.

Extract from the minutes of a conference of the Elders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, held at Military Hall, New York, April 3d and 4th, 1844. Elder Wm. Smith in the chair.

Eld. G. T. Leach submitted to the conference a proposition for publishing a weekly paper for the dispensation of our principles, which was read by the clerk.

The proposition was advocated by a large majority of elders present, and Eld. Wm. Smith spoke, at length, in favor of the proposition, and on motion,

• Resolved. That the proposition be accepted.
• Resolved. That a committee of five be appointed to carry into effect the proposition.

Whereupon:—Elders Wright, G. T. Leach, Miles, J. Leach and Priest Brocklebank were appointed.

W. H. Miles, Clerk.

The Prophet, v1 n1, 18 May 1844, page 2

.

Joseph Smith’s candidacy for President of the U.S. was apparently the impetus behind the newspaper, as early editions promoted his campaign. The organizers were likely very aware of the success of other Mormon newspapers and periodicals outside of Church headquarters, such as the Millennial Star and Benjamin Winchester’s Gospel Reflector, and they no doubt hoped to benefit from William Smith’s experience editing The Wasp.

Despite the local strength that this announcement portrayed, in fact the Church in New York struggled in at least some ways. The Prophet apparently always struggled financially, as it repeatedly sought subscribers to pay their subscriptions and solicited donations to maintain its operations.And as far as can be ascertained from the ads in the newspaper, William H. Miles was one of the biggest supporters, since advertisements for his business interests appear in every issue.

The fact that the newspaper was started barely a month before the martyrdom didn’t help keep it stable. By October two of the founding committee, George T. Leach and A. E. Wright, had been excommunicated, apparently for supporting Sidney Rigdon. And even as Parley P. Pratt changed the publication’s name to the New York Messenger a year later the situation was still uncertain. At that point William Smith was excommunicated and Samuel Brannon was disfellowshiped, although he was reinstated after making a hasty trip to Nauvoo to plead his case.

But questions remain unanswered in the bare information contained in this conference extract. What else happened during the conference? Were there minutes covering the rest of it? Who was the priest, Brocklebank and what role did he play? Are there other contemporary accounts of the newspaper? Did John Leach (apparently a relative of George T. Leach) also leave the Church when his brother was excommunicated?

As with all history, the little we know opens many more questions.

On the last page of the The Mormon for May 30, 1857, the editor, Apostle John Taylor, included an article entitled:

Aux Elders et aux Saints, en Canada, en France,
en Suisse, en Italie, et dans les iles
de la Manche.
(To the Elders and Saints in Canada, in France, in Switzerland, in Italy and throughout the isles of the Sea.)

What followed was a treatise or the text of a tract in French expounding the truth of the gospel and urging members to “let their light shine before men.” As far as I can tell, nothing in the 2,500 word text is unusual. Except that it is in French and published in a New York City LDS newspaper.

As far as I’ve seen (I have not yet read through all the issues of The Mormon or the Messenger, or for that matter several other Mormon periodicals of the time), this is unique or at least unusual for Mormon periodicals at that time. So why did Taylor include this article in French?

Today it doesn’t seem that unusual to provide text to those around New York City who speak other languages, given the multilingual nature of the city’s immigrant population and the Church’s willingness to reach out to them during the past 100 years at least. In fact, there are wards and branches of the Church in the region serving members who speak about a dozen different languages, last I counted. Language units have existed in New York City continually since the first Spanish-language branch in the city was founded in the late 1960s, and prior to World War II a German-language branch existed in Brooklyn.

So, could ZTaylor have considered reaching French speakers in New York City

The idea that missionaries in 1857 might find success among immigrants in New York City who didn’t speak English is not farfetched. Nearly half the population of New York City and Brooklyn at the time hadn’t been born in the United States, and as much as 25% spoke a language other than English.

But the idea that French speakers would be approached first is difficult to swallow. Very few of those in New York spoke French—probably less than 10,000. The largest non-English language among immigrants in New York was German, spoken by nearly 150,000 (more than 15% of the population). If missionaries had chosen to target immigrants in the city, they would have started with German, not French.

So why did Taylor insert an article in French in The Mormon?

All I can do is speculate. He addresses the article to Elders and Saints in Canada, France, Switzerland, Italy, etc., but doesn’t include New York City in the mix. Perhaps he assumed that copies of this issue would be mailed to those places?

