Ola Larson: Conversion and Mobs (Part 1)

[Editors note. this is based almost entirely on a journal written by Ola Larson himself. I find it remarkable that he wrote so well since English was not his first language.]

In the spring of 1874 Ola Larson and his family left Sweden for New Zealand. There trip was largely eventless except for the birth of a daughter in Spetember some of the coast of Africa. They arrived in Lyttelton, New Zealand on the 25th of October that same year and were subsequently shipped to Akaroa, and finally finding work and a home in Little Akaloa. Ola and his family learned English and moved again to Christchurch.

In the fall I left there and went out in the country to make more money following a threshing machine. Work was very hard but we made about $5 per day. This is where I first got acquainted with the Mormons or Latter Day Saints. There were several of them working with the machine. But I was not yet ready to receive the Gospel. One of the men that presented it to me had been an immoral character. I know him from [illegible] and could not receive his doctrine.

Ola changed jobs again, finding employment at a large estate. After working there two years, he goes on

I was greatly favored by the gentleman and his family, and I had a great many friends but this is the time I received the Gospel. I got acquainted with a missionary by the name of Thomas A. Shrives from Salt Lake City, Utah. … I was converted to be baptized and on the 6th day of October 1878, I, together with my wife and daughter Elida, was baptized by Elder P. J. Norstrand and was confirmed two days later by Elder Shrives. Elder Shrives at that time was the only missionary in New Zealand.

I at once opened my house for missionaries and for to hold meetings in. We rejoiced exceedingly in the Gospel and had great many manifestations of healing of the sick and dreams and visions shortly after Elders E. F. Pearce and George Batt, missionaries from Utah, arrived, and a great many people received the Gospel. The Christchurch branch soon numbered 120 souls. We engaged the Oddfellows hall for our meetings on the fifth of Jan 1879. I was ordained a priest, and one month later ordained elder and a short time after I was set apart as first counselor to the president of the branch, Elder P. J. Nordstrand. And shortly after that was appointed secretary of the whole missions, still continuing as counselor to Brother Nordstrand.

Then Ola related his first instance of persecution.

We were mobbed one evening at our hall in Christchurch and I at the time was doorkeeper. One man turned out the lights on us in the hall and I saw him doing so. So I called a policeman and arrested the man and that caused the mob. I was at the time living 3 miles out of town in a place called Papanui and a great many of the mob knew that I was living there, so when the meeting was over an immense crowd was awaiting outside the hall. They tried to get hold of me because I arrested that man, but after some difficulty I got away together with my daughter Elida. But the saints followed us and after came an immense mob that the police estimated to be about 1,500. Before we got out of town the greater portion turned back, and about 300followed us home. I took my family to the house and returned to a crossing of the road, a few hundred feet from the house, and waited until the [mob] came up so they could see me and then took another road to mislead the mob, but it seems that they would not follow me. I ran home another way, and arrived at the house before the mob came. I blew out the lamps, arranged for my family and the saints to go into the back part of the house so if they broke the windows they should not be hurt. At this time nearly all the saints in the branch had arrived. Not knowing what the mob intended to do, some of the saints were very much frightened and some of them a little hurt in trying to keep back the mob so we could get out of their way. After having arranged for my family and the saints in the house, I went into the hallway of the house with the intention to give myself up to the mob if they would save those in the house. I offered up a short and very sincere prayer in words similar to this: "O Lord save my family and those in the house. I am willing to give myself up to the mob and if necessary offer up my life to them if thou will save those who are inside." I put my hand on the key and opened the door and intended to ask the mob if they would allow me to speak to them from the veranda. At that time they were all standing against the fence facing the house, there being a small lawn between the house and the fence. At the same moment as I opened the door a wagon load of armed police drove up in front of the house, arrived from town, and the mob was scattered in a few minutes. Only about 20 or 25 were left and upon inquiring we found these to be our friends. They all had big sticks in their hands and pieces of lumber and all kinds of weapons whereby they had kept the mob back, else they supposed that some of us would have been killed. These men came into the house together with the police and they took these men as witnesses and made lots of inquiries. Next day I had to go to court and I found out that the man I had arrested proved to be a Methodist minister. He was finally dismissed and the head of the police promised us that he would protect us even if he should call out the military of soldiers to protect us. I will here state that afterwards nearly all the men there who had protected us from the mob embraced the Gospel.

