Brigham Young and the Mountain Meadows Massacre

Historians still debate the autonomy and precise roles of local Cedar City LDS Church officials in ordering the massacre and Young's concealing of evidence in its aftermath.

[3] Young's use of inflammatory and violent language[4] in response to a federal expedition to the territory (known as the Utah War) added to the tense atmosphere at the time of the attack.

[5] It is unclear whether Young held this view because of a possible belief that this specific group posed a threat to colonists or that they were responsible for past crimes against Mormons.

"[6] The Mountain Meadows Massacre victimized several groups of emigrants from the northwestern Arkansas region who had started their treks to California in early 1857, joining along the way and becoming known as the Baker–Fancher party.

The religion had undergone a period of intense conflict with non-Mormons in the American midwest, and faithful Mormons made solemn oaths to pray for vengeance upon those who killed the "prophets" including founder Joseph Smith, and more recently apostle Parley P. Pratt, who was murdered in April 1857 while traveling as a missionary in Arkansas.

[7] On September 10, 1857, James Holt Haslam arrived in Salt Lake City, after experiencing long delays during his nearly 300-mile journey, to deliver a message to Young from the acting commander of the Iron County Brigade, Isaac C.

"[11] Young's message of reply to Haight, dated September 10, 1857, read: In regard to emigration trains passing through our settlements, we must not interfere with them until they are first notified to keep away.

have argued that since Young understood that an engagement may have already taken place, he tailored his response knowing the message would be used as evidence in the aftermath, and could serve to limit his own liability.

"[14] Brooks writes, "While Brigham Young and other church authorities did not specifically order the massacre, they did preach sermons and set up social conditions that made it possible."

[14] In Blood of the Prophets, Mormon historian William Bagley echoes David White's conclusion that the letter does not absolve Young of any wrongdoing.

[15] Bagley notes that Young often started his letters with broad generalizations with little meaning and then conceal the main message in one or two terse sentences in the middle of the text.