The Schism Among the Mormons in California

The article discusses a split among the Mormons in San Francisco, with tensions leading to a significant disagreement. The outcome of this split is expected to scatter them across different parts of California, where they are believed to be hardworking and industrious individuals who can contribute positively to society. The article suggests that both sides may be at fault in the conflict.

The short article titled "THE MORMONS." provides an intriguing glimpse into the sectarian strife experienced by the Mormon community in San Francisco during the 19th century, reflecting both social dynamics and broader historical trends. The mention of an "irreconcilable split" suggests significant internal conflict, which was not uncommon during this period for the Mormons, who were often at odds with emerging national attitudes and within their own divergent factions.

The phrase "the little volcano has been rumbling for some time, and has at last broke forth in flame" is particularly illustrative of the narrative tension surrounding Mormonism at the time. The metaphor of a volcano indicates both the simmering unrest within the community and the potential for explosive conflict that could affect the group's stability and external relationships. The metaphor aptly captures the precariousness of their societal position as a distinct religious group in a predominantly Protestant America, especially given the background of persecution they had faced since Joseph Smith founded the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in 1830.

The author wisely refrains from assigning blame, stating, "Where the fault lies, we pretend not to say—probably as in most quarrels, on both sides." This neutrality highlights a common historical approach where outsiders often found it difficult to fully understand the complexities of intra-group difficulties, especially within communities like the Mormons, which were frequently marginalized and misunderstood. It becomes evident that the author recognizes the inherent challenges in elucidating the dynamics of communal faith identities that were under pressure, both internally and externally.

Moreover, the assertion that "in this dissevered state they will undoubtedly do more good than a distinct community" is quite revealing of the author's attitude towards the Mormons. The suggestion that a more fragmented community could be more beneficial implies an acknowledgment of their industrious nature. The following description—"They are a plain, laborious, frugal people, and little deserve the approbum which may be cast upon them"—serves as a defensive posture that seeks to mitigate criticism of the Mormons. In the context of the mid-19th century, when Mormons were often seen as outsiders and faced widespread prejudice, such affirmation of their virtues as hardworking and frugal individuals challenges a narrative that often labeled them as deviant or untrustworthy.

In summary, the article encapsulates a transformative period in the history of the Mormon community, marked by both internal divisions and external perceptions. The Mormons' industriousness and potential for societal contribution, despite cultural tensions, is a theme that resonates beyond the confines of this text, situating the community within the broader tapestry of American religious pluralism and conflict during the 19th century. The challenges they faced not only shaped their development but also contributed extensively to America's evolving narrative on religion and community.

 The Schism Among the Mormons in California: A Historical Perspective

In a notable 1846 article from *The Californian*, we encounter a pivotal moment in California's social landscape, reflecting the broader patterns of migration, settlement, and community division in the 19th century. Although the piece is succinct, it highlights significant themes: the Mormons' industrious nature, their evolving roles in California's burgeoning society, and the conflicts arising from cultural and ideological differences. This post will delve into the article's core messages and situate them within the larger narrative of American history, exploring how the divisions among the Mormons offer profound insights into the complexities of communal living and settlement patterns.

 Understanding the Context

To appreciate the significance of this article fully, we must first explore the historical backdrop of Mormonism and its followers’ migration journeys to territories like California. Founded in the 1820s by Joseph Smith, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was born out of a need for refuge from rampant persecution. Early Mormons sought new frontiers where they could establish communities free from judgment and fear. The tragic and often violent history of the Mormons included a series of migrations—from New York to the Midwest—culminating in their flight to Utah under the leadership of Brigham Young.

This quest for safety and community laid the foundation for their arrival in California, where they would again confront the challenges of settling in a new land.

 The Expansion to California

By the mid-1840s, the allure of California, catalyzed by the Gold Rush and burgeoning economic opportunities, attracted a diverse array of groups, including the Mormons. The 1846 article notes a prominent schism among Mormons in San Francisco, indicating that, even within their ranks, tensions were rising. With the phrase "the little volcano has been rumbling for some time, and has at last broke forth in flame," the author captures the simmering unrest, likely fueled by differing opinions on settlement strategies, local conflicts, and varying interpretations of their faith.

This unrest serves as a microcosm for the broader divisions that arise when disparate societies converge in new territories. The interplay of cultures and ideologies can lead to fracturing as individuals strive to forge their identities amid conflicts. Importantly, this friction was not confined to the Mormons; many immigrant groups in 19th-century California grappled with similar challenges as they navigated their cultural identities in a diverse yet tense landscape.

Schisms within the Community

The article describes this “irreconcilable split” among Mormons, suggesting that their dispersion across California could allow them to thrive independently rather than remain a singular, divided community. The author optimistically posits that "in this dissevered state they will undoubtedly do more good than a distinct community," implying that distinct groups might be better suited to serve the rapidly expanding and diverse economy.

Reflecting on this division prompts us to consider similar instances in American history, where communities fragmented to optimize their economic and social contributions. Just as labor movements often birthed factions of varying ideologies to address communal needs, so too did the Mormons find that their divisions could lead to innovative solutions, albeit at the cost of initial cohesion.

The Frugal and Hardworking Nature of the Mormons

Central to the article is its portrayal of the Mormons as "a plain, laborious, frugal people," a characterization that serves multiple purposes. First, it aligns with the prevailing 19th-century American values of hard work and industriousness—an era marked by westward expansion and the quest for economic opportunity.

Moreover, this depiction subtly defends the Mormons against the pervasive stigma they faced. By celebrating their work ethic and contributions, the author seeks to humanize a group often marginalized for its beliefs. This reflection reveals that preconceived notions about the Mormons were frequently informed by misunderstanding and prejudice.

Mormons and California’s Transformation

The settlement of Mormons in California marked a period of considerable change and transformation in the region. As they spread out, they brought agricultural skills, trade practices, and a distinctive ethos of cooperation that fostered community collaboration. Their agricultural advancements would play a crucial role in establishing California's reputation as a thriving agricultural powerhouse.

By examining the era's shifts alongside contemporary accounts, we can see how these pioneering communities laid the groundwork for California’s future. The Mormons were not merely transient explorers of gold-laden lands; they were integral in establishing systems of labor and commerce that would enrich the state's economy.

Broader Implications of the Mormon Experience

The historical schism among Mormons carries implications that extend beyond their community, reflecting broader societal dynamics. Such divisions shape the very fabric of the communities in which they exist, highlighting the complex interplay of competing ideologies and cultural practices.

Throughout American history, fragmentation has often emerged in response to external pressures or internal crises. These moments of disunity have paved the way for the formation of new factions, alternative political ideologies, and organized movements. In the case of the Mormons, their "dissevered state" set the stage for a process of adaptation and resilience—traits that would characterize much of American life.

The Legacies of Tension and Cooperation

As we reflect on the historical narrative surrounding this article, we recognize that the legacies of such tensions aren't confined to their time. The cultural fabric of contemporary society, both in California and across the nation, continues to be shaped by similar dynamics of conflict, adaptation, and cooperation. The ability to navigate divisions and harness strengths within cultural enclaves often dictates the trajectory of social progress.

Today, we witness a rich diversity in American communities, echoing the multifaceted cultural landscapes that challenged early settlers. Understanding the roots of these dynamics roots our interpretation of current societal challenges.

 Conclusion

In summary, the schism among the Mormons in San Francisco during the mid-19th century is more than a simple anecdote; it exemplifies a microcosm of the larger struggles, triumphs, and transformations that defined the experiences of early American settlers. The insights gleaned from the article reflect themes of communal living, economic contributions, social cooperation, and resilience amidst discord, serving as a historical touchpoint that resonates with contemporary discussions surrounding diversity, identity politics, and collaboration across differences.

As we navigate the complexities within our communities and the broader national discourse, we would do well to remember these historical narratives—of industrious peoples, of friction, and ultimately, of shared growth and potential. In reflecting on divisions and their capacity for renewal, we hold the power to shape a more inclusive and productive future, drawing from the invaluable lessons of the past.

Key Phrases:

1. **Mormon migration and persecution** - This relates to the historical context of Mormonism and the socio-political challenges faced by its followers. For further reading, see the article on [Mormon Migration](https://www.history.com/topics/religion/mormonism).

2. **California Gold Rush and 19th-century migration** - The Gold Rush significantly influenced migration patterns in America. For a comprehensive overview, refer to the National Park Service's resource on the [California Gold Rush](https://www.nps.gov/goga/learn/historyculture/goldrush.htm).

3. **Cultural schisms among immigrant communities** - This phrase points to broader issues of social conflict and cultural integration among immigrants. An insightful resource can be found in the article "Cultural Clash: Immigrants and American Society" at [PBS](https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/immigrants-and-american-society/).