More to come...

Charles Henry Crow: Part 3 (Constable)

In 1874 was elected to the position of Constable of the fifth Precinct of Salt Lake City. He served for several years. Charles was not afraid of mobs. And there were several incidents involving unruly non-Mormons at the time. One was called the Half Mast Incident.


On July 4th 1885, the American flag was flown at half mast in protest of the anti-polygamy laws that were being passed. The premise was that liberty was dead. The non Mormon Community was up in arms. One group marched on ZCMI which had a flag pole with its flag at half mast. Charles was among those called to restore order and disperse the mob. Anti-Mormon newspaper accounts cast Charles in less than favorable light, but include his threat to knock down anyone who tried to raise the flag to the top of the pole. Even in the presence of a mob his threat was credible enough that no one decided to test him.

My grandfather had in his possession some items belonging to Charles. They included a saber, a set of brass knuckles, and a lead shot filled billy club. Unfortunately these items were stolen a few years before my grandfather passed away.

Charles Henry Crow: Part 2 (Burglar Shot)

By 1859, Charles had made it to Utah. He brought along with him a former co-worker, Mr Seegmiller whom he had introduced to the church. Together they opened a harness and saddle shop. In 1867 (Jan 2) a newspaper article appeared.

Burglar Shot – On Thursday night, shortly before 12 o’clock, Mr. Charles Crow, firm of Seegmiller and Crow, saddlers on East Temple St., was lying in his store, one of his workmen being with him, when he was awakened from a dozing condition by a noise in the building, and heard some person walking through the front part, evidently carrying some article of saddlery, from the sound of the straps trailing along the floor. He could not see who the burglar was, the night being very dark and no light in the store, but a form of some kind barred the passage of the street door, which had been opened by the burglar, when Mr. Crow fired and hit the thief, who dropped. Mr. Crow immediately went to city hall, reported the circumstance to the police and gave himself into custody. The burglar was carried to City Hall, with a saddle which he was carrying off when so suddenly stopped. He was then known to be “Dutch Charley” a character more notorious than respected, whose thieving proclivities had made him well known to the members of the police force. “Charley” lived until about 4 a.m. He was attended by Dr Ormsby, whose professional services were called for, gave his name as Charles Burs, from Zurich Switzerland, expresses sorrow for the act he was committing when shot, and did not wish his friends to know how he cam by his death. His antecedents in the mining regions pointed to such an end in some place. An inquest was held on Friday Morning and a verdict returned in accordance with the facts, upon which Mr. Crow was discharged.

After this incident Mr. Crow began to appear in more newspaper accounts working for the police, although he may have worked for the police before this as well. The earliest is an 1870 story in which he is described as an officer delivering two mail robbers to the Elko, Nevada police.

Newspaper stories include descriptions of his "closing down" unlicensed saloons and brothels in accordance with court orders. He was sued by the owners of these establishments for alleged police brutality and destruction of property, but never lost a case. George H Crow claimed that his father also served as a body guard to Brigham Young and John Taylor.

Charles Henry Crow: Part 1

(Editors note: This record is about my great great grandfather, Charles Henry Crow. It is based on two biographies, one written by his Son George and the other on file in the church history office which has no author. Some details were added based on folklore told by my grandfather. )

At age 17, Charles was apprenticed to a saddle maker near Birmingham, England. His parents were expecting twins and so it was his time to move out and get a job. At 22 he married and shortly thereafter they joined the church. He was quickly ordained a priest. His wife had twins, but they passed away shortly after the birth. In just a couples of years they emigrated to New York City. For some reason they stopped there for 3 years. My guess is they needed more money to continue their journey. But I have no evidence of this. There may have been some delay because of the rumored rebellion going on in Utah. At any rate Charles and his wife were in New York City from 1856 to 1859. While there he was ordained an Elder. Two more children were born as well but neither lived to adulthood.

