OSS war documentary “The War Department Report” leaves mark at the University of Utah.

By Ellie Cook

students see war filmIn the February 3, 1944, issue of The Utah Chronicle, students were invited to attend a campus screening of the Academy Award-nominated documentary The War Department Report. The film was originally released to a small number of military personnel on December 7, 1943, by the U.S. Office of Strategic Services (OSS). It was directed by Oliver L. Lundquist; David Zablodowsky was credited as the writer, Carl Marzani as producer, Richard Lyford as editor. It was narrated by Walter Huston. (IMBD)

Director Lundquist was described by the Central Intelligence Agency as “a talented architect and industrial designer” who worked for the Office of Strategic Services, the CIA’s predecessor during World War II. Lundquist also created the logo for the United Nations as well as the one for Q-tips.

EPSON scanner imageThe documentary’s project began after a report was made by Major General George V. Strong on “The Strength of the Axis Forces.” The documentary included obtained footage taken of allies by the Germans, Italians, and Japanese. One segment of the film included “startling shots of the Pearl Harbor raid, taken from [Jap] planes.” (“New War Film”)

The American Film Institute notes that the film “marked the first time in history that the high command of the American armed forces made an official report to the country on the strength of the enemy.”

Originally the film was intended to remain “a restricted government film” and was “destined chiefly to be displayed before war plant workers.” (“Cary Grant”) However, it was later publicly released, which eventually earned the film an Academy Award nomination for Best Documentary Feature.

war department reportThe War Department Report is still viewed today, primarily used in military training. The OSS is highly praised for the film’s exposure of the war. Katz writes, “Through their pioneering experiments in the visual display of information … in service of the War Crimes trials … they left a small but indelible mark on history.” The film is kept today in the Academy Film Archives.

Leroy E. Cowles, the University of Utah’s president at the time, described the film as containing some of the “finest combat scenes ever photographed by army or navy cameramen.” In a Utah Chronicle story published in 1944, he highly encouraged professors who had classes at the same time of the on-campus screening to make arrangements in order to allow students to attend the viewing, which was held at Kingsbury Hall on February 3. The viewing included a display of “captured enemy pictures” as well as the film’s screening. (“Impromptu”)

Today, free screenings of recent films remain available to University of Utah students. However, the 1944 viewing of War Department Report stands out among many because students were able to see in real time the reality of the war via footage from the enemy’s perspective. The film is still highly acclaimed today and remains an important asset for military training purposes.

Ellie Cook is a third-year student at the University of Utah studying communication (journalism) and psychology. She has written for Trend Privé Magazine and U NewsWriting.

Sources

Major General George V. Strong, “The Strength of the Axis, delivered before the House of Representatives on 20 October 1943 and before the Senate on 21 October 1943.”

War Department Report. Oliver L. Lundquist, director. United States: U.S. Office of Strategic Services, 1943.

“Cary Grant, McCarey Team on Comedy Plans … ‘War Department Report’ Gives Pessimistic Outlook,” Los Angeles Times, December 21, 1943, 8.

“Impromptu War Film Showing at U,” Salt Lake Tribune, February 2, 1944, 8.

“New War Film Shown In S.F.,” San Francisco Examiner, February 2, 1944, 7.

“Students see War Pictures,” Utah Chronicle, February 3, 1944, 1.

Documentary (Feature Subject),”  The 16th Academy Awards.

Katz, Barry. “The Arts of War: ‘Visual Presentation’ and National Intelligence,” Design Issues 12, no. 2 (Summer 1996): 3–21.

The OSS Architect Who Designed the UN Logo,” Central Intelligence Agency, June 23, 2017.

War Department Report, IMDB.

War Department Report, American Film Institute Catalog of Feature Films.

Andrew Hays Gorey, University of Utah Graduate, Journalist and Editor

By Donald Aguirre

When we think of Utah, images of the Wasatch Mountains, the Great Salt Lake, and orange-rusted landscapes of southern Utah occupy the mind. As we take in these very Utah landscapes, we may encounter hidden gems. Andrew Hays Gorey would be one of those buried treasures.

Gorey was born on June 6, 1921, in Salt Lake City and as his Salt Lake Tribune obituary notes, he found his calling to journalism at the age of 5 when he wrote a story about the death of a pet. The reporting bug inspired an extensive career that stretched from copy boy at a local newspaper to editor of The Utah Chronicle, a political correspondent for Time, and defender of the free press.

When Gorey died in April 2011, The Salt Lake Tribune noted that it had won its first Pulitzer Prize in 1957, the same year Gorey became editor at the Tribune. Gorey was editor by age 24. The Salt Lake Tribune called it the “ridiculous age of 24,” in the same article, noting his talent at such a young age.

Hays Gorey

Utah Chronicle editor Hays Gorey. Used by permission, Special Collections, J. Willard Marriott Library, University of Utah.

Gorey understood how to speak to his local community about national issues. Three days after the attack on Pearl Harbor, he penned a column where he encouraged his university audience to contribute to the war effort. “The sacrifices we will be called upon to make will be made cheerfully. We know what the goal is; we recognize the intrinsic worth of that goal enough to want to attain it, and to help in the struggle to attain it,” he wrote for the Utah Chronicle on December 10, 1941.

He didn’t skirt the issues, even in his early college days. “It is indeed gratifying that these teethless [sic] organs of the student government system at last came in for a little much-deserved adverse criticism; their past activity, or rather, inactivity, more than warrants condemnation,” he wrote in The Utah Chronicle on November 6, 1941, criticizing the inefficiency of overabundant student councils monitoring school activities. As a columnist at the University of Utah paper, he made his thoughts clear and opinions direct.

The following week on November 11, 1941, in the same publication he addressed those who had called him a “radical” and a “communist” for his scorching criticism, but he never walked his opinion of the student government back. Gorey cherished the First Amendment. His column defending the free speech rights of former Senator Rush Holt—an unashamed isolationist—in The Utah Chronicle on November 19 rang true with his principles.

While he was at Nieman Reports he asked the question on whether balanced and relevant news was being produced beyond eloquent writing and eye-catching headlines. “We must worry not only about what a thorough analysis of the printed article will show we did say—but what the general impression of our entire presentation, headline, play, and article had on the reader,” Gorey wrote in January 1950 in his article, “Making Makeup Matter.”

Gorey_Hays_Shot_2-1

Used by permission, Utah State Historical Society.

In April 2011 The Washington Post reported in its obituary that Gorey had won a Nieman Fellowship to Harvard in 1949 and after his stint at The Salt Lake Tribune he landed a job as national correspondent at Time magazine in 1965. “Gorey was best known nationally for his work at Time [sic] from 1965 to 1991,” wrote Jan Gardner from Nieman Reports, the same publication where Gorey added his two cents when he was alive.

In a C-SPAN interview on January 13, 1984, Gorey defended the existence of the free press and made no apologies for an adversarial and engaged journalistic body. “The interest of the public demands that the press be aggressive, be alert, be skeptical, be cynical if you will and it doesn’t matter if it’s a Republican in the White House or a Democrat, we should be equally vigilant,” he said during the hourlong discussion.

Gorey had shown years prior how tenacious the press could be when he interviewed Special Prosecutor Leon Jaworski in November 1973 for Time shortly after the Saturday Night Massacre where President Richard Nixon fired special prosecutor Archibald Cox. He pressed for answers on behalf of the American people amid a constitutional crisis.

His columns, editorials and interviews garnered the respect of his colleagues. He was considered a “journalist’s journalist,” by former Salt Lake Tribune publisher Jack Gallivan, as reported by Paul Rolly in The Salt Lake Tribune on April 5, 2011.

Gorey ran the journalistic gamut. He was a University of Utah alumnus who started off as a copy boy and ended up doing a great many things in the service of muckraking.

Donald Aguirre is a senior at The University of Utah. He is a journalism student majoring in communication and is the owner & creator of the blog, The Mockery Times.

Sources

Hays Gorey, “New Foreign Developments Awake America to Fact Of Former Over-confidence,” Utah Chronicle, December 10, 1941, 4.