4. **Economic contributions of Mormons in California** - The impact of the Mormons on California's economy warrants deeper exploration. The article on [Mormon Economic Contributions](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/mormon-economics?lang=eng) provides relevant insights.

5. **Community fragmentation and identity politics** - Understanding how community divisions shape identity in America is essential. Consider exploring the work on identity politics in the context of American history by reading "Identity Politics and the Politics of Identity" from [Brookings](https://www.brookings.edu/research/identity-politics-and-the-politics-of-identity/).

6. **Mormon agricultural practices** - Mormons played a crucial role in developing agriculture in California. For a detailed history of their agricultural contributions, see [The Mormon Pioneer Farm](https://www.sltrib.com/news/2020/06/06/mormon-battle-agriculture/).

7. **Resilience amidst discord** - This theme resonates with various historical movements across cultures. For a broader understanding, see the resource "Resilience in American History" from [Harvard University](https://www.harvard.edu/resilience-in-american-history).

8. **Preconceptions about marginalized communities** - This addresses not only historical biases against the Mormons but also ongoing societal issues. An interesting perspective can be found in the article "Understanding Stereotypes and Prejudice" at [American Psychological Association](https://www.apa.org/topics/prejudice).

These phrases and their corresponding resources can provide a meaningful foundation for further research into the topics related to the schism among Mormons in California and their broader historical context.

**Citation**: The Californian
- THE MORMONS.—There has been, it, 1846-10-10
https://cdnc.ucr.edu/ University of California Riverside Digital Newspaper Archive

Original Article:

seems, an irreconcilable split among the Mormons at San Francisco. The little volcano has been rumbling for some time, and has at last broke forth in flame. Where the fault lies, we pretend not to say—probably as in most quarrels, on both sides. The result of this explosion will be to throw them into different parts of California. In this dissevered state they will undoubtedly do more good than a distinct community. They have habits of industry that can make them extensively useful. They are a plain, laborious, frugal people, and little deserve the approbum which may be cast upon them.

 

A Twirling Tango: Diving into the French and English Minds

This article contrasts the characteristics of the French and English intellects and temperaments in the 19th century. It describes the French as quick, social, and optimistic, enjoying immediate pleasures and being resourceful in making the most of small means. In contrast, the English are portrayed as more reserved, self-reliant, and pragmatic, valuing solidity and completeness in their pursuits. The French are depicted as lively and communicative, living in bustling environments, while the English prefer privacy and quiet in their brick mansions. The French are said to excel in wit and sensibility, while the English are noted for their humor and richer imaginations.

Diving into the French and English Minds

Analyzing this article from a historical perspective, we recognize that it's a socio-cultural commentary comparing the collective intellectual and social behaviors of the French and the British societies during the Late Georgian to Early Victorian era (approx. 1810 - 1840). It appears to be written by a keen observer, echoing sentiments that were common during those times, as nations in Europe tried to understand each other's ways of life and cultural perspectives.

While outlining the characteristics of the French, the author states, "The French intellect is quick and active...They are therefore more social and communicative; more fond of society, and of places of public resort and amusement." This statement mirrors contemporary observations about the French society. Indeed, Paris was said to be bustling with intellectual salons, busy cafés and marathon dances during that time period, indicating a social vibrancy that the author attributes to the French people.

But the author's claims are not universally flattering. They note that, "The faults of the opposite temperaments are, that the vivacity of the French is apt to sparkle up and become frothy, the gravity of the English to settle down and grow muddy." This framing suggests a cautionary tone applied to both societies - the French risk being superficially vivacious, while the English may verge on becoming overly solemn or stagnant.

Again, shedding light upon the British society, the author writes, "An Englishman is more reductive in his habits. He lives in the world of his own thoughts, and seems more self-existent and self-dependent. The Englishman, on the contrary, is expensive in his habits, and expensive in his enjoyments, He values everything, whether useful or ornamental, by what it costs." This image of the introspective and conservative Englishman aligns with a larger Victorian societal veneration of propriety and constraint.

There does seem to be some bias in the author's observations. For instance, military prowess and intentions are framed quite differently for each country. Here the author asserts that "The ardent Frenchman is all for military renown: he fights for glory... John Hull [Englishman]...fights because the good of the world requires it..." Although the historical context must be scrutinized in order to further explore these claims, this difference in framing does suggest an implicit favoritism towards the English manner of waging war.

