some "truth" to the error The valley running west of Grand Junction into Utah, north of 1-70 and south of the Book Cliffs, is called Grand Valley, and fruit is grown there At one time, the southern edge of Uintah County dipped into what is now Grand County, which was created in 1890 Though it is hard to determine the exact boundary on the maps available to us, it is possible that the pre-1890 Uintah County included part of Grand Valley If not, the border would have run very close to the valley The photo in question may well have been taken before 1890