 Hays Gorey, “Columnist Maintains Council Activity Supervision is Failure,” Utah Chronicle, November 6, 1941, 4.

Hays Gorey, “Editorialist Defends Attack On Activity Councils Suggests Sportsmanship,” Utah Chronicle, November 13, 1941, 4.

Andrew Hays Gorey, “Making Makeup Matter,” Nieman Reports, January 1950, 5,

Journalism: Mr. Gorey defended a recent editorial published in Time magazine,” C-SPAN, January 13, 1984.

INVESTIGATIONS: Nothing Is Inviolate,” Time, November 26, 1973,

Hays Gorey: A distinguished newsman passes,” Salt Lake Tribune, April 8, 2011.

Gardner, Jan. “Spring 2012: Class Notes,” Nieman Reports, March 15, 2012.

Bernstein, Adam. “Obituaries,” Washington Post, April 12, 2011.

Rolly, Paul. “Former Tribune editor and Time reporter was a ‘journalist’s journalist,’” Salt Lake Tribune, April 5, 2011.

Hays Gorey,” Salt Lake Tribune, April 7, 2011.

 

The Cadet Nurse Corps at the University of Utah

By Tyson Aldridge

The Cadet Nurse Corps was established across the country between the years 1943 and 1948 to help with the demand for nurses during the war. According to authors Willever and Parascandola, “124,065 nurses were graduated from the Cadet Nurse Corps, making the Corps one of the largest and most fruitful Federal nursing programs in history.” (Parascandola and Willever, p. 455)

Screen Shot 2018-11-19 at 9.02.15 AM

Image from Public Health Reports.

The need for nurses was at an all-time high after the United States entered World War II and as a result, nursing leaders were trying to find solutions to supply enough nurses for the war. The need for nurses increased as the war went on, but other higher paying jobs were taking women away from the nursing profession. Consequently, the Public Health Service created in June 1943 the Cadet Nurse Corps to focus on improvement of nursing education and recruitment of more nursing students. If admitted, a student would receive scholarships that covered tuition and fees, as well as a monthly stipend. The expectation for the nurses was to graduate in 30 months, as opposed to the usual 36 months, and perform nursing services for the duration of the war. The schooling was broken into sections. The first nine months the nurses were known as “probies.” “Junior cadets” were in the middle of their schooling and attended classes as well as applying their learning in the field at actual hospitals. During the final training period, the students were known as “senior cadets” and would be placed where nurses were needed.

Screen Shot 2018-11-19 at 8.59.56 AM

Image from Public Health Reports.

Like many other universities across the country, the University of Utah was part of this program. In the very first semester of the program, 150 women registered. To help boost morale and get the nurses excited for the upcoming program, a representative from the national nursing council came to the University of Utah and spoke to the freshman students at Kingsbury Hall. The representative, Mildred E. Newton, spoke about the urgent need for 65,000 nurses and the chance to serve the country they loved.

From the very beginning, the University of Utah was extremely supportive of the Cadet Nurse Program and the students in it. In the Utah Chronicle on September 23, 1943, Mrs. Hazelle Baird Maequin, an assistant professor of nursing education at the University of Utah, said, “The 15 nurses in the cadet corps are going to make up an important part of the wartime life on the campus this year.” The nurses were not kept from students; the university wanted them to be recognized and supported. This was shown when Carlson Hall, a dining room and living area on campus, was renovated to accommodate the nurses in the program. The hall normally would fit around 76 people, but after a few renovations and converting the hall to cafeteria style, 154 people could fit in the hall. Most of those 154 were nurses in the program, and all of the nurses lived at Carlson Hall.

A lot of the nurses as they went through schooling at Utah would receive hands-on training at nearby LDS Hospital, and most of the time when they were there, their living arrangements would change as well. Once a nurse completed her 30 or 36 months of training, she would receive a certificate of nursing and would be placed at either LDS hospital or one of the nearby local hospitals as a civilian nurse, or she would be placed in one of the branches in the military to serve as a nurse there.

Overall, the Cadet Nurse Corps program at the University of Utah was a great success. The university made the nurses’ time in school comfortable and enjoyable by providing places to live and places to study and eat. The University of Utah also made sure that the Cadet nurses were included in student activities on campus, and made sure that other students were aware of the program and its importance. This program helped improve nursing education, as well as prompting federal aid for graduate school studies for nurses. The effect is still felt today around local and national hospitals and nursing now is a respected profession. Modern-day nursing definitely got a kickstart because of this program.

Tyson Aldridge is a senior at the University of Utah. He is majoring in journalism communication.

Sources

“Campus Trains Cadet Nurses,” Utah Chronicle, September 23, 1943.

Helen Chamberlin, “Registration Swells Despite War,” Utah Chronicle, September 23, 1943.

“Nursing Official Outlines Program,” Utah Chronicle, October 21, 1943.

Walter A. Shead, “Continuation of Nurses Training to Provide for Thousands of Qualified Hospital Assistants,” Pleasant Grove Review, September 21, 1945.

War Affects Carlson Hall,” Utah Chronicle, September 23, 1943.

Kathleen Emerson Britton, “U.S. Cadet Nurse Corps,” Rochester Regional Health.

Parascandola, John and HeatherWillever. “The Cadet Nurse Corps, 1943-48,” Public Health Reports 109 no. 3 (May-June 1994): 455-457.

H. V. Kaltenborn Discusses World War II at the University of Utah’s Master Minds Event

By Anthony Scoma

The October 9, 1941, issue of the The Utah Chronicle reported that H. V. Kaltenborn, the “fearless correspondent, editor, and radio newscaster,” would be speaking at the University of Utah’s first “Master Minds and Artists series” at the Salt Lake Tabernacle, after demand exceeded the capacity of the on-campus Kingsbury Hall. The event was sponsored by the university extension division, which brought Kaltenborn to deliver “his analytic accounts of war reports” based on his experiences as a broadcast journalist covering the war between Germany and Great Britain and his time spent living in Germany, where he had developed a “hate for Hitler and the Nazi regime which can only come from personal observation.”

Salt_Lake_Telegram_1941_10_15

Photo accompanying Bob Hale’s article, “Russ Good until Spring, Kaltenborn Believes,” that was published in The Salt Lake Telegram, October 15, 1941.

According to journalism historian Louis Liebovich, Hans Von Kaltenborn was an extremely popular and important radio broadcaster throughout the 1940s and was the “most listened to foreign affairs commentator of the time.” Kaltenborn’s radio broadcast was regularly listened to by anywhere from 10 to 17 percent of American homes during the years 1942 through 1947, meaning that his program “reached a larger portion of the American public across the country than any other single news opinion source with the exception of Time magazine.” His influence greatly shaped American discourse by stimulating newspaper editorials, effectively attacking high-ranking government officials, and shaping public opinion of government policy (Liebovich, p. 47).

Kaltenborn’s popularity was certainly evident in the tone of the coverage before and after the event by The Utah Chronicle and the Salt Lake Telegram. The October 15, 1941, issue of the Telegram called Kaltenborn the “No. 1 news commentator” and from the moment he landed at Salt Lake airport the paper reported on his observations of the war in Europe and specifically “the Russian fight against the invading Germans.” The Salt Lake Telegram’s subsequent October 16 issue reported that these topics were also addressed during Kaltenborn’s speech when he said that Hitler’s invasion of Russia was going so poorly that even Hitler admitted he had made an error.

Kaltenborn’s assessment of the war was also combined with a strong endorsement of the U.S. providing support to the Allied forces and called for a more involved foreign policy. According to the October 16 issue of the Salt Lake Telegram, during Kaltenborn’s 90-minute address to the audience of 5,000 people, he said that “[t]he weight of the United States will decide the turn of events in the European war” and that if China, with the support of the United States, could take the offensive with Japan “it might change the world situation.”

The Utah Chronicle’s coverage of Kaltenborn’s speech in its October 16, 1941, issue highlighted his dislike of Hitler, the Nazi regime, and its desire for conquest. The article also brought up Kaltenborn’s concerns in the “Far East” where Kaltenborn said, “Japan feels her destiny is to rule.” The article finished its coverage by describing Kaltenborn’s warning about labor unions and profit motives interfering with the defense industry and his conclusion that “Russia will never be conquered.”