Taylor had served as the first mission president of the French mission, and had learned the language there. Perhaps like many missionaries he had a love for the people and language. And while in France he also published pamphlets and a newspaper (Étoile du Déséret), so it is possible that this text is reprinted from one of the French publications, perhaps just to fill space in this issue of the newspaper.

I’ll keep looking for information that might explain why this text was included in The Mormon.

Since its a little blurry, here is the text:

ADVERTISEMENT.

TO PRESIDENTS OF CONFERENCES OR BRANCHES.

W. J. SILVER, (Box 5057, Post Office, New York,) has for Sale—
Blank Licences,                                  per 100,      $0.75
.    ”     Certificates,                             per 100,        0.75
.    ”            “               for a less number, each        0.01
Conference Notices,                          per 100,        1.00
Ruled Books for District Visitors   per dozen,    0.30
Festival Tickets,                                 per 100,        0.25

N.B.—Licences will be forwarded to the written order of a President of a Conference only.
Certificats to the written order of the President a Branch or Conference only.
Terms, Invariably, Cash, including expenses of carriage ?? ???, to accompany the order.

——-

Perhaps this ad is mundane, simply a necessary element of running an organization like a church. But I’m not convinced that any element can be truly unimportant, given the relative lack of information about this time in Mormonism in New York City.  Some of the things mentioned in this ad I believe I understand. Others I’m not so sure.

For example, the ad is addressed to “Presidents of Conferences or Branches.” I don’t yet know how many branches and conferences were in the Eastern States Mission, but it easily could have been dozens. I hope to know more as I explore the pages of the Mormon and other sources.

What was a “Conference?” We don’t use this term the same way any more in the Church. As I understand it, a conference was roughly the equivalent of a mission district today — a group of branches in a mission. I don’t know why the term was dropped in favor of the term district, or if there were operational differences from districts today. As far as I know, the history of organizational changes in the Church like this one has not been studied. I’d like to know more.

I know a bit more about William J. Silver, the vendor mentioned in the ad. Silver arrived in New York City from his natal England in 1855 on the ship Cynosure. A mechanical engineer, Silver had worked for the Great Western Railway and at the Stothert and Pitt Iron Works at Bath, England, but had resigned his position to immigrate with his family.

In the city Silver apparently worked as a mechanical engineer, which leads me to wonder why he stayed in New York for four years and why he was selling supplies to the conferences and branches in the mission. Was he actually unable to find work and needed this income, as little as it must have been? That seems unlikely given the rapid growth of railroads in the New York region at the time. Why did he stay in New York, given the 1857-1858 Utah War? Was he simply an entrepreneur and found an opportunity? Or did John Taylor ask him to do this so that the supplies would be available?

Silver did emigrate to Utah in 1859 and there he started an iron works business that eventually became the Silver Brothers Iron Works. On November 20, 1868, Silver constructed the first steam engine ever built in the State. He died in 1918.

Leaving aside the mysteries of the New York City years of William Silver, I should probably ask what were the items he sold used for? I’m not 100% sure, but I imagine a lot of their use grew out of the need to communicate who was authorized to act for the Church and who was actually a member. I imagine that a License indicated that the bearer was a church leader or missionary—President of the Branch, for example. I have occasionally seen references to individuals having their license taken from them.

I assume that a certificate, in contrast, represents an ordinance performed, much as it does today (even though it seems like they are not often used any more).

Conference Notices seem straightforward, except we don’t really use anything like them today—members find out about conferences through announcements made in meetings. So why were conference notice forms needed? Were they advertising to the general public? Were they delivered or mailed to members? Did attendance at the conference mean more than attendance at Church? Was that how the number of members in a conference or branch was determined?

Visitors books make some sense, although today they are only used for special occasions, like weddings and funerals and commemorative events. But if a branch had a visitors’ book, what happened to these books? Do they exist for at least a few units in the Church archives? It would be fascinating to see the signatures or names of some of the visitors that came to Mormon meetings at this time. As I understand it, John Greenleaf Whittier visited a Mormon meeting in the late 1840s. It would be cool to see his signature in a visitors book!

The final item for sale, “Festival Tickets” leaves me scratching my head. Was this some  specific event? or was it a type of event that was frequently put on by Mormon branches in the east? Why was it called a “festival” instead of a party or excursion something?

I hope this kind of analysis raises the same kind of questions in your mind. This kind of thinking is what leads me to say that there isn’t really any information that isn’t of potential value to history. And it is likely the tendency to overlook this kind of “mundane” item that leaves us with so many questions about our own history.

