Part 3 of 4 on the Nauvoo Expositor. This will build on the first part, continuing the discussion of the conspiracy against Joseph Smith, going forward to the destruction of the Expositor press and the martyrdom. It is hard to believe how misunderstood and intentionally twisted all of these events have been in people’s efforts to paint Joseph Smith as a polygamist.
Part 4 will again focus on the specific claims of polygamy surrounding the Expositor and the high council meeting.
Please consider supporting this podcast:
Links:
[25:40] Dallin H. Oaks Paper
Suppression of the Nauvoo Expositor (pgs 862-903)
[49:30] Warsaw Signal June 14th Extra Original Transcribed
Mayor’s Orders to Nauvoo City Marshal
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/letter-to-thomas-ford-16-june-1844/1
Letter to Thomas Ford, 22 June
https://famous-trials.com/carthrage/1308-fordletter
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/letter-from-thomas-ford-22-june-1844/1
https://byustudies.byu.edu/online-chapters/volume-6-chapter-29/ pