Forty Years Among the Indians / A true yet thrilling narrative of the author's experiences among the natives

by Daniel W. Jones

That will do; if I go I will take a few sacks.

How about custom duties? No trouble for regular colonizers that go in order and conform to the laws and make their applications beforehand, so that when they arrive at the custom house they are known as colonizers, haphazzard work in Mexico makes trouble the same as in any other country.

Do you think there will be much of a move from this country to Mexico? I did think so at one time; but I am now under the impression that there will be no great move to that land.

What has changed your opinion? Simply this—the people do not wish to go. The inhabitants of Utah have good homes and have made up their minds to accept the situation and stay, and enjoy their wealth and luxuries the same as other people.

Then you have given up the idea of ever seeing a prosperous colony of Mormons settle in Mexico, in some of the rich valleys that you have been recommending so long? No, sir; not at all. I still have faith in the move; those who have faith in the Book of Mormon, and have a greater desire to see the words of the Book fulfilled that to have to accumulate wealth, will go.

Then you think it will be at the sacrifice of worldly wealth and comforts that people will take hold of the work? Seemingly so, but not in reality. There are many principles revealed to this people that we are slow to put in full practice. Among others United Order, a principle the Prophet Brigham declared would have to be practiced before further advancement would be made by this people. While the majority of the people called Latter-day Saints are inclined to look with suspicion on any move in that direction, the natives of Mexico favor and, in a good degree, practice the principle. A short description of their mode of farming will illustrate this. In the spring, when planting time comes, all join together and go into the field of one party and plow and put in the seed; the poor man who has no cattle shares the same as the wealthy. This they continue until all the fields of the village are planted. If any lack seed it is loaned to them. If there is a scarcity of provisions the first field products fit for use, instead of being sold at an exorbitant price, become common property, and all the hungry partake of the blessing. When the crops are gathered in the owner of the early field receives such as his neighbors feel free to give him, which is always liberal in quantity.

Now, I would not advocate the doing just as these natives do; but will say this, their customs show that they have a principle of union and good fellowship among them that could easily be trained into more successful principles of union. They are true Israelites, descendants of the Jews, and, having left Jerusalem before the crucifixion of the Savior, have not that curse resting upon them, but, on the contrary, have the merit of having descended from a people who received the Savior and the gospel and lived for hundreds of years in a condition of peace, union and intelligence far beyond the Church at Jerusalem. They are entitled to the gospel, according to the Book of Mormon, immediately following the work among the Gentiles. The day of their deliverance cannot be far away, for if the fullness of the Gentiles is not close at hand, the Saints must have a hard experience before them.

Now, to finish up this work, I wish to give a few of my own observations and reflections. The sketches of history I have given as they occurred to me. My descriptions of country and inhabitants, according to the best of my judgment, after years of study and acquaintance. No person can describe a country from a single visit sufficiently well to predicate a reliable report upon, unless receiving information from a most trust-worthy and intelligent source. For this reason I have always made it a rule to visit country, where convenient, at different times and seasons; also to inquire from different disinterested parties, watching closely the general reports. The judge on his bench allows a person's general reputation to be a proper question for proof, but will not allow direct individual testimony, neither good nor bad. This rule should largely apply in determining the quality and conditions of a country. If the reputation is generally good, then we may look favorably on the subject; but if bad, like the person with a bad reputation, we should be careful in dealing with them.

Sometimes, when speaking of certain tracts of land in Mexico, persons will ask me if the titles are good. When I tell them yes, they will ask, "How do you know? I hear people are often deceived about titles; how do you know they are good?" There was an old lady told me the title is good. Now this might seem a light answer; but, in reality, is not the "old lady's" answers on general reputation, and many times more reliable than an interested party?

Of course, this information is preliminary; but it will, many times, enable a person to form an opinion as to whether it will pay to make further investigation. I would rather take the friendly report of a neighbor about the titles of a Mexican ranch than I would the information of an officer of state, that might have an ax to grind. People, who visit President Diaz and cabinet when on land business in Mexico, are likely to be kindly treated and receive such information as his Excellency and associates have to give, but, individually, I have always found it best to get posted from the neighbors or owners.