While there Charles found employment at a saddle shop that had a government contract to provide for saddles (probably the saddle Capt. George B. McClellan designed. Thanks, Bill.) for Johnson's Army. The army was preparing to go west to Utah to put down the Mormon rebellion. An army officer was assigned to monitor the progress of the contract. During his periodic visits, the officer discovered that Charles was Mormon. The officer said some less than charitable things to him. To which Charles responded "Sire, You are going out west to get licked". (Bill, the closest I could find to an original source was an account written by George H Crow, Charles' son. George attributes these exact words to his father, but paraphrases everything else. I'll keep looking.)

History made us Paranoid.

Mormons are paranoid. There I said it. It's out in the open now. We are paranoid. Of course, not without good reason. There have been people who have looked for any stick with which to beat us up. Historically you could point several examples of this. There was a long succession of laws designed to legislate the LDS church out of existence over the issue of Plural Marriage. Leaders were arrested, Church property confiscated, members disenfranchised (i.e. had their right to vote taken away). Then before the priesthood ban was lifted there was talk about losing tax exempt status. It doesn't take much of an imagination to envision what other steps could be tried had the ban not been lifted.

So in light of this I start to see why the Church picks certain political battles to fight. ERA for example. In the light of history I can see some anti-Mormon deciding that a successfully passed ERA would have made the Church vulnerable because it does not ordain women to the priesthood. Or even same sex marriage. Could the California court find the Church in contempt for not allowing Same sex marriages in the temple. Or prevent LDS social service from placing children for adoption because they won't place in same sex households.

It may seem far fetched to us now, but none of the writers of the 14th amendment would have considered that it would someday be used to legalize abortion. And yet that is exactly what happened. There is even some fool out there trying to get "In God We Trust" taken off US currency on the premise that it violates the first amendment. With the right combination of plaintiff and judges, even the unimaginable is possible.

Can you imagine how the Church would respond if the courts ruled against them in such a case. Would the temples in California just close down? Would the First Presidency call all the members in California to leave the state? And then dust their feet as they leave? Where would they go? What would the effect be of half a million Californians just leaving the state? How many would really leave if told to by the Church? Would there be another splinter group?

Just for the record, I don't care if same sex marriages are legal in California. We didn't fight that hard against the repeal of prohibition. Or the decriminalization of adultery. Or against the idea of no fault divorces. Of course, we have to claim it is a moral issue. If we just said "we oppose this because we are paranoid" I don't think it would sound nearly as salient. All the same, the vague argument that it will erode away at the institution of marriage could be interpreted as paranoia. But as the saying goes, just because you're paranoid it doesn't mean there isn't someone out to get you.

Pontiac Michigan Branch Research

I have found that I tend to wander from one topic to another when I do any kind of research. In this case I have developed an interest in the Pontiac Michigan Branch. But I have been only getting peices of a whole story.

Some of it will come from the writings of Lucy Mack Smith. She had much to say about Pontiac that was very interesting. I have been able to review her writting with little difficulty.

Edward Stevenson was one of the Seven Presidents of the Seventy. His family joined the church in Pontiac Michigan. So what he has to say would be very interesting to read if I could get at a copy of the original documents. Although I can find quotes, I can't even find a reference for them.

The other source I would love to read is the discourse Jospeh Smith gave during his 1834 visit to Pontiac. I find many quotes from it, but I can't seem to find the entire discourse. Unfortunately I am in Nashville and I'm not having any luck getting a copy at the library or online. I appear to have two options. Either I can visit a library in Utah and read it there, or buy it in a published collection. The one I am looking at is Early Mormon Documents Vol. 1 edited by Dan Vogel. But I don't really want to have to buy it if I don't have too. Any Suggestions?

Joseph Smith's distant relations.

In many of the mormon histories I have read there appears to be a pattern in early missionary work. Early branches of the church were formed when missionaries would travel to a place where Josoph Smith had relatives. One case in point was the Pontiac Michigan Branch. Hyrum Smith and others went there to share the gospel with his mother's family in 1831. Lucy's brother, Stephen Mack, had founded the city of Pontiac and his widow and children still lived there. His daughter Almira had already joined the church while visiting Lucy in New York. Ultimately, they did not receive his message, but others who heard the message did. Aftre Hyrum anf his companions left Lucy stayed behind to visit relatives and fellowship the new members. These early members asked Lucy to have the church send another missionary, preferably in nice clothes this time. Lucy made sure the next missionary (Jared Carter) was better dressed. By October 1834 there is a branch there large enough (reportedly over a hundred members) that Joseph Smith and several other church leaders make a special visit.

