Had the author bothered to read some of the secondary literature on the topic, he would have come to a much different conclusion. I refer readers to: Stanley S. Ivins, "Free Schools Come to Utah," Utah Historical Quarterly 22 (October 1954): 321-42; my article: "Charles S. Zane, Apostle of the New Era," Utah Historical Quarterly 34 (Fall 1966): 290-314; and my Mormonism in Transition: A History of the Latter-day Saints, 1890-1930 (University of Illinois Press, 1996).

Private schools appeared first in Utah as the pioneers entered the valley, but they were not tax-supported. The Mormon-dominated territorial legislature soon mandated tax-supported public schools.

Territorial laws of 1854 (which Brigham Young, as governor, signed) and 1866 required the establishment of tax-supported public schools, and the 1866 law required the school trustees to assess taxes on property to pay the cost of various purposes including "to pay teachers."

The people organized school districts along LDS ward lines. Some paid teachers' salaries, some supported themselves by a combination of taxation, private donations and tuition.

Those public schools were called "common schools"; later, the term "district schools" was adopted. Tax-supported public schools were not foisted on the people of Utah by anti-Mormons, rather Utah communities led out in the movement.

In 1867, American Fork was probably the first city in Utah to have fully tax-supported public schools. In 1869, the citizens of Washington County supported many of the schools, including teachers' salaries, by taxes; in 1870, Hyrum followed. In each of these, teacher salaries were paid through taxation.

In 1871, citizens of Utah County called on the legislature to establish fully tax-supported schools, and this movement expanded. In 1871, the territorial superintendent of schools, Robert L. Campbell, wrote in favor of "free schools." In 1890, the territorial legislature mandated tax-supported public education for all children.

The common schools were not tax-supported private schools. They were public schools. The private schools in Utah Territory consisted principally of Protestant mission schools, Catholic schools and academies operated by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. None of these was tax-supported.

After the passage of the Edmunds-Tucker Act in 1887, the LDS Church expanded its academy system so the schools could include religious instruction in their curriculum. These schools were not tax-supported. Beginning in 1912, however, the church started the seminary system.

By the 1920s, the LDS First Presidency recognized that the Latter-day Saints were paying for two educational systems - the tax-supported public education system and the voluntarily supported academies. They began to close down the academies and to encourage students to attend public schools and seminary, often on released time.

By the mid-1930s they retained only a few academies, all outside the United States, and several institutions of higher education in Utah and Idaho.

Most important, perhaps, we should understand that the Mormon leadership was not unified on the question of tax-supported free schools. Brigham Young, John Taylor and George Q. Cannon opposed them. Erastus Snow, however, a senior member of the Quorum of Twelve Apostles, publicly said the "State owes an education to its citizens and parents, to every child born into the world." (A. Karl Larson, Erastus Snow . . . . [U of U Press, 1971], 584.

Wilford Woodruff promoted the establishment of academies, but the people of his 14th Ward signed a petition that came out strongly in favor of public tax-supported education.

In addition, we should understand that territorial Utah was not a dictatorship of Brigham Young or anyone else. John Gunnision called it a "theo-democracy." Under the circumstances, when the people disliked something that some members of the church leadership favored, they simply did something else or refused to implement the leaders' proposals.

Examples occurred with the United Orders (1855-56 and 1874-75), the Walker War (1853-54) and tax-supported public schools.

This historical argument says nothing about the wisdom of using tax money for school vouchers today. It does say, however, that the historical argument presented by the Sutherland Institute is fallacious.

The people of Utah did not appropriate money for tax-supported private education in the 19th century. They also opted for tax-supported public education on its merits, not because it was foisted on them.

---

* THOMAS G. ALEXANDER is the Lemuel Hardison Redd Jr. Professor of Western American History at Brigham Young University, emeritus, where he taught for 40 years. He is the author of numerous books and articles on Utah, Western, Mormon and environmental history.