In Mormon history Bywater isn’t very well known. He spent few years in Utah (finally arriving in 1883) and arrived by train, unlike the pioneers who crossed the plains on foot and horseback. As a result, he isn’t mentioned often by those who compiled Mormon histories.

Henry Gwilyms Bywater was born in Wales in 1834 to George Henry Bywater and Elinor Gwilym. The family joined the LDS Church in 1848, and Henry was ordained an Elder in 1856, serving as a “traveling Elder” in the Cheltenham, England conference for a year in 1857. A decade later Henry and his family had earned enough money to emigrate to the U.S., reaching New York in September 1868.

While trying to earn money to continue his voyage to Utah, Bywater was a teacher, a “pressman on tin,” and “president of the first district of the Williamsburg branch” until 1871, when the branch president, William Searle, immigrated to Utah. The branch then had about 400 members. Elder Staines, the Church’s immigration agent and in charge of the church in the east at the time, then appointed Bywater as president of the New York conference, which then embraced New York, Long Island, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Connecticut.

Bywater tried to grow the Church in the New York conference during his service, organizing, for example, a 25-member branch in Providence, Rhode Island in 1873. But with members regularly trying to immigrate to Utah and few if any missionaries, Bywater must have had a difficult time getting the conference to grow. Instead, it is likely that the membership declined during his tenure, and an 1877 newspaper reported just 100 members where there had been 300. In 1878 the branch moved from Grand Street in Williamsburg to 92 Prospect Street in Brooklyn, changing its name from the Williamsburg Branch to the Brooklyn Branch, and in 1882 the New York Conference was dissolved, since Brooklyn was the only branch remaining in the conference. Bywater was then released and James T. Flashman was named branch president.

While I’ve found little about Bywater’s life in Brooklyn, newspaper accounts have given some information about his Church life. He apparently preached regularly during Church meetings, speaking on subjects like the persecution that Mormons had suffered and the necessity of gathering to Utah. During his time in Brooklyn, Bywater apparently worked as a pressman on tin and resided in Greenpoint, according to newspaper articles of the time.

Bywater was finally able to immigrate to Utah in 1883, and left New York on September 11th of that year. He died in Salt Lake City in December 1889.

That was probably true in the early 20th century also. Newspaper accounts of the Church here often refer to the bulk of members here as the “Utah colony” and speak of why members have arrived (usually for work or school) and how they are returning back “home.”

But, of course, there were occasional deaths and the associated memorial services—which were held in place of funerals because the deceased was sent back “home” for a funeral.

I recently stumbled across a memorial service held in New York City for Willard S. Langton, from Logan, Utah, who was in New York serving as a missionary, pursuing a Ph.D. in Mathematics at Columbia University and teaching at Cooper Union. His story is unusual, and so different from our missionary experiences today that I found it fascinating.

Langton was born in Smithfield, Utah (near Logan) in 1872 and attended the University of Utah, graduating in 1893. He returned to the Logan area and joined the faculty of the Utah Agricultural College (now Utah State University), as professor of Mathematics, although he also taught biology. He also started the physical education department, and at his death was honored as the “father of athletics” at the school. By 1900 he had also married and had an infant son.

After teaching at UAC for 17 years, Langton was called on a mission to the Eastern States in 1910. By soon after he arrived, Langton had arranged to enroll at Columbia University in the Mathematics department, in pursuit of a Ph.D. Whether that arrangement was made before or after his call, I haven’t been able to determine, but it was apparently acceptable to the Eastern States Mission President Ben E. Rich because within 6 months he called Langton to serve as mission secretary (replacing Arthur V. Watkins, later U.S. Senator for Utah).

In many ways, Langton’s missionary service seemed more like today’s senior missionaries than like the service of a traditional unmarried 18 to 21+ year old. Langton entered the mission at 38. His wife and son joined him in New York in early October 1910, apparently staying the school year. He returned to Logan for the summer of 1912, returning in the Fall.

Apparently he worked hard at his degree, along with his missionary work. He was awarded an MA in Mathematics in 1911, producing a thesis titled The integration of discontinuous functions. But he also kept up his work for the mission. One missionary reports in his diary that Langton gave out the assignments of where new missionaries would serve, and a newspaper report says that he traveled to Wheeling, West Virginia in early December 1911 to debate an RLDS missionary on the succession question. By this time his workload must have been substantial, since the news report indicates that he was also teaching mathematics at the Cooper Union.