Utah_Daily_Chronicle_1941_10_23

Hays Gorey’s story, “Noted News Lecturer Shows Weakness in War Problem Analysis.” (The Utah Chronicle, October 24, 1941, 1)

Kaltenborn’s speech and perspective was not without criticism, however, and in The Utah Chronicle’s October 23, 1941, issue, Hays Gorey argued that Kaltenborn “continued a policy common to Master Minds and Artists series speakers of being more concerned with propagandistic entertainment than with logical presentation and interpretation of facts.” While Gorey’s opinion column admitted Kaltenborn’s speech was “a success,” Gorey charged him with creating “a war-frenzy” and making claims without substantiating them with a “firm foundation of reasoning.” Of these claims, Gorey specifically questioned Kaltenborn’s analysis of the defensive capabilities of the English Channel, his certainty that Hitler was “inherently sinister and power-mad,” the lack of similar criticism of Josef Stalin, and the address being “full of generalities […] with a few statements that bordered on the ridiculous here and there.”

Less than two months after Kaltenborn’s speech in Salt Lake City, millions of Americans across the country tuned in on December 7, 1941, to hear his analysis of the attack at Pearl Harbor, which heralded the United States’ entrance into WWII (National Broadcasting Company, Inc.). The timing of Kaltenborn’s speech, his outspoken position on the war, and the media coverage before and after the event provide a great insight into the contemporary arguments for and against entering the war and can help to better understand the political landscape of Utah concerning the war prior to Pearl Harbor.

Anthony Scoma is a senior at the University of Utah majoring in communication and political science and is set to graduate in May 2019. He is interested in radio journalism and is the podcast producer for K-UTE Radio.

Sources:

“H. V. Kaltenborn Opens Master Minds Series,” The Utah Chronicle, October 9, 1941, 1.

Bob Hale, “Russ Good Until Spring, Kaltenborn Believes,” Salt Lake Telegram, October 15, 1941, 15.

“Hitler on His Way Out, Says Kaltenborn” Salt Lake Telegram, October 16, 1941, 11.

Wallace Bennett, “Famous News Analyst Sees Need for Unity,” The Utah Chronicle, October 16, 1941, 1.

Hays Gorey, “Noted News Lecturer Shows Weakness in War Problem Analysis,” The Utah Chronicle, October 23, 1941, 4.

National Broadcasting Company, Inc.“H.V. Kaltenborn’s Analysis Of The Japanese Attack On Pearl Harbor,” December 7, 1941.

Liebovich, Louis. H.V. Kaltenborn and the Origins of the Cold War: A Study of Personal Expression in Radio Journalism History, no. 14 (Summer/Autumn 1987): 46–53.

 

The Story of the Utah State Capitol

by MATTHEW A. SMITH

The Utah State Capitol building could be considered the crown of the Salt Lake Valley. Nestled high atop the northernmost hills of Salt Lake City, this beautiful statehouse can be seen from miles around in most directions. Despite its current location overlooking the capital city in which it resides, Salt Lake City was not the original choice for the Utah State Capitol.

In 1851, legislators for the then-territory of Utah decided the small working-class town of Fillmore, named after the sitting President Millard Fillmore, would be the ideal place to construct a government building. Construction began in 1855 for what was to be called the Utah Territorial Statehouse. (Fillmore City)

Funding for the project came in part from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which had recently arrived from the Midwest to start colonizing the new territory. Other construction funding came from the federal government, with a personal touch from President Millard Fillmore himself, who had become sympathetic to the young territory’s quest for statehood. (Fillmore City)

Fillmore’s goal of achieving capital city status never was fully realized. In 1856, after only part of the statehouse was completed and just one legislative meeting, territory lawmakers determined the bigger town of Salt Lake City would be the better option for a permanent location. (Fillmore City)

However, the capitol building as it is seen today took some time before it became a reality n Salt Lake City. Many local buildings in the area were used for the purposes of conducting territory business while officials pondered a final government home. (Fillmore City) In 1896 Utah was finally granted statehood by the federal government and that accelerated plans to come up with a capitol building. In 1900, the “Capitol Commission” was started as a special group dedicated to creating plans, searching locations and securing financing for the project. (“May Construct State Capitol”)

A few places in Salt Lake City were top candidates for the new construction, including the grounds of Fort Douglas, downtown Salt Lake City near the city/county building that had served as the temporary state building for some time, or the northernmost hills of Salt Lake City known as Arsenal Hill. (“Surveying Site of New Capitol”) Arsenal Hill was a more popular choice among decision-makers due to its central location and elevation. The site was not without its obvious challenges, though. The state legislature as well as the Capitol Commission had strong doubts regarding the placement on Arsenal Hill. Not only was there a large, natural grade, but there was also a large presence of residential neighborhoods and private property. Lawmakers knew it would be expensive to secure the land for the project to move forward. (“Surveying Site of New Capitol”)

Despite these concerns, Arsenal Hill was chosen. Thanks to a $1 million bond provided by the state legislature and receipt of an inheritance tax in the amount of $800,000 that was charged to the estate of Union Pacific Railroad President E. H. Harriman, the finances were secured for construction of the Utah State Capitol. (About the Capitol)

Once the finances were secure, Utah architect Richard Karl August Kletting won the bid out of 10 other national and local candidates to design the capitol building. (“Plans Selected by Commission”)

Kletting wanted to start right away because the governor of the new state of Utah, William Spry, who also served as the chair of the Capitol Commission, promised the citizens of Utah the project’s foundation would be poured by the time the following session of Congress commenced. (“Construction of State Capitol”)

Throughout the construction process, the Capitol Commission and Kletting worked together to ensure satisfactory completion. There was a clear understanding between the two that the capitol building be “functional, distinguished and lasting.” (Centennial Exhibit)

The materials involved in the construction were specifically chosen with Kletting’s eye on perfection and architectural significance, the sort that made him a name in the industry up to that point in his career. A priority that both Kletting and the commission agreed upon was the need for this building to be as fireproof as possible. (Centennial Exhibit) As most structures in that day were created with stone and wood, the destruction a fire would have on a building of such scale was certainly apparent. So, Kletting used reinforced concrete for the frame instead of wood, the standard framing option then. He also ensured the further protection by installing a vacuum system for fire suppression and stone walkways. (Centennial Exhibit)

capitol

The Tribune announced on March 14, 1912, that the esteemed architect Richard K. A. Kletting had been selected to design the capitol.

Aside from pragmatic construction methods, the pride Kletting had in Utah’s own natural resources gave way to the use of Utah granite, copper, Sanpete limestone and Utah onyx on the construction site. (“Marble Dial in Stone”) This was crucial in Kletting’s attempt to make this capitol building unique and representative of the local environment. These resources adorn the entire building, from the rotunda to the basement, and granite and limestone make up a large part of the capitol footprint. (About the Capitol)

Unfortunately, the state legislature was not able to hold its meeting, as promised earlier by Gov. William Spry, on the capitol grounds. Construction delays prevented the ability to open the capitol on time, thus an alternate location was designated for the session. (“Construction of State Capitol”)

The Utah State Capitol was finally completed enough in 1915 for many state workers as well as state legislators to move in. Improvements were still being completed to the satisfaction of the Capitol Commission and Kletting, but most of the working quarters were complete enough to house many people.

Then on October 9, 1916, as reported by the Salt Lake Tribune, the Utah State Capitol was dedicated before a crowd of nearly 40,000 people. Citizens, out-of-state guests, dignitaries and reporters attended the dedication on the steps of the capitol.

Gov. Spry addressed the crowd and said, in part, “I want to tell you how glad we feel that such numbers have turned out to accept from us this home that we now turn over to you.” (Centennial Exhibit)

Matthew A. Smith is a junior at The University of Utah. He is majoring in mass communication with an emphasis in journalism and religious studies.

