OCR Text |
Show 99 had given them had been taken for wheat fields. When they asked the Mormons for some of the bread raised on their lands, and beef fed on their grass, the Mormons insulted them, calling them dogs and other bad names. They said when the Mormons stole big fields and got rich, other Mormons, who were poor, had to buy the land from them, they were not allowed to steal it from the first owners, the same as the first Mormons stole it from the Indians. I have often wondered how these statements will be answered. They are still open. I never could answer them like many other propositions I have had to meet while laboring among the Indians. I have had to give it up acknowledging that they had been wronged. All I could do was to get their hearts set right and then teach them magnanimity. Some may jeer at this idea, but I have found more nobility of character among the Indians than what is common among many whites, even Mormons included. In explanation of their accusing some of the Mormon Bishops of helping to rob them, it had been told to them how the agents managed to get certain ones to sign false vouchers for flour and beef. Whether this was true or not the Indians fully believed that it was. I found evidences afterwards that at least looked like their accusations were well founded.1° It was obvious that the lack of good crops, government penury, and bullying by the citizenry and Army would not and could not bring a solution to this difficult and vexatious situation. The problems awaited a new man. 16Ibid., p. 193. |