Buffalo Bill on Stage

6: Incidents and Accidents

• 101 • • C h a p t e r s i x • IncidentsandAccidents •••• Buffalo Bill . . . surrounded with defunct Indians, and standing stalwart in a cloud of smoke and dust . . . was sublime. —Craig Nieuwenhuyse, “Six-Guns on the Stage” In the early fall of 1877, Cody headed to the Red Cloud Agency in Nebraska to recruit Indians for his combination. Most Americans had regarded the Indian policy of Ulysses S. Grant as a failure, primarily because of the bloody battles it produced. With the succession of Rutherford B. Hayes as president and the appointment of Carl Schurz as secretary of the interior came a change in policy allowing Indians eager to leave reservation confinement to take jobs in traveling shows. With the Indians and his family in tow, Cody headed east; Louisa and their daughter Orra had opted to travel with the troupe. Daughter Arta was enrolled in a Rochester school.1 He opened at the Bowery Theatre in New York City on September 3, 1877, in May Cody; or, Lost and Won, a drama by Captain Andrew S. Burt. An army career soldier, Cincinnati-born Burt had proven his gallantry in the Civil War. During the Great Sioux War, he was stationed at Fort Laramie, the anchor for military operations, communication, and supplies, at which time he and Cody almost certainly met. Reviewers often judged chapter six 102 • the play “realistic,” which it was, owing to Burt’s experiences on the plains with wild bears, road agents, and outlaws. From these, he had arrived at “conclusions which an unbiased judgment must necessarily draw.”2 Cody’s proclivity for incorporating current frontier events into his dramas assured timeliness and easterners’ continued interest. The Mountain Meadows Massacre in September 1857 provided the basis for May Cody. At that time, convinced the Mormon Church in Utah was flouting the authority of the territorial government, President James Buchanan decided to replace Governor Brigham Young and dispatched a sizable military force. Expecting persecution, the Mormons went into high alert. Meanwhile, a band of 140 non-Mormon emigrants on their way to California from Arkansas reached the territory. With no military to resist federal authority, Young authorized, if not commanded, his Paiute Indian allies to attack the emigrant party to show the nation the cost of waging war with Mormons. According to historian Will Bagley, Young’s manipulation of the Indians before the massacre makes it seem he was “directly responsible for the tragedy.” After a few days, during which the emigrants put up a valiant resistance , the commander in the field, John D. Lee, realized “the Indians could not do the work and we were in a sad fix.” He needed to persuade the emigrants to surrender their arms and then to convince the Mormon militia to murder them. Some participants claimed they only killed the emigrants to avoid an Indian war that would have destroyed their own families but, in fact, the Mormons did not regard the Paiutes as a military threat. Moreover, most of the Indians had already left the scene.3 After the Arkansans surrendered, Lee’s treacherous scheme was compounded when, under the guise of a white flag, he and his men approached the wagon train. Along with a group of Mormons disguised as Indians, they separated out the “innocent blood” of children under eight, led the rest away, and executed them.4 The surviving children later recalled seeing the “Indians” washing off war paint, exposing white faces. Days later, Young had mixed feelings about the massacre. It would prove perilous to his sect if word leaked out that Mormons had joined Indians in the slaughter. Needing to distance himself, Young ordered Lee to write an account blaming the Indians. The sect was well aware that the actions of the few did not reflect the philosophy of all its members, but previous harassment at the hands of non-Mormons convinced them denial was the best course. Most Americans, however, laid the responsibility for the massacre Incidents and Accidents • 103 at the feet of the Mormons. Federal officers believed Young was responsible, but they could not get enough evidence to make a case in court. Instead, Lee was made the scapegoat until, by March 1877, he had composed at least four accounts ranging from “the Indians did it” to the “Indians made us do it.” All the while he was convinced he had done nothing wrong. Still protesting his innocence, he...