Primary Sources

“Fillmore City,” http://www.fillmorecity.org/historyoffillmore.html

“About the Capitol,” https://utahstatecapitol.utah.gov/explore/about-the-capitol

“Centennial Exhibit,” https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4l_fw7iWWaLSTdvNi1xSWNqZk0/

“Capitol Commission and City Are Agreed,” Salt Lake Herald, October 13, 1912.

“Construction of State Capitol,” Wasatch Wave, August 2, 1912.

“Plans Selected by Commission for Utah’s New State Capitol and Photograph of Richard K. A. Kletting, the Winning Architect,” Salt Lake Tribune, March 14, 1912.

“Surveying Site of New Capitol,” Salt Lake Tribune, August 12, 1911.

“May Construct State Capitol,” Salt Lake Herald, June 11, 1909.

“Marble Dial in Stone,” Deseret Evening News, January 16, 1900.

 

 

Lucin Cutoff Tragedy: Greek Contribution and Sacrifice in the Mountain West

by JONO MARTINEZ

Greek immigrants were among the last Europeans to make their way into the United States during the late 1800s. Toward the turn of the twentieth century, thousands of young Greeks fled to Utah to live what they would consider their first years of exile. Facing continued Turkish control in their own country, many of these people, young men and boys mostly, sought to live a life elsewhere with hopes of returning to a more promising Greece. (Papanikolas, 45)

Finding solace in the American West, Greek immigrants quickly took to labor on railroads and mines as a means to survive. These men endured long, isolated seasons of strenuous labor with payment as low as $20 for a single month. Although California and Nevada would provide bountiful labor for immigrants, the railroads of Utah would be of special interest to them and would also tragically cost some of their lives. Among the places where extensive Greek contributions took place are the Carbon County mines, Murray-Midvale smelters, Bingham Canyon mines, Magna mill, Garfield smelter, and north of Ogden for railroad-gang work on the Oregon Short Line (later Union Pacific). (Papanikolas, 46-48)

On February 19, 1904, 24 men—16 of whom were Greek immigrant railroad workers—died in a train collision near the Lucin Cutoff crossing the Great Salt Lake. The Lucin Cutoff is a 102-mile railroad line in Utah that runs from Ogden to its namesake in Lucin. (“With Dead”) News reports at the time provided varying numbers of victims and gave inconsistent details regarding the details of the crash. By most accounts, the air brake system failed on the eastbound train, which contained a boxcar of black powder, and the locomotive collided with a dynamite-laden westbound train attempting to clear the mainline. (“Air Brakes”) The magnitude of the explosion was such that the adjacent small town of Jackson was destroyed and 1,000 feet of track were blown up, leaving an excavation 30 feet deep. One engine was blown over in the flat and almost buried in the salt earth; one of the drive wheels was found nearly a half-mile away. (“Dynamite Wrecks”)

p0121n01_03_01

An unidentified group watches a woman shaking hands with a railroad worker. Greek Archives photograph collection, 1900-1967, Special Collections, J. Willard Marriott Library, The University of Utah.

The disaster would quickly gain the attention of local newspapers, with Ogden’s own Standard dedicating at least one piece a day of coverage for the weeks following the event. Accounts in the paper were graphic, with descriptions of decapitated bodies and scattered limbs. (“Dynamite Explosion”) Even the hailed New York Times would mention the half-mile radius of damage in its February 20 issue. The article listed by name the three American victims, but the immigrant workers were lumped into a single group with little to no recognition. While the tragedy was indeed covered in the news, the loss of the eight Utahns would ultimately overshadow the loss of Greek immigrant life. As The Salt Lake Tribune would make sure to mention on February 20, 1904, “A majority of those killed were Greek laborers, although many of the victims were English-speaking people.” The emphasis on “American” life over immigrant casualties in news accounts of the 1904 wreck ultimately reflected views that foreign laborers were expendable. (“Memorial Honors”)

Misfortune for the victims’ families only grew in the days following the accident. The designated coroner charged various undertakers, including Larkin & Sons, with handling the 24 bodies. Larkin opted to remove the bodies under his care to his own establishment in order to better prepare them for burial. This raised a protest from the assembled multitude of Greeks, many of whom had cousins and other relatives under the coverings inside the improvised morgue. They declared the bodies should not be moved. Richey, the other undertaker, later burned the blankets in which their bodies had been wrapped for transportation to the city. The Greek community had their own blankets that they wished to use instead, which were traditionally used for bedding. These were often hand-woven of superior material by them in Greece and brought to America with them. (“Dead are Brought”)

It was clear that there would be a long process in both identifying and treating the bodies, yet unique issues arose with regard to the extant language barrier between immigrants and local authorities who hoped to discover the cause of the accident. Two Americanized Greeks, John McCart and Arthur Mitchell, were sworn in as interpreters. Even so, they were unable to communicate much information to the authorities due to the conditions survivors were in. According to a story published in The Salt Lake Tribune on February, 26, 1904, “very little information concerning the accident could be elicited from the wounded Greeks.”

Other obstacles in the investigation came in the form of English-speaking witnesses who refused to give their full testimony. For example, Sam Courtney, the conductor of the water train, was questioned to no avail. Courtney’s hips and back were badly injured in the accident; yet, when he was asked who, in his opinion, was responsible for the makeup of the train and for the accident, he refused to make any statement. Ultimately, no blame would be placed on a single party and all persons interviewed would be absolved. (“Verdict of Jury”)

George N. Tsolomite, vice-consular agent for the Kingdom of Greece, arrived two weeks after the accident in Ogden. He then decided to contest each of the probate proceedings, which had just begun in Weber and Box Elder counties for the appointment of administrators in the estates of the Greeks who were killed in the recent railroad disaster at Jackson. (“Verdict of the Jury”) For many people at the time and now, it was evident that immigrants were misused as employees, especially those who could not speak English. Tsolomite’s involvement was to lessen aggravations felt by the families. Yet it was disasters like the one at Jackson and countless others that eventually energized immigrants to force employers to improve working conditions through labor unions. (“Memorial Honors”)

On October 22, 2000, nearly a century after the Lucin Cutoff tragedy, members of Utah’s ever-growing Greek community gathered in Ogden to witness the installation of a granite monument in memory of the deceased workers. (“Memorial Honors”) The tragedy and suggestion for the memorial were brought to the attention of the Utah Hellenic Cultural Association by Stella Kapetan of Chicago, who discovered the episode while researching her family history. (“Memorial”) This commemoration was seen by many as long overdue, considering that the majority of the men were buried without a headstone. For many, those Greek railroad workers who lost their lives are an example of the undervalued efforts and sacrifices undergone by immigrants in the United States of America. The memorial now serves as a reminder to both Greeks and non-Greeks of an otherwise downplayed moment in Utah history. Furthermore, their contribution as immigrants to help build the American West now receives the credit it has deserved.

Jono Martinez graduated in May 2017 with a Bachelor of Arts degree in journalism.

Sources

“Action of Greek Counsul,” Standard, March 1, 1904.

“Verdict of the Jury Judge Pritchard in Cut-off Disaster,” Standard, March 1, 1904.

“Coroner’s Inquest Continued to Thursday,” Standard, February 26, 1904.

“Inquest in Jackson Explosion,” The Salt Lake Tribune, February 26, 1904.

“Verdict of Jury in Cut-off Disaster,” Standard, February 26, 1904.

“Air Brakes Failed,” The Salt Lake Tribune, February 24, 1904.

“Dynamite Explosion Brings Havoc and Death,” Standard, February 23, 1904.

“Dead are Brought to Ogden Sunday,” Standard, February 22, 1904.

“With Dead of the Jackson Explosion,” The Salt Lake Tribune, February 22, 1904.

“Dynamite Wrecks Town,” The New York Times, February 20, 1904

“Memorial Honors Forgotten Victims of 1904 Railroad Tragedy,” The Salt Lake Tribune, October 23, 2000.

“Memorial,” Deseret News, May 29, 2000.

Papanikolas, Helen Zeeze. Toil and Rage in a New Land: The Greek Immigrants in Utah. Salt Lake City, Utah: Utah State Historical Society, 1970.