In conclusion, what resonates through this analysis is the interplay of cultural perceptions and prejudices during a key historical era. Not only does it reveal the ways in which these societies viewed each other, which would eventually impact diplomatic relations, but it also opens up a canyon of questions about how far such societal generalizations can truly describe a nation's intellect and disposition.

Narrative Exposition:

There's an enthralling allure to humanity's cultural diversity – considering it as an ever-changing mosaic of intertwining perspectives, societal norms, shrouded in a kaleidoscope of colors. Amid the labyrinthine complexities of this social tapestry, we find comfort in discovering shared intellectual landscapes. Historical imprints and societal contexts have birthed distinct mindsets – a captivating conceptual space explored within fields such as anthropology, psychology, and sociology. One compelling facet of this is the comparison of the French and English psyche as presented in the article 'The French intellect is quick.'

"The French intellect is quick and active. It flashes its way into a subject with the rapidity of lightning; seizes upon remote conclusions with a sudden bound, and its deductions are almost intuitive." This provocative opener carves a vivid tableau of the French mind - nimble, effervescent, and innately intuitive. On the flip side, the sturdy English intellect is painted with a more persistent, introspective, and meticulous brush, steadfast in its approach.

The charm of these differences, eloquently stated in the article, isn't about superiority but lies in the unique gifts each psyche presents. These variations in their inherent dispositions radiate into lifestyle choices, societal norms, and interaction styles, exuding the intricate interplay between individual mindset and societal culture.

The lively French mind, fond of socializing and the public sphere, is said to glean from immediate impressions. The English, however, leans toward introspection, meditation, and measured social conduct. Instead of antagonistic opposites, these distinct traits form a beautiful diptych — a harmonious blend of societal structures, cultural normatives, and psychological virtues hewn by history.

"The Englishman is more reductive in his habits. He lives in the world of his own thoughts, and seems more self-existent and self-dependent. He loves the quiet of his own apartment: even when abroad, he in a manner makes a little solitude around him, by his silence and reserve," the article elucidates, encapsulating the serene, introspective ethos of English intellect. In stark contrast, the vivacious French spirit emanates from their enthusiasm, optimism, and their remarkable talent at deriving joy from life's simple pleasures.

Taking a step back, could England's geographical isolation have shaped the English introspective psyche over generations? Or has France's central role as Europe's cultural nexus nurtured the outgoing, sociable demeanor in its people? History indeed leaves subtle but enduring imprints on a nation's collective consciousness.

These ingrained dispositions interestingly reflect in the nations' approach to societal and national matters. The French are depicted as favoring glory, thrill, and martial honor, while the typically reasoned and reflective English gravitate towards rationality and ethical stewardship.

A deeper examination redirects towards past events like the French Revolution, underscoring individual glorification and national pride, opposed to the English emphasis on rule of law and social order. Notably, these character sketches, while insightful, shouldn't be mistaken as definitive — personal and cultural subtleties significantly color individual attitudes and behaviors.

This dissection of dual intellects affords an enlightening lens into the vast spectrum of cognitive and cultural diversity. Honouring individual and social differences fosters mutual respect and comprehension, a necessary lesson for our increasingly interconnected world. As the article fittingly concludes: "When the two characters can be fixed in a medium, the French kept from effervescence and the English from stagnation, both will be found excellent."

In a nutshell, exploring the nuances between the French and English minds sparks a greater appreciation for our collective intellectual dance's contrasting cadences. Weaving these differences harmoniously could very well forge paths towards mutual understanding and respect, setting the stage for a more cohesive multicultural global society.

Key Phrases:

1. 'French and English psyche' - This refers to a comparison of mindsets and behavioral patterns among the French and English people. For additional research, see this comprehensive overview on [French and English cultural differences](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15348423.2020.1725749) from Journal of Intercultural Communication Research.

2. 'Anthropology, psychology, and sociology' - These academic fields often study and compare different cultural mindsets. For further reading, try the [Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy's](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/culture-cog/) page on Culture and Cognitive Science.

3. 'Societal norms and interaction styles' - These terms refer to the commonly accepted behavior and methods of communication within a society. For continued studies, read about [Social Norms](https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.soc.25.1.395) from Annual Review of Sociology.

4. 'French Revolution' - This refers to the historical event that significantly shaped France's societal and political landscape. For further research, refer to the [Overview of the French Revolution](https://www.history.com/topics/france/french-revolution) from History.com.