All this makes me wonder how many other early church branches may have been connected to Joseph Smith's family.

Parley P Pratt's Autobiography

I have just started reading Parley Pratt's Autobiography. To be honest I don't really like his writing style as much. A little too flowery and wordy. Perhaps even a little hagiographic, if I can use that to describe an autobiography. But his book came so well recommended. It is pretty much a first hand account even if it was written near the end of his life. I'll get through it. I am finding some great gems here and there.
Shortly after hearing the gospel, Parley witnessed what he described as an astronomical event. A string of red lights in the sky forming a line which moved to form a carpenters square and then a compass before fading away. His reaction was one of wonder as you might expect. But I found it odd to find an astronomical "sign of the times" instead of a spiritual vision.
I was thinking I should expand my reading list, but I have few ideas on the relative value of various books. So how can I determin which ones to read first? I was hoping I could solicit some help in collecting and prioritizing the list.

Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling

I recently finished reading Richard Bushman's wonderful biography of Joseph Smith. I loved it. Unfortunately, the tone he chose for the book was probably not right if he truly wants his book to replace Brodie's as the definitive work on Joseph Smith. His premise was that he would try to present Joseph and his followers saw him. and avoid digging into the veracity of his claims. Admittedly this made for a shorter book than it would have been had he addressed his detractors claims. And to tell you the truth, it is pretty long as it is. But his intent was to present what was going on in his mind. Why did he do the things he did and what events in his life contributed to his decisions. Although Bushman was willing to bring up issues some devote Mormons will be uncomfortable with, Bushman nearly always came down on the sympathetic side of Joseph Smith's controversial life.

Bushman did note something I had not noticed before. When non-mormon historians write about Joseph Smith, they tend to refer to him as "Smith." When Mormons refer to him they call him "Joseph." Bushman decided to use "Joseph: in his book, to be true to the tone of his book. In writing this post, I noticed just how hard it is to decide the which to use. Part of me wants to use "Joseph", and another part to use "Smith." For now I use his full name, but I guess I'll just have to see where I come down on this as I write more.

Errors in original documents

I find it fascinating that Mary Curtis' primary biographer, Charlotta Julina Markham Crow, got so many of the ages and other details wrong in her account. Naively, I expected better data considering Mary was her mother.
It appears that even Mary was willing to fudge some of the deatails of her life. When she went through the temple for her own endowments she listed her birthdate as one year earlier. Was there some requirement that she be at least 14? But other records where her birthdate is listed next to her husband also uses the 1831 date instead of 1832. Only when she is listed by herself does the correct 1832 date get used. I have to wonder if she was embarrased at her youth and perhaps even lied to her husband.
This being my first foray into historic research to verify existing family biographies, I'm curious how frequently these errors are made and how many more I have missed.

How do professional researchers (and I know you are out there) deal with this issue?

Mary Lucy Curtis Houghton Markham

Below is a biography of a Mormon woman who married at the age of 12. In the light of what was reportedly going on in the FLDS church, I thought this would be interesting. This post represents the first in a series that is designed to allow me to practice my research skills. I will be taking existing family biographies and attempting to verify and flesh out details using records from other sources.

Mary Lucy Curtis was born 15 November 1832 in Highland, Michigan. Her parents, Jeremiah Curtis and Ruth Stratton, along with their extended family, moved to Michigan from Pennsylvania about 10 years earlier. Once there, they met with Mormon missionaries and joined the church. They became part of the Pontiac Michigan Branch.

In 1835 the she moved to Missouri (not Nauvoo in 1836 as recorded in Charlotta Crow’s account). She lived with her sister, Aurelia, who had married Ornan Houghton in Michigan in 1834. Ornan had been part of Zions camp.

Mr. Houghton and his wife had lost their oldest child [in Missouri in 1835] and they felt so lonely and bad that they took Mary to live with them. Aurelia wanted Sarah, who was two years old, but Ornan wanted Mary, who was four years old, as while traveling she had hung to him so close he had become very much attached to her. Crow

There are few details about their life in Missouri. There are birth and death records for Aurelia’s other children in Missouri. Her parents names (Jeremiah & Ruth Curtis) show up in the petition sent to congress for redress for what happened there. Documents list their residence as Clay and Caldwell counties. No accounts of the hardships they faced in Missouri have been found yet.