 

Nuclear Testing: Southern Utah’s Battle for Air

by ARYAN FARAHANI

During the years of World War II and throughout the years of the Cold War, we saw many horrific acts of violence that changed many components of our society. Within these acts of violence, the rise of destructive weapons, known as nuclear weapons, were more prominently showcased throughout the world.

Not only were these nuclear weapons used for “safety,” but they were also manufactured to showcase a nation’s superiority. In 1945, toward the end of WW II, the United States was the first nation to use nuclear weapons, on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. After these horrendous events, and as the quest for world dominance continued, many more nations began developing nuclear weapons. With that in mind, the competition to create the world’s best nuclear weapon was in the works. And with the United States taking on the role of global hegemon, it was clear that in order to create the perfect weapon, many tests had to be conducted throughout the US.

Nevada, with its desert-like geography and immense amounts of open space, was an ideal site for one of the nuclear testing centers operated by the United States Department of Energy. Nye County, in south-central Nevada, also was close to two cities in southern Utah: St. George and Cedar City. With the initial test-taking place in January 1951, many Southern Utahns were unaware of what exactly the nuclear tests would entail. But in the coming years, the disastrous effects of the “purple cloud” became more evident. (“Atom Explosions”) As Seegmiller writes, “Relatively few Iron County residents were aware of or concerned about nuclear testing when the first mushroom-shaped cloud rose into the western skies … but the cloud figuratively remains over southern Utah and Nevada to this day.”

The Salt Lake Telegram reported on January 27, 1951, that “residents of Southern Utah, miles to the cast of here, said they saw the sky light up and heard the distant rumbling.” This initial blast was the beginning of many tests. And although that was the case, many were not aware of the harmful toxins that nuclear tests would release on the residents, as well as on the surrounding residents of Southern Utah.

Through the initial steps of the first nuclear test, further progress needed to be achieved. Therefore, another nuclear test was conducted in April 1952. The Salt Lake Telegram reported on April 14, 1952, that “indications pointed to the testing of another atomic device rather than a full-blown atomic bomb,” which would essentially “be developed into future atomic weapons.” Many of the repercussions were still not evident to the residents, but it became clear that more nuclear tests were to be conducted in the near future.

Moreover, another nuclear test was conducted in March 1953. The Iron County Record reported on March 5, 1953, that “ranchers, miners, migrants, private fliers, and others concerned are warned that the atomic energy commission’s Nevada proving grounds will be used for nuclear experiments.” Although this was the case, many were still not warned of the harms, but instead had to find out about them the hard way.

In consideration of the above tests that were conducted throughout the years of 1951-1953, some individuals who were educated on the matter of nuclear weapons concluded that they were obliged to talk about it. It wasn’t until 1953 when some of the nuclear tests’ tragedies began to become evident. More specifically, and as reported in the May 7, 1953, issue of the Irony County Record, University of Utah research student Ralph L. Hafen noted that he was “morally obligated to warn people of the irreparable damage that may have occurred or may in the future occur” from the nuclear tests. Hafen stated in the Irony County Record that the plutonium and radiation that the tests released could affect many components of southern Utah residents’ lives, which can be summarized to include cancer, blindness, mutations, death, and climate change.

Capture

The Iron County Record reported on March 3, 1955, that ranchers were convinced atomic testing had killed their sheep.

Many individuals in southern Utah began noticing that some changes in their everyday lives could be related to the nuclear tests that had been conducted in the border state of Nevada. And although they noticed, it was clear that the tests would continue to be conducted. That being said, the March 31955, issue of the Iron County Record reported that “the third atomic blast [of 1955] was seen from Cedar [City],” which shows its severity, because Cedar City is more distant to the Nevada border. The article also stated that that southern Utah farmers were “convinced that the atomic fallout from the experiments at Yucca Flats in Nevada two years ago was the direct cause of heavy loss to sheep herds grazing in adjacent areas.” Therefore, they filed a lawsuit against the Atomic Energy Commission for its actions and incompetent behavior. Also in 1955, many citizens, including southern Utah residents, were briefly told about the harms that the nuclear tests could have on their lives. The Iron County Record reported on February 3, 1955, that “the Atomic Energy Commission, Department of Defense, has announced that it will not be responsible for patrons who might wander into the area, without proper authority.” It was also reported in the same issue that it was dangerous to be around the tests, identifying that “caution has also been advised for individuals in the general area.”

Film_transparency_of_atomic_explosions_at_the_Nevada_Test_Site_Nye_County_Nevada_circa_1950s

The view of an atomic explosion at the Nevada Test Site, located 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas in Nye County, Nevada. Lloyd Franklin Manis Collection, Special Collections, University of Nevada-Las Vegas. Used with permission.

The book Fallout: An American Nuclear Tragedy by Philip Fradkin discusses the government’s historical role with nuclear testing. Fradkin highlights how the Atomic Energy Commission was at fault through “the mistakes and subsequent cover-ups” that they used with these nuclear tests. (2) It is clear that the government officials involved with these tests were aware of their harms, but did not feel a need to tell residents the details. Instead, these officials withheld information, and gave them a brief warning four years after the first nuclear test took place.

Southern Utah residents were deeply affected by these events and by the actions of the Atomic Energy Commission. In the book Justice Downward: America’s Atomic Testing Program in the 1950s, a former University of Utah professor, Howard Ball, discusses the careless behavior of the government. Ball examines the events of the blasts, and quotes Frank Butrico, a Public Health Service radiation safety monitor who worked in St. George during the 1953 series of tests. Butrico testified in a 1982 wrongful death suit filed by 24 cancer victims and their relatives. He said, “The radioactive cloud hung over St. George for over two hours, fallout radiation levels peaked at a little less than 6 rads, well over even AEC standards.” (Ball, 43)

In addition to that, southern Utah residents were not truthfully told about this information. Instead, they were told, “Radiation levels were a little above normal but not in the range of being harmful.” (Ball, 43-44) Not only was valuable information withheld from residents, but they also were exposed to dangerous levels of radiation that indefinitely caused many issues to their health and surrounding environment. With a matter as severe as this, it is saddening to learn about the truths after they had initially taken place. Although there isn’t a reliable statistic proving the amount of illnesses and cancer-related deaths the exposure of the radiation levels caused, Seegmiller reports that “as of September 1994, 1,003 claims had been approved, 829 claims had been denied, and 125 were pending.” These figures illustrate just how severe the effects were on southern Utah residents.

All in all, it is clear that the nuclear tests that were conducted in Nevada are an incredibly important part of Utah’s history as a whole. Although this research focuses on the years of 1951-1955, these nuclear tests ultimately changed many people’s lives, and to this day in 2017, the effects that these nuclear tests had on southern Utah residents are extremely palpable. It is important to take into account these events, because although these nuclear tests caused many tragedies, they are an essential part of our history, and are important components in learning more about how nuclear activity had an effect on Utahns.

That being said, today, the government has set up funds to compensate families for the illnesses and deaths these blasts may have caused. Although it does not make up for the damages the nuclear tests have done, it does show some initiative and responsibility on the government’s part. Looking through the United States Department of Justice webpage, the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act “established an administrative program for claims relating to atmospheric nuclear testing and claims relating to uranium industry employment.” (RECA) And if these nuclear tests are proven to be the cause of any harm, then families would receive compensation to make up for the indescribable damage.

Aryan Farahni graduated in May 2017 from The University of Utah. He attained a Bachelor of Science degree in political science, with minors in media studies and international studies. 

Sources

“Atom Explosion Set off in Nevada,” Salt Lake Telegram, January 27, 1951, 1.

“Spews Purple Cloud,” Salt Lake Telegram, October 30, 1951, 1.

“Scientists Arrive at Vegas for Second A-Blast,” Salt Lake Telegram, April 14, 1952, 2.

“Atomic Proving Ground Set for Nuclear Test,” Iron County Record, March 5, 1953, 3.

Ralph L. Hafen, “Effects of Atom Blasts on Southern Utah Discussed by U. of U. Student, Iron County Record, May 7, 1953, 9.

“Citizens Are Warned of Dangers at Nevada Test Site,” Iron County Record, February 2, 1955, 2.