Langton kept this up until early in 1915, including through the death from illness of the mission president, Ben E. Rich, in September 1913. Rich’s successor, Walter P. Monson, retained Langton as mission secretary. It is possible that Langton was one of those who accompanied Monson when he “rushed” the stage at a Carnegie Hall speech by Mormon turncoat Frank J. Cannon in April 1914.

Less than a year later, Langton became ill with an unspecified “intestinal trouble.” He underwent an operation in early February, 1915 and lingered until the 22nd, when he died. The reactions to his death were unusually strong.

While his body was being transported home to Logan, Utah, the mission held a memorial service at Hawthorne Hall (151 West 125th Street)—apparently near the mission headquarters and one of the meeting places used by the New York congregation. Mission President Monson opened the service, praising Langton’s “untiring labors” and saying that “there never had been a time when a requirement had been made but what our departed brother has cheerfully responded…”

President Monson was followed by Horace Cummings, then Commissioner of Church Education (why he was in New York I haven’t been able to discover), who observed that “he realized that he was going to go, but faced it willfully and with courage and even with resignation. I might almost say joy.”

Then spoke Dr. C. R. Richards, Director of Cooper Union and a non-Mormon. Richards observed that Langton

came to us quietly and modestly four years ago, and in those four years he won our affection, our respect, and our regard for his high qualities as a man and a teacher. In his chosen field of mathematics he was possessed of fine scholarship and high ability. He was indeed an artist in his appreciation of the meaning of mathematics in life and in its relation to engineering and to industry. On our side our loss is great, but it is not for the scholar that we grieve but for the man.

Here in Cooper Union our conditions are very different from those of schools in smaller cities and in the newer parts of the country. There the homogeneity of student body and faculty makes natural a feeling of sympathy and fellowship between teacher and pupil. Here we face a different situation.

Yet this man came to us from the West to our new and strange conditions, to a student body of many races and many creeds, and brought a sympathy, and understanding, a fellowship, a brotherliness, so warm, so kindly and so insistent to serve that he won the affectionate regard of every student with whom he came in contact as he did every one of his colleagues.

…

No request from students for help—no demand upon his time—was so trivial but what he responded with all that he could give. His time outside of his school work even was not spared, and he opened his home to students who specially needed help, and who were welcomed there as friend with friend.

It is by these things that we shall best remember him.

He was a simple, manly, faithful servant of the Lord if there ever was one: To serve, that was the truest instinct of the man.

…

After a solo rendition of “One Sweetly Solemn Thought” by Robert C. Easton, Dr. Dean Brimhall introduced a resolution that the congregation adopted, and then made his own remarks, ending with a hymn by his father, George H. Brimhall (then President of BYU), “O, may I know the Lord as friend.”

The service ended with a solo by E. F. Tout, accompanied by a trio of Elenora Tout, piano, Hazel Tout, violin and Irving Tout, cello and a benediction by Edward P. Kimball (organist or assistant organist for the Mormon Tabernacle Choir from 1905 to 1937).

Langton’s body reached Logan a few days later and his funeral on March 3rd, which followed a memorial service at the UAC, filled the Logan Tabernacle. There he received equally high praise from local leaders and the administration of the college, led by UAC President John A. Widtsoe.

What I found unusual in the sermons given in the memorial service in New York and the funeral in Logan (aside from the resolution passed in New York) is the level of praise for Willard S. Langton. Funeral addresses tend to be laudatory, often exceedingly so. But these were somehow more. And in New York, the remarks of Dr. Richards of the Cooper Union were especially unusual, given that he came from outside of the Mormon community that Langton grew up in. He must have been an unusual man.

But even more unusual, at least from our modern perspective, was Langton’s presence and activities in New York. From what I’ve seen it wasn’t unusual at that time for LDS missionaries to work to support themselves in their missionary life. And missionaries did often stay or return to New York to go to school (Langton’s predecessor as mission secretary, Arthur V. Watkins, was back the year after he completed his mission to attend Columbia Law School). But to actively serve a mission AND pursue a Ph.D. AND teach? Seems like a lot—more than what any but an unusual person can accomplish.

Do you record the details of sacrament meetings in your journal? Has it ever occurred to you that 100 years in the future sacrament meeting might be somewhat different? Fortunately, outsiders sometimes see the mundane of our lives with different eyes, and their accounts of what is mundane to us and unusual to them are, 100 years later, insightful accounts of important parts of every day lives.