Following the expulsion from Missouri in 1838, the Houghtons moved to Nauvoo. Ornan purchased same land in Nauvoo. There, Mary grew up in the Houghton household. Her personal history starts up in the events following the death of Joseph Smith.

She was among the mourners who stood by the roadside as the bodies of the Prophet Joseph Smith and his brother Hyrum Smith were brought back to Nauvoo after being murdered in Carthage Jail. Crow

On 8 August 1844 she … heard and [saw] Brigham Young when the mantle of Joseph Smith fell upon him and heard his voice as of Joseph's. She often testified of this as she was present at the meeting when the question was presented as to whether the saints should follow the twelve apostles or Sidney Rigdon. Crow

A few months later, on 21 February 1845, Mary’s sister, Aurelia, died of “quick consumption” (now known as galloping or miliary TB) when Mary was 12. Aurelia's last wish was that Ornan take her sister, Mary, as his wife, knowing how well her children would be cared for.

In March of 1845 her father's family went with Lyman Wight's company to Texas. They tried hard to persude her to join them. But she strongly believed that she should remain with the saints who followed Brigham Young. She would never see her parents again.

On 11 July 1845, while still only 12 years old, she married Mr. Houghton (who was 38). Family accounts record her age as 14 in more than one place. But the birth date and marriage date are clearly 12 years apart. One must suppose that Mary claimed to be 14 at one point, perhaps to get around the legal age limit, and never corrected the lie. There are some records that indicate her birth was in 1831, but only when recorded next to Ornan Houghton.

Mary went through the Nauvoo Temple January 29, 1846, at age 13, and had her own endowments along with her husband Ornan. There marriage was not sealed during his lifetime. They ran out of time as the ordiance room was closed on Feb 8th 1846. That day they crossed the Mississippi, nearly drowning in an ferry accident. On the far side Ornan took ill due to exposure. Because of his health, Brigham Young advised him to stay and travel with a later company when hi shealth returned. While waiting Mary had one son, Edgar, born on 10 October 1846. But Ornans health never improved. On 18 of August 1847, when Mary was 14, her husband died, leaving her a widow with three children.

After the death of her husband and while still a widow her oldest brother Meacham came from Texas, where all her brothers and sisters lived with their parents, but his only conveyance was a mule to take her and her three children to join the rest of the family. He sold everything he could belonging to her, even a strand of gold beads which had been handed down in the family for a number of generations. These beads were to be handed down to Louisa for which she never forgave him in all her eighty [actually 67] years of life. Still, Mary would not consent to go with him, as she had heard Brigham Young speak and she knew he was chosen by God to lead his people. Her brother went back to Texas very mad at her as was all the rest of the family. Crow

Her parents’ family never rejoined the saints. According to one account, they are buried in the Zodiac cemetery near Fredricksburg, Texas. Another account places them in Oklahoma, dying from salt poisoning. After the death of Wight, her siblings scattered across the western US.

At some point she went back to Nauvoo or at least close enought to witness that awful sight [of] the temple burning down. Her step-daughter Louisa remembers seeing the temple burn in 1848, and seeing an old Catholic woman waving her arms and shouting "Glory Hallelujah" as she watched it burn. Crow

Somehow she made it to Council Bluffs, Iowa. There she joined her cousins in the spring of 1850

…She joined her cousins of the Curtis family who had wagons and cows and one horse which they hitched up together and they started for the west. Mary and Francis Houghton, her step son nine [actually 12] years old, drove the team across the plains. She helped cook for the company of the Curtis family. Crow

Since she raised the other two children, Edgar and Louisa, I have assumed there travelled with her as well, even though they are not mentioned in Charlotta's account.

Stephen Markham was Captain of the company. They arrived in the Salt Lake valley the first of October 1850, and on the fifth of October she married Stephen Markham in Brigham Young's office as the Endowment House had not yet been built. Crow
Heber C Kimbal performed the ceremony.

In 1851 her husband was called to settle the Spanish Fork area. He served as Bishop and she went with him as one of several wives. In her biography, she was regarded well because of her superior domestic skills, her hospitality and her integrity.