“Local Sheep Raisers File Suit with Govt. for Loss,” Iron County Record, March 3, 1955, 1.

“Third Atomic Blast Seen From Cedar,” Iron County Record, March 3, 1955, 8.

Ball, Howard. Justice Downwind: America’s Atomic Testing Program in the 1950s. New York, New York: Oxford University Press, 1988.

Fradkin, Philip L. Fallout: An American Nuclear Tragedy. Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1989.

The United States Department of Justice. “Radiation Exposure Compensation Act.” https://www.justice.gov/civil/common/reca

Seegmiller, Janet Burton. “Nuclear Testing and the Downwinders.” Utah History to Go, http://bit.ly/1nSvCYD

 

 

 

 

 

Utah Prohibition: Battle Between State and Religion

Article and images by KRISSI KARREN

More than one hundred years ago, anti-alcohol movements spread across the United States. On January 16, 1920, the prohibition of alcohol was enforced by the 18th amendment to the United States Constitution, which made the manufacture, sale, and transportation of intoxicating liquors officially illegal throughout America. (Fisher, Prohibition)

Salt Lake City, Utah, is the headquarters of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Mormons follow “The Word of Wisdom,” a health law that stipulates that certain substances, including alcoholic drinks, are harmful.

IMG_9837

The still at Sugar House Distillery, where small batches of vodka, rum, malt whisky and bourbon whiskey are produced.

In the 1840s, Mormon pioneers settled in Utah, thus creating a long lineage of conservative culture. Mormon leaders have not only guided their religion, but also Utah politics. This article focuses on Utah’s stance on alcohol production and consumption between the time of Prohibition to 2017. By studying the political conditions in Utah we can gain insight about the effect of church over state and what led to ratification of the 21st amendment, and how Utah currently regulates alcohol consumption.

According to Bruce Dyer in his thesis, “A Study of the Forces Leading to the Adoption of Prohibition in Utah in 1917,” Senator Reed Smoot was an influential man in both the LDS religion and in politics. During the early 1900s, Senator Smoot controlled Intermountain Republican, a newspaper published in Salt Lake City. During the spring of 1908, the Intermountain Republican devoted considerable space on the front page to open political discussion. According to Dyer, each morning in large black letters the newspaper asked, “Shall Utah have Prohibition?” Within the box were the opinions of those who either favored statewide prohibition or were against it. Intermountain Republican and other journals were stressing the prohibition issue.

Also according to Dyer’s thesis, The Salt Lake Tribune carried the majority of the anti-prohibition articles appearing in local press. In 1908, an unidentified Tribune writer reported that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints owned Zion’s Cooperative Mercantile Institute, which was one of the most extensive liquor dealers in the state. (Dyer, 11) In addition, The Salt Lake Tribune addressed the fact that one of the religion’s greatest leaders, Brigham Young, was empowered to grant licenses to persons to manufacture liquor, which brings up the issue of business over beliefs. (Dyer, 12) According to a speech made by Richard Lyman on October 3, 1930, the most important pressure against Prohibition came from businessmen whose interests included liquor manufacture or sales.  

image1

Sugar House Distillery uses American oak whisky barrels that have been charred. This and the wood add flavor to the liquor.

Anti-alcohol movements were created to show that alcoholic drink in any form was dangerous and destructive. Alcohol was blamed for social problems such as unemployment, poverty, business failure, slums, insanity, crime and violence. Prohibitionists were utopian moralists because they believed that eliminating the legal manufacture and sale of alcoholic drink would solve the major social and economic problems of the American society. (Fisher, Economic) From the late 1800s to the early 1900s, Utah politicians came face to face with moral implications while deciding what was best for Utah and ultimately the American people, but first relied on the Mormon community for support.

According to a story published in the Deseret News on June 11, 1910, “although increasing scientific evidence on the adverse effects of alcohol helped the movement, moral rather than scientific considerations seem to have sustained it.”

Heber J. Grant, seventh president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, made an address in 1916 at an officers meeting of the Mutual Improvement Association. He said, “I believe that Utah should have been the first state in the Union to have adopted state prohibition, because the Lord has given to us a prohibition law….”

According to author Del Vance in his book, Beer in the Beehive, A History of Brewing in Utah, in 1929 Albert Becker was elected to the Utah House of Representatives. He was the first and last local brewery owner to hold a high position in Utah’s state government and lobbied hard for repeal of Prohibition. (194) It was becoming apparent to the government that prohibition did little to stop alcohol in Utah. Federal agents seized more than 400 distilleries, 25,000 gallons of spirits, 8,000 gallons of malt liquors, and 13,000 gallons of wine. (216) Chaos rose with underground sales and consumption of alcohol. Rather than decreasing crime rates, there was an increase, which put into perspective the viability of alcohol prohibition.

From 1920 to 1933 there was homebrewing, bootlegging, a declining economy and political propaganda on the restriction of alcohol, until the 21st Amendment to the United States Constitution was passed. On December 5, 1933, the state of Utah became the thirty-sixth state to ratify the amendment, which made the manufacture, sale, and transportation of intoxicating liquors legal. However, with the events of history in mind, alcohol consumption would not go back to how it was before the prohibition.

The Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, known as the DABC, was created in 1935, two years after the ratification of the 21st Amendment, which gave individual states the right to choose their own system of controlling and distributing alcoholic beverages. The Utah legislature believes that the state should control sales to promote responsible drinking and holds the intent to reasonably satisfy the public demand and protect the public interest, including the rights of citizens who do not wish to be involved with alcoholic beverages. The legislature also required that the department be operated as a public business using reasonable management principles and practices.

I experienced the effect of Utah’s government on alcohol regulation firsthand while touring Sugar House Distillery with owner James Fowler. Sugar House Distillery is located on 2212 S. West Temple in the Sugar House neighborhood of Salt Lake City. This distillery received federal approval for spirits distilling in September 2013, and Utah approval in January 2014. It now produces vodka, rum, malt whisky, and bourbon whiskey. James Fowler first showed me the “Zion Curtain” that he has to pull down over the alcohol he has for sale in the front room as well as the curtain that is over the window on the door that separates the front room from the distillery. This is a legislative provision required of restaurants and other establishments to keep children from seeing alcohol. Fowler said he is required to keep detailed records about his distillery that are examined by the DABC’s compliance department. In addition, he said 68 percent of his sales go toward taxes, thus making an income difficult in this industry. Despite challenges posed by legislation in Utah, he chose to launch his business here rather than Texas or Nevada. Ultimately, he said, “Utah has outstanding resources for fresh local ingredients and there is something special about the extra persistence required to locally produce alcohol in Utah.”  

To conclude, we can see that Mormon beliefs impacted the prohibition of alcohol in the 1900s. But because of crime rates, a declining economy and the fight of the opposition, the 18th Amendment eventually became unsuccessful.

The Utah State Legislation continually changes alcohol regulations. For example, in March 2017, Governor Gary Herbert signed a bill giving Utah the strictest drunken driving law in the nation. (Scribner) Herbert also signed into law HB 442, a 144-page document that made “numerous changes to how restaurants, dining clubs and off-premise beer retailers will operate.” (Lake) As the Tribune editorialized on April 26, 2017: “[E]very year the Legislature takes a step forward — like loosening the ridiculous Zion Curtain requirements … — it takes two steps back.”

Krissi Karren is a junior at The University of Utah and is majoring in mass communication. She is pursuing a career in the field of visual communication and is interested in writing about psychology and health of the human body, while residing in San Diego, California. Karren also wants to learn more about power Vinyasa yoga.

SOURCES

Irving Fisher, Economic Benefits of Prohibition (Westerville, Ohio: American Issue Press, 1926).

Irving Fisher, Prohibition at its Worst (New York: Alcohol Information Committee, 1927).

Heber J. Grant, “Prohibition,” address delivered June 9, 1916, to the Mutual Improvement Association. Reprinted in The Young Woman’s Journal xxvii (1916): 402-405. http://bit.ly/2phc8AN

Lyman, Richard R. “Prohibition, Not State Control.” Address in the Tabernacle, Salt Lake City, October 3, 1930. 