Sacrament meeting is a good example, in this case. In 1873 a reporter for the Brooklyn Eagle published an account of a Brooklyn sacrament meeting, leaving us what is, I think, an interesting outsider’s view of the “mundane” of Mormonism:

… The meeting place of their branch, is in Grand street, E. D., in the fourth story of a brick tenement house. Every Sunday afternoon at three o’clock, the principal service takes place. About 120 persons are seated in the benches and chairs, crowding every part of the room. At one end stands a plain altar, bearing a Bible, and on a table in front of it, is a communion service of silver plate covered with a linen napkin. About twenty-five or thirty elders among the saints, are seated behind the altar ranging across the room. The President of the Branch sits on the high seat at the altar, unless one of the twelve apostles or of the seventy elders, or some other superior officer of the universal church is present, in which case he presides instead of the branch officer. The people, for the most part, are from the unintelligent and uncultivated classes—factory hands predominating. They are past middle age, or else are children; few young men or women are to be observed among them. The physiognomical signs of all nationalities are to be seen—French, German, Swiss, Scandinavian, Scotch, Irish and English. The latter take more kindly to Mormonism than any other race.

The service opens with a hymn, sung standing. A prayer follows, and then the Sacrament is administered. During the communion the following hymn is sung:

Ye children of our God,

Ye saints of latter days;

Surround the table of the Lord,

And join to sing His praise.

After another prayer, the meeting is open for speaking, and the elders present are at liberty to address the meeting. Some of these sermons are often eloquent and always earnest; cant phrases are abundantly employed. They refer with special unction to “The Holy Church of Jesus Christ,” of “The Latter Day Saints,” “The Chosen People,” “The Beautiful Valley of the Mountains,” “The New Jerusalem” and “The Hills of Zion.” After all the speakers are through, another hymn is sung, and the meeting is closed with a benediction.

…¹

.

The meeting is at once different and yet the same. The Branch’s Elders sitting in front is certainly unusual, as is singing while the sacrament is being passed. The hymn isn’t anything I recognize either. And 120 people at sacrament meeting with 30 Elders sounds large enough to be a ward today–so did the reporter just fail to mention counselors to the Branch President? Or did he not have counselors?

I love the reporter’s mention of phrases of Mormon cant (we’d call it jargon today). referring to the New Jerusalem doesn’t seem very Mormon, but the Hills of Zion , Latter Day Saints and Chosen People all seem normal today.

The differences are mostly things that changed in Mormon culture over many years, and the changes happened so gradually that I suspect they weren’t recorded by the vast majority of Mormons. What changes do you notice? And what changes are gradually happening today?

Parley P. Pratt records that when he opened missionary work in New York City in the late summer of 1837, it was several months before he baptized anyone. It seems likely that regular meetings weren’t held until early 1838, and those first meetings were held in a private room — the room above David Rogers store on Goerick Street, today located below the Manhattan side of the Brooklyn Bridge.

By September 1838, Rogers left for Missouri with his family, along with Pratt and others, and where the remaining members met I haven’t yet discovered.

Only a year later do we learn that the New York Branch had acquired a more regular and public meeting place. In May 1839 John P. Greene came to New York City to raise funds for the Mormons who had been expelled from Missouri. In addition to raising “a considerable amount of money” (according to newspaper accounts¹), Greene also presided over the New York Branch and Eastern States Mission, and set up more public worship for the branch:

The Mormons are determined not to leave a stone unturned to advance their doctrines and extend the number of their followers. They have hired Columbian Hall, in Grand street, where one of their “latter day saints” holds forth every Sunday and Wednesday evening.…²

Parley P. Pratt remarked on the meeting place in a letter to Brigham Young:

Our N. York meetings are now held Three times every  Sabbath in Columbian Hall, Grand Street, a few doors east of  the Bowery, it is very central and one of the best places in  the city, it will hold nearly one thousand people and is  well filled with attentive hearers…³

The New York branch continued to meet in Columbian Hall for several years, apparently along with many other organizations, who used the Hall on occasion. It was a meeting place for Temperance societies and  housed a number of businesses. It hosted dinners and balls and was also the meeting place or a Methodist congregation at about the same time (although how Sunday meeting times were divided between the Methodists and the Mormons isn’t clear). I haven’t yet located images of the Hall nor information on when the building was built or what happened to it. I’ve found references to its use through the 1870s.

Regardless, the Columbian Hall was likely the first regular meeting place for Mormons in New York City.

An 1856 newspaper story about the Hornerstown, New Jersey congregation gives an impression of a group in similar flux, although one that is slowly declining instead of increasing as most Mormon congregations in the area today.