5. 'England's geographical isolation' and 'France's central role as Europe's cultural nexus' - These indicate potential factors that might have shaped societal behaviors and mindsets over time. For more context, consider referring to [Geography and History in the Near North](https://books.google.com/books?id=UVmHDwAAQBAJ) from Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

**Citation**: Trinity Journal
- The French intellect is quick, 1855-05-05
https://cdnc.ucr.edu/ University of California Riverside Digital Newspaper Archive

Original Article:

 It flashes its way into a subject with the rapidity of lightning; seizes upon remote conclusions with a sudden bound, and its deductions are almost intuitive. The English intellect is less rapid, but more persevering; less sudden, but more sure in its deductions. The quickness and mobility of the French enable them to find enjoyment in the multiplicity of sensations. They speak and act more from immediate impressions than from reduction and meditation. They are therefore more social and communicative; more fond of society, and of places of public resort and amusement, An Englishman is more reductive in his habits. He lives in the world of his own thoughts, and seems more self-existent and self-dependent. He loves the quiet of his own apartment: even when abroad, he in a manner makes a little solitude around him, by his silence and reserve; he moves about shy and solitary, and as it were, buttoned up, body and soul. The French are great optimists: they seize upon every good as it flies, and revel in the passing pleasure. The Englishman is too apt to neglect the present good, and preparing against the possible evil. However adversities may lower, let the sunshine but for a moment, and forth sallies the mercurial Frenchman, in holiday dress and holiday spirits, gay as a butterfly, as though his sun were perpetual: but let the sun beam never so brightly, so there be but a cloud in the horizon, the wary Englishman ventures forth distrustfully, with his umbrella in his hand. The Frenchman has a wonderful facility at turning small things to advantage. No one can be gay and luxurious on smaller means: no one require less expense to be happy. He practices a kind of gilding in his style of living, and hammers out every guinea into goldleaf. The Englishman, on the contrary, is expensive in his habits, and expensive in his enjoyments, He values everything, whether useful or ornamental, by what it costs. He has no satisfaction in show, unless it be solid and complete. Everything goes with him by the square foot. Whatever display he makes the depth is sure to equal the surface. The Frenchman's habitation, like himself, is open, cheerful, bustling, and noisy. He lives in a part of a great hotel, with wide portal, paved court, a spacious dirty, stone staircase and a family on every floor. All is clatter and chatter. He is good-humored and talkative with his servants, sociable with his neighbors, and complaisant to all the world. Anybody has access to himself and his apartments: his very bedroom is open to visitors, whatever may be its state of confusion; and all this not from any peculiarly hospitable feeling, but from that communicative habit which predominates over his character. The Englishman, on the contrary, ensconces himself in a snug brick mansion, which he has all to himself; locks the front door: puts broken bottles along his walls, and spring-guns and man-traps in his garden: shrouds him with trees and window curtains, in his quiet and privacy, and seems disposed to keep out noise, daylight, and company.— His house, like himself, has a reserved, inhospitable exterior: yet whoever gains admittance, is apt to find a warm heart and warm fireside within. The French excel in wit: the English in humor: the French have gayer fancy, the English richer imaginations. The former are full of Sensibility, easily moved, and prone to sudden and great excitement; but their excitement is not durable: the English are more phlegmatic: not so readily affected: but capable of being aroused to great enthusiasm. The faults of the opposite temperaments are, that the vivacity of the French is apt to sparkle up an become frothy, the gravity of the English to settle down and grow muddy.— When the two characters can be fixed in a medium, the French kept from effervescence and the English from stagnation, both will be found excellent. This contrast of character may also be noticed in the great concerns of the two nations. The ardent Frenchman is all for military renown: he fights for glory, that is to say, for success in arms. For, provided the national flag be victorious, he cares little about the expense, the injustice or the inutility of the war. It is wonderful how the poorest Frenchman will revel on a triumphant bulletin: a great victory is meat and drink to him: and at the sight of a military sovereign, bringing home captured cannon and captured standards, he throws up his greasy cap in the air, and is ready to jump out of his wooden shoes for joy. John Hull, on the contrary, is a reasoning, considerate person. If he does wrong it is in the most rational way imaginable. He fights because the good of the world requires it. He is a moral person, and makes war upon his neighbor for the maintenance of peace and good order, and sound principles.