Merrill, Joseph F. “Alcohol, Citizenship and the Church.” KSL Radio Station, September 13, 1931. Speech.

“Prohibition: history of the movement in Salt Lake City,” Deseret News, June 11, 1910.

Scribner, Herb. “2017 changes to liquor laws join other significant state actions,” Deseret News, March 11, 2017.  

Dyer, Bruce T. “A Study of the Forces Leading to the Adoption of Prohibition in Utah in 1917.” Master’s Thesis, Brigham Young University, 1958.

Karren, Krissi. interview with James Fowler, April 3, 2017. 

Lake, Catherine Parrish. “2017 Changes to Utah Liquor Laws.” Stoel Rives LLP Alcohol Beverage Blog. http://bit.ly/2qgJYal

“Utah liquor laws fly past peculiar and into weird.” The Salt Lake Tribune, April 26, 2017. http://bit.ly/2pvZNsY

Vance, Dell. Beer in the Beehive: A History of Brewing in Utah. Salt Lake City, Utah: Dream Garden Press, 2006.

Reactions to Utah’s Public School Sex Education in the Early to Mid-1900s, from Medical Professionals and Students

by MARISSA SITTLER

Sex education has been a contentious topic since it was first introduced by the United States government in the early 1900s. However, Utah has been and continues to be stuck on the receiving end of flak from outsiders, as well as its own residents concerning its (lack of) sex education.

What might be defined as “sex education” now, was not the same during 1946-47, when LaMar Holmes conducted a study, The Status of Sex Education in the State of Utah, in which he sought to discover what Utah’s K-12 public schools were teaching its students. Holmes mailed a questionnaire to 435 public school principals listed in the Utah Public School Directory of 1946-47. One hundred seventy-four out of the 435 questionnaires were returned.

In Holmes’s study, he defined sex education as “activities directed toward bringing about the development of wholesome habits, conduct, attitudes, and ideals within the individual to the end that the family will be preserved and home life improved.” (Holmes, 10) The purpose of sex education, in his eyes, was not to teach of sexually transmitted infections or contraception, but rather to teach adolescents to respect the opposite sex, and to build “wholesome” relationships.

In Holmes’s study, there was not an official sex education curriculum for Utah’s public schools that was mentioned. Instead, offerings at schools varied. One example was a unit of instruction called “sex education” that was administered in tenth and eleventh grade physical education. Another school’s principal simply said that sex education was part of the health education program in his school. Perhaps the most comprehensive curriculum mentioned in the study was that of a home nursing class, which included a one-hour period for lecture and informal discussions about each of the following subjects:

“1. Anatomy and physiology of the female reproductive system. 2. Physiology and hygiene of menstruation. 3. Conception, growth and development of the fetus, and the birth of a baby. 4. Prenatal care of the mother including social and emotional adjustments. 5. Baby care including collection of layette and demonstration of a baby bath. 6. Brief discussion of the social diseases.” (Holmes, 19)

On the other end of the spectrum were schools where sex education was not integrated into the curriculum. Rather, instruction was given if “problems arose.” (Holmes, 18)

Three decades before Holmes’s study, Utah newspapers were discussing the need for a consistent curriculum and regular instruction of sex education. The Salt Lake Telegram reported on March 5, 1916, that Dr. M. J. Exner of New York said, “Sex education at high school is necessary” because the earlier the education, the better guidance in regards to the topic for high school-aged boys. Exner also commented on the sources of sex education in early years, and that “91.5 per cent said they received their early impressions from unwholesome sources, mostly from older boys; 70 percent said those impressions had aroused in them morbid curiosity, distorted the whole sex question, and led to unfortunate practices.”

On August 11, 1927, the Ogden Standard Examiner covered a meeting of the World Federation of Education. In an address to its health section, Dr. T. W. Galloway of New York, associate director of the department of education of the American Social Hygiene association, stressed “the need of greater sex education in home and school, particularly among junior high school students.” In addition, Galloway said the current state of sex education did not include enough information about biology, anatomy, hygiene, or venereal diseases.

p1086n038

The Utah State Capitol building, circa 1920. Used with permission. Special Collections, J. Willard Marriott Library, The University of Utah.

In a May 5, 1948, Daily Utah Chronicle article, another medical professional added her two cents to the sex education discussion. Dr. Bernice Moss, of the physical education department, believed that even those who had already been taught or trained on the topic of sex education could benefit from further instruction.

An article in the Salt Lake Telegram on May 23, 1938, noted that Dr. William Cary, a gynecologist and obstetrician, said “too many college courses are being taught by people who have had no personal experience” when it comes to sex education classes and that the teaching of such curriculum needs to be better.

A sex education conference in 1948 sponsored by the Adult Education committee, Board of Education of Iron County School District, and Parent-Teachers Association was held in a public school auditorium and was regarded as highly successful with good attendance. Miss Winifred Hazen, the consultant in family life education for the State Department of Public Instruction, was the conference leader. In a February 12, 1948, Iron County Record article, she stressed “the need for accurate knowledge of sex behavior, and fundamentals to proper training of every child, and also the responsibility of teacher and parent in giving proper information.”

It was not, however, only medical professionals who recognized the need for expanded teaching of sex education in Utah’s public schools. Students, also, voiced their opinions in favor of the matter. Several Utah newspapers chronicled stories on students’ reactions. As the Utah Daily Chronicle reported on March 2, 1939, “Sex education should no longer be a matter to be whispered about, a large majority of American college students believe.” Sixty-two percent favored making courses on the principles of sex mandatory, according to a nationwide study done by the Student Opinion Surveys of America.

The Salt Lake Telegram reported on April 8, 1948, that more students had been interested in a course on sex education than any other class offered in adult education curriculum of the Salt Lake City schools, according to Ralph V. Backman, head of the division.

On December 10, 1948, the Telegram reported that college students did indeed want more education about sex. According to surveys, about 99 out of 100 of people of all ages said they learned “practically nothing from courses in high school or from parents! Appalling!”

Despite considerable support for improvement upon sex education from medical professionals as well as students themselves in Utah’s public schools, currently the status of Utah’s public sex education is abstinence-only. Senator Frances Farley introduced the idea of teaching abstinence in 1988 into schools’ core curriculums in response to the AIDS crisis then. However, what Farley did not introduce was an abstinence-only stance, but the curriculum has since become that.

A February 16, 2017, Salt Lake Tribune article reported that Utah Democratic representative Brian King tried to introduce two bills to update Utah’s sex education curriculum. Both failed because people view sex education as the parents’ role. King’s bills intended to create a more comprehensive sex education for students, as the current curriculum for Utah’s public schools forbids the teaching of contraception, in addition to many other things.

The Trump administration has threatened to defund Planned Parenthood, an external source of sex education for what is not taught in schools. Speaker of the House Paul Ryan created a bill to eliminate health care for millions of Americans, which included Planned Parenthood centers. Neil Gorsuch recently became the Supreme Court Justice, and his history of interference with reproductive health and rights is concerning to Americans who need basic access to reproductive health care at centers such as Planned Parenthood.

Marissa Sittler is a sophomore at The University of Utah studying communication, with an emphasis on journalism.

Sources

Albert E. Wiggam, “College Students Seek More Sex Education,” Salt Lake Telegram, December 10, 1948, 8.

“Sex Education Conference Draws Good Attention,” Iron County Record, February 12, 1948, 10.

“Sex Education Popular,” Salt Lake Telegram, April 8, 1948, 8.

Jean Bruno, “Sociology forum urges early sex education,” Utah Daily Chronicle, May 5, 1948, 2.

“American Students Favor Sex Education,” Utah Daily Chronicle, March 2, 1939, 1.

Ruth Millett, “Doctor Suggests Improvements In Sex Education,” Salt Lake Telegram, May 23, 1938, 4.

“Sex Education Need Stressed,” Ogden-Standard Examiner, August 11, 1927, 3.

“Sex Education In High Schools Is Urged,” Salt Lake Telegram, March 5, 1916, 5.

The Tribune Editorial Board. “Sex ed is ed,” Salt Lake Tribune, February 16, 2017, 10.