Mary had thirteen children by Mr. Markham and raised four other children. She was again widowed on 10 March 1878 when Mr. Markham died. She died in Spanish Fork the 6 of October, 1900. Crow

Family folklore states Stephen was truely in love with her (I'll bet he said that all his wives) and that he asked her to have her sealing to her first husband cancelled so she could be sealed to him, and that she refused to do so. The implication was that she was truely in love with her first husband regardless of how young she was when she married him.

[Addendum: Descendents of her children through Stephen Markham believe her relationship with Ornan was more like that of a father. They contend that because she did not get sealed to either one during their lifetime, that in the eternities she will have to choose one. Because of her lifetime with Stephen and their many children, they believe she will choose to be with Stephen.]

Average age of first marriage among early Mormon women

Being very curious about how common young (for the woman) marriages were in the early (19th century) Mormon church I pulled up my own family history and started searching. While I knew of one in particular at age 12, I was surprised to find several 14 and 15 year olds as well. Even with this, the average was 21.1 years old. I created this graph showing the distribution by decade.

Curiously, I found that the average woman's age at first marriage dropped sharply in the 1870s and jumped up in the 1880’s. I was left with a puzzle to explain. Was my sample too small? Probably, I only have records of 112 marriages in the 19th century. But since this dip happened in the middle of the polygamous period, perhaps there is an explanation tied to this peculiar practice. Anyone have any suggestions?

Radical Mormon

I read an article by Eugene England on Orson Scot Card. In it, England describes Card as a radical Mormon. He describes him as “deeply committed at his core to both the Church and the Gospel and to traditional family values, to the point of great self-sacrifice”. The implication is that Card is not like other modern Mormon conservatives, in that he is “willing, in his fiction, to attempt to get at the roots of the most fundamental questions and issues affecting the Mormon religion.” England calls Milton and Shakespeare radicals too because they “both comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.” By calling Card a radical he puts him in the august company. For his bias toward selecting literary figures I will forgive England because he was, after all, a professor of literature. But I like his idea of what makes a radical Mormon.

To expand on England’s idea, an honest yet faithful approach to Mormon history requires that we take a radical stance. No student of Mormon history discovers preconceived notions wrapped up in neat little packages. True history is far too messy for the conservative approach. Radical Mormons dig through the doctrinal folklore that makes up our history and understand the root of Mormon theology. They accept what they find as interesting and embrace its unique character.

In this sense I am radical. I accept what is Mormon not on the merits of its historic narrative, but because of it spiritual qualities. I am Mormon because of the spiritual events in my live. I study Mormon history because each event adds one more thread to the whole fabric of the Mormon experience. The cloth is not perfect, but if I tried to remove the imperfections, I would destroy the integrity of the fabric. Like the way my wife loves the look of woven raw silk, Mormon history is beautiful just as it is.

I'd Rather Know

When I was in high school, I was confronted with the existence of temple garments by a friend who wasn’t Mormon. Quite honestly I had never heard of them before and dismissed the whole notion as nonsense. Neither of my parents had been to the temple. Of course, I was later surprised to learn she was right. Well, mostly right, anyway.

Around the same time our ward planned an activity for the youth which involved explaining the events leading up to and including Mountain Meadows. The idea was to present the proven facts so that we would not be caught off guard by the speculation of anti-Mormons. I remember the discussion to this day. While they did not get all the facts right, I applaud the effort. Based on the difference between the two events, I prefer to learn about these things before I am surprised by them. How can I use my agency if I don’t know about the choice? How can I have faith it is true if it is presented in a way that does not require that leap of faith?

We don’t need to create erroneous notions about church history to make it more believable. It is pretty preposterous as it is. A little more truth won’t hurt it. Just a couple of years ago, I ran across a reference to the Kinderhook plates. I had somehow missed the Ensign article from 1981. My bishop basically told me there are somethings better left alone. I couldn't disagree more. As a result I determined to learn all the dirty little secrets no talks about. I would not be surprised again.

Part of the purpose of this blog is to put out there a snapshot of where I am in that journey. My approach to research is eclectic. Seldom do I have the time or discipline to focus on one subject long enough to learn all there is to learn. So if anyone sees I have missed something along the way, feel free to point it out.