The article, from the New York Independent, reports that the congregation  consisted of about 50 members, down from 70 or 80, “some twenty or thirty having emigrated a few months since to Salt Lake City.¹” And for most of the 19th century such migration to Utah must have been a constant fact, something local leaders needed to adjust for.

The congregation had long been lead by “Elder Curtis”—James L. Curtis², a tailor who had moved to Nauvoo after his conversion and had then returned to Hornerstown following the destruction of Nauvoo. However, unlike many in his congregation, Curtis never made it to Utah; the Independent reports that he died suddenly in November 1855³.

Following Curtis’ death, the congregation was lead by an English immigrant, Richard Treseder, who had arrived at Philadelphia in 1855 with his wife and eight children, but was apparently not able to continue west at that time. Instead the Treseder’s sent their three oldest sons, Charles, Richard, Jr. and George, on to Utah in 1855 and sought work to pay the way for the rest of the family. They finally emigrated in 1862.

In late September 1856 Charles Treseder wrote to his parents in Hornerstown New Jersey and reported on the excitement in Utah over the new system for emigration introduced that summer:

The first two hand-cart companies arrived in the city last Friday evening, 26th. Since we received the news of their starting, they have been the universal topic of conversation; while at work or in leisure. I wonder where the hand-carts are? was on the end of every one’s tongue⁴.

The two companies Charles talks about were the Ellsworth and McArthur companies, they were followed by three additional companies of hand-carts, the Bunker, Willie and Martin companies. Charles goes on to describe the excitement when the handcarts eventually arrived:

… I shall never forget the feeling that ran through my whole system as I caught the first sight of them. The first hand-cart was drawn by a man and his wife, they had a little flag on it, on which were the words: “Our President—may the unity of the Saints ever show the wisdom of his counsels.”

The next hand-cart was drawn by three young women. I did not take particular notice of the others, some were drawn by women some by men, in all amounting, I believe, to 50 hand-carts, and near 500 souls. I believe some 7 or 8 persons died on the road. The tears rolled down the cheek of many a man who you would have thought would not, could not, shed a tear; but the scene was exciting in the extreme and most everybody felt sympathetic and joyous. I could scare refrain from tears. Richard cried like a child, and amongst the women the crying was pretty near universal.

…⁵

Then, later in his letter, Charles reports something that today gives us chills:

… I believe some of the Jersey Saints are coming out with some hand-carts; I say God speed and give them strength. …⁶

The Independent did report that “some twenty or thirty having emigrated a few months since to Salt Lake City.” Perhaps those saints were the New Jersey Saints that Charles spoke of.

What happened to them? Unfortunately I can’t say. I haven’t yet found any documents that give the names of the Hornerstown New Jersey Saints of the 1850s, nor do the documents I have available online indicate where the members of the Bunker, Willie and Martin companies came from, other than broad categories like “United States.” The Hornerstown group could have been split up among several companies. They may have had to wait in the states somewhere until the following year before coming to Utah. Or, they may have been part of the ill-fated Willie and Martin companies.

I hope to find out soon.

[Cross posted from Mormon Baseball.]

It is a simple journal entry by Mormon Battalion member Azariah Smith. After spending most of 1846 struggling along the long, 1,900 mile road from Council Bluffs, near what is now Omaha, Nebraska, through the territory we know as Kansas, New Mexico, and Arizona, and after arriving in southern California, near San Diego, Smith recorded in his diary early in 1847 how he and some fellow soldiers chose to entertain themselves:

.

Sunday March the 6th. We drilled as before and through the day we play ball and amuse ourselves the best way we can. It is very cool weather and clothing scarce.

“Ball,” of course, likely meant baseball or some form of the game. There was simply no other game that was called “ball.” While it is conceivable that Smith meant something different, as we saw in my post on Joseph Smith and baseball, “ball” was the common name for baseball, only rarely referring to something else, and the Mormons in Nauvoo, and on the Missouri frontier played baseball.

Smith, who joined the Mormons at 11 years of age in Ohio in 1839, could have easily been one of those who played ball with the Prophet. We don’t know where the Mormons of the late 1830s and the 1840s learned how to play baseball, nor do we know for sure that Azariah Smith learned the game in Nauvoo. He may have played baseball or seen it played earlier, before his family left Ohio.

*   *   *   *   *

Of course, while Smith has apparently the first recorded reference to baseball in California, another group of Mormons could have brought the sport to California.

Traditionally, the origin of baseball is attributed to New York, and the first formal rules of baseball were drawn up by the New York Knickerbocker Base Ball Club in 1846. The founding members of the club began playing baseball in 1842 in Manhattan, and by 1846 had run out of suitable fields on Manhattan and had moved to playing on the Elysian Fields in Hoboken twice a week. Prior to this organized leagues developed to play earlier versions of baseball in Philadelphia and in Camden, New Jersey.

But the Knickerbocker club wasn’t the only user of Elysian Fields. A newspaper article of August 1844 reports the following:

Pic Nic at Hoboken

This recherche little pleasure meeting came off on Tuesday last—at 10 o’clock, some thirty or forty saints met at Canal street Ferry, prepared to enjoy themselves and as the boat bore them across the river, the air resounded with the glorious songs of Zion. After arriving at Hoboken, they proceeded to the “Elysian Fields,” marching to the time of some favorite hymn. We never witnessed such a bevy of cheerful countenances as was displayed on this occasion—every one giving their mite for the happiness of the whole. We have been on many pleasure parties, but never saw so much unity. Not a single circumstance occurred during the whole day to mar the harmony of the scene. There were several that had not yet taken upon themselves the name of Jesus, who resolved that they would investigate Mormonism, because a religion that would produce such harmony and good feeling, must be of God.

The proprietors of the cottage that sheltered us during the half-hour it rained, deserve our thanks for their kind attention—and while mntioning those who administered to our comfort on that day, we would not forget Mr. Mrs. and Miss A., whose well stored basket came in good play—nor would we forget Brother B., whose humor added much to the pleasures of the day.

As this little affair has gone off so well, we would propose one on a more extensive scale. A great union of saints, say some three weeks hence. Come Sisters, will you not assist us in getting up one.

The New York branch was therefore no stranger to Elysian Fields, also the site of the first regular baseball field, in use by September 1846. When were games first played there? We don’t know. It could easily have been before 1844, and branch members could have easily seen games, or even pick up the rules that Alexander Cartwright and the Knickerbockers published in late 1845.

Many of the saints in New York, along with members from the region, including Philadelphia and Camden, purchased tickets on the ship Brooklyn, which left the first week of February in 1846. The Brooklyn arrived in Yerba Buena, California (now San Francisco) on July 31, 1846 and briefly made Mormonism the principal religion in the town.

Did any of the 238 Mormon passengers on the Brooklyn play baseball? Could the game have been been played in San Francisco in the seven months before Azariah Smith played it in San Diego?

We may never know, of course. I don’t know how many records and accounts exist covering San Francisco during those seven months. I assume there aren’t many. If not, then there simply may not be any record of anyone playing “ball.” Or, it could be, that no one has ever looked.

.

[Cross posted from Mormon Baseball. Please make comments there.]

Why were the missionaries so coy?

The lack of candor by the missionaries is not the only confusing part of the story. The Times article says that there were 25 missionaries in the group—three or four times the number that usually accompanied immigrants—and implies that there were no Mormon immigrants with them. Why not?

Here is the text of the article:

Arrival of the Mormon Missionaries

The ship Underwriter, Capt. ROBERTS, from Liverpool Jan. 23, arrived yesterday afternoon, bringing 25 Mormons, all Americans, who have been on a visit to various points of England and the Continent, as missionaries of the Church of Latter Day Saints, and upon business affairs. There is only one lady among them. The party were taken from the ship as she was passing up the river, and landed at Castle Garden, whence they all took their way to various hotels and private houses in the City.

At WALKER’S Hotel, No, 25 Greenwich-street, our reporter found four of the Elders with the only lady. They were seated at a small table in the sitting room, enjoying a game of whist, the lady looking on. The cards had evidently seen service. They were all young, healthy and good looking men, who have not apparently suffered from sea sickness or short rations. The effort to learn any particulars concerning their party; where they had been, how long they had been abroad or even their names, was abortive. They referred the reporter to Mr. HERRIMAN, whom they designated as their chief, who they thought was at LOVEJOY’S Hotel.

The discipline of the camp appears to prevail among them. The lady is young, rotund and not bad looking. In answer to the question if they were going to Salt Lake the chief speaker replied, that they were each going to their respective homes. One to Vermont, another to Illinois, &c.

At Mrs. LAWTON’S, No. 138 Cedar-street, there were six of the same party. At LOVEJOY’S Hotel there six others, whose names stood on the register as follows; David Wilkins and D. Margett, St. Louis; E. H. Price and T. Price, Philadelphia; Thomas R. King and Peter Robison, Syracuse¹.

Several of the missionaries who returned on this voyage left accounts of their trip, including Phillip Margetts, Eli H. Peirce, Andrew P. Shumway and John L. Smith. Shumway’s reminiscences makes the reason for so many missionaries returning at once, as well as their lack of candor, clear:

“… I labored here [Glouchester District] till January 16th when I was called to go home in connection with all the Valley brethren in the mission. On account of the U. S. Army being sent to Utah. …”

He goes on to report that 22 missionaries were in the group he met in Liverpool prior to departure², but skips over the landing in New York to discuss crossing the plains to Utah.

From the article, we can assume that the missionaries were worried that any attention might lead to delays or harassment, so they tried to keep a low profile in New York. None of the other accounts mentions the reporter, although one of those who talked to the reporter, John L. Smith, stayed at Walker’s Hotel and was probably one of the five that the reporter saw there (Smith only indicates that he stayed there. He left on the 12th.)³.

From the Mormon Migration Database it seems clear that the lady staying at Walker’s Hotel was Hannah Bond, the only woman on the passenger list outside of the Loosli family. Also on the list is a William Bond, who is, I assume, her husband. Since this is well before female missionaries were called, her presence is unusual. Did she accompany her husband on his mission, or did he marry while there? (I know that some apostles did this.) The only William Bond I’ve been able to find in my limited search immigrated from England with his family in 1856 and he doesn’t seem to have married anyone named Hannah, so I haven’t been able to find any additional information.

Henry Harriman, the leader that the reporter was referred to, was 54 years old and one of the Seven Presidents of the Seventy. He had accompanied a group of missionaries that went east from Salt Lake City the previous year, and like many of the rest of the missionaries had seen his mission cut short by the war.

The journal of Phillip Margetts (probably the D. Margett mentioned in the article) stops prior to the landing at Castle Garden, and therefore doesn’t mention anything about the stay in New York City. But his fellow traveler, Eli H. Peirce (probably the E. H. Price in the article) does talk about his stay:

“March 10 … We arrived in New York Harbor near to New York City. About 3 o’clock p.m. there then came a steamboat from New York City to our ship after the passengers. We then all got on board & went to shore. Landed at New York about half past 3 p.m. We were all very glad to set our feet upon land once more. My brother Thomas went & took our abode at Mr. Lovejoy’s Hotel in company with Elders Wilkins & Margetts, after eating a very hearty & sumptuous supper, we sat down & spent the evening in reading newspaper stories concerning the Mormons in Salt Lake & the Mormon war &c. & then we retired to bed to take our rest upon land once more⁴.”

He makes it sound like they were unaware of the reporter’s inquiry at Lovejoy’s Hotel (located at 34 Park Row, on the corner of Beakman St.). The letterhead of the hotel in 1861 said that guests could dine in a private restaurant adjoining the “Ladies’ Parlors,” so it is possible that the missionaries dined and read in the hotel’s private restaurant and parlors, as well as their rooms, where they were unaware of the reporter’s visit.

Peirce’s diary also suggests that the missionaries’ reason for listing homes outside of Utah wasn’t entirely incorrect. On leaving New York City the next day the Peirce brothers did go to Philadelphia, their home before they joined Mormonism:

“March 11 – Thursday. Beautiful morning. Rested very well through the night. After breakfast we went down to 117 John Street to see President Samuel W. Richards, as we understood that he was there along with President Appleby & Sternhouse. When we arrived at the place we was very happy to find them all enjoying very good health with the exceptions of President Appleby who was not very well in body but well in spirits. We tarried here with them for about 3 hours with several more of our elders, President Richards gave us our orders & instructions &c. We all then departed & went our way, my brother Thomas & myself took train & went to Philadelphia, 150 miles, among our relations to raise means if possible to assist us on our way home to the valley. We arrived at Uncle Caleb Peirce’s (my Father’s brother) in Philadelphia about 9 o’clock p.m. Found them all well. Uncle Caleb had just gone to bed. Aunt Mary was up. She was very glad to see us both thus far safe on our return home. We spent about an hour in talking about our travels, voyages over the sea &c. & then we retired to rest for the night⁵.”

In the end the curiosity of reporters and the public was largely unsatisfied. And as far as I can tell, the missionaries all arrived in Utah safely and without harassment. And by the end of the U.S. Civil War, the Utah War was long forgotten in New York City.