Holmes, LaMar L. The Status of Sex Education in the Schools of Utah. Salt Lake City, Utah: University of Utah, 1948.

 

 

 

The Media’s Role in Citizens’ Perceptions of Topaz, the Japanese Internment Camp in Utah

by Elizabeth Fields

The media have always played a role in our history. More than simply relaying the news, media dictate which stories deserve our attention, whether or not we are aware of it. Sometimes subtle and sometimes not, the media mold our values and opinions through careful choice of language and selection of which stories to tell. In the case of the Japanese internment facility located in Delta, Utah, the media’s influence over the public proved to be no different. Through the alienation of Japanese-American citizens and normalization of internment facilities, Utah media placated its citizens and prevented them from being able to recognize Topaz as being inhumane and unjust.

WRA official

Internees began arriving at the Central Utah Relocation Center, known as Topaz, on September 11, 1942. This article from the August 27, 1942, issue of the Millard County Chronicle, was typical of the coverage.

Described as being “one of the most flagrant violations of civil liberties in American history,” the upheaval and relocation of many Japanese-American citizens during World War II was set in motion on February 19, 1942, when President Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066. (history.com) This order authorized the creation of military zones along the West Coast and stipulated that individuals who were considered a threat to national security could be relocated to internment facilities located farther inland. The order soon was used to justify the removal of Japanese-Americans who were suspected of having an allegiance to Japan. Forced to put their jobs and education on hold and to give up their homes and most of their possessions, more than 120,000 citizens were sent to internment camps in states including Idaho, Wyoming, and Colorado, where they were closely monitored to ensure that they could not assist the enemy. The Central Utah Relocation Center, more commonly known as Topaz for the mountain to the west, officially opened on September 11, 1942. By the time it closed, it had housed more than 11,000 detainees. (topazmuseum.org)

American citizens who did not have ties to Japan had been primed by the media to distrust and dislike Japanese culture, both domestic and abroad, since the beginning of America’s involvement in WW II. In the months leading up to the opening of Topaz, Utah citizens were exposed to hateful, racist terminology degrading their perception of the Japanese. On January 6, 1942, the Salt Lake Telegram reported that American soldiers were “killing the cocky little invaders like flies,” quite literally dehumanizing the foreign enemy. On January 5, 1942, the Salt Lake Telegram relished the thought of American allies writing “in rivers of Japanese blood.” This violent rhetoric set the stage for internment camps to open without question or opposition from the American public. It is important to note that Utah media consistently referred to the Japanese enemy as “Japs” in nearly any article written about the progress of the war.

In September 1942, when Japanese-American citizens began arriving at Topaz, the media also referred to these camp residents as “Japs.” On August 27, the Millard County Chronicle published an article under the headline, “WRA Officials Arrive to Take Over Jap Camp.” In the same issue, a separate article advertised cheap labor provided by internees and provided details about “how the Japs can be got, the regulations, and other information.” In this particular story, the language is eerily reminiscent of historical articles advertising slave labor. Utah media did not even bother to differentiate between the Japanese enemy and the Japanese-American citizen. Instead, the media lumped the two populations together using the same racial slur. Immediately, citizens living outside of internment camps differentiated the Japanese-American citizens as being in a separate category from themselves and associated them with the enemy. In some cases, citizens may not have even made a distinction between citizens and the enemy because the two shared the same epithet.

To further Utah’s ignorance to the injustice at play, Utah media completely normalized the Topaz internment camp by publishing mundane, day-to-day happenings at the camp, none of which included any of the harsh realities of life at Topaz. One of the most insulting articles was published in the Salt Lake Telegram on December 30, 1942, with the headline, “You Wouldn’t Trade Places.” It suggested that those living outside internment camps were actually experiencing some kind of envy. The article observed: “There are all sorts of rumors—that the Japanese evacuees from California live there in style, that they are being fed far better than most Americans.” The article described the minimalistic lifestyle of internment camp, but then assured readers, “Certainly they are being treated decently … the food is wholesome…. Although not being pampered, they are being very fairly treated.” It even claimed that the Japanese-American citizens enjoyed the work they did at the camp, saying, “Work becomes desirable as a pastime.” In reality, life at Topaz was anything but fair. According to the Densho Encyclopedia,

“Many of the apartments were not finished when inmates arrived. The prisoners had to endure especially cold conditions until gypsum board was installed on the walls and ceilings… Ill health was common at Topaz… Several prisoners reported how this … traumatized them and prevented them from ever feeling fully secure in camp.”

On December 17, 1942, the Millard County Chronicle published an article detailing the plans for a Christmas party to be held at Topaz: “This will be a large scale operation, purposed by the WRA [War Relocation Authority] to promote good will, [and] to show the proper Christian spirit.” The brief article clearly applauded the righteousness of the WRA and completely dismissed the fact that internees could not be in their own home with their friends and extended family to celebrate. Many of the internees were not Christian and did not even observe Christmas as a holiday. This article reinforced the concept that they they were comfortable and happy, perhaps even lucky. This complete misconception of the reality of living in an internment camp prevented Utahns from recognizing the injustice of the situation.

The last and perhaps one of the most significant elements in keeping Utah citizens silent was the Espionage Act. This act prevented anyone from publishing material conveying “anti-patriotic” sentiments. More than an act of censorship, the Espionage Act reflected a deep-rooted fear that citizens of Japanese descent felt a stronger alliance to Japan than to America that would cause them to betray their country. On May 28, 1942, the Millard County Chronicle wrote,

“What shall we do with Japanese aliens to prevent possible espionage and sabotage?… Many of the Japanese, especially those of American birth, were loyal to the United States. But their fathers and mothers were aliens. It was to be expected that a considerable number of these would be tied to Japan by bonds of race and nationality.”

The Espionage Act only encouraged feelings of distrust toward the Japanese and furthered the media’s contempt for them. To write in opposition of Topaz would be to risk interrogation or even detainment. Simply put, it was unsafe to openly protest Topaz. Had it not been for the Espionage Act, perhaps Utah media would have exposed the truth about Topaz and the public would have had the ability to resist.

As Americans when we think of World War II, we think of bravery and sacrifice. We think of the grainy, black and white footage of victorious soldiers raising the flag at Iwo Jima. We think of Rosie in her red bandana, proudly pulling her denim sleeve across her flexed arm and proclaiming, “We Can Do It!” We think of the famous photograph of a young soldier home from war, in the streets of New York kissing a stranger out of pure elation. We do not think of an American Japanese family leaving their home in San Francisco to be locked away in an internment camp in Utah. We do not think of a young American Japanese student, forced to halt his education to be unjustifiably imprisoned. We do not think of thousands of people uprooted from their homes, careers, and aspirations to satiate the racism of a fearful country. We do not think of it, but we should. Through alienation, false justification, and writing within the boundaries of the Espionage Act, Utah media placated citizens and manipulated them to believe that Topaz and facilities like it were just and necessary.

Today still, our country faces prejudice every day that is perpetuated by our media. With the understanding of the injustice of Topaz, we are better able to critically analyze the sources we rely upon and protect those who our media would wrongfully have us fear.

Elizabeth Fields is studying strategic communication at The University of Utah.

Sources

“They Fought Like Demons,” Salt Lake Telegram, January 5, 1942, 8.

“The Japs Take a Beating,” Salt Lake Telegram, January 6, 1942, 6.

“The Story of 112,000 Japanese in America,” Millard County Chronicle, May 28, 1942, 8.

“WRA Officials Arrive to Take over Jap Camp,” Millard County Chronicle, August 27, 1942, 1.

“Utah County Wants Topaz Jap Laborers,” Millard County Chronicle, September 27, 1942, 8.

“To Hold Xmas Festivities at Topaz,” Millard County Chronicle, December 17, 1942, 1.

“You Wouldn’t Trade Places,” Salt Lake Telegram, December 30, 1942, 6.

“Japanese-American Relocation.” History.com, http://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/japanese-american-relocation.

“Topaz.” Densho Encyclopedia, http://encyclopedia.densho.org/Topaz.

“Topaz Camp.” Topaz Museum, http://www.topazmuseum.org/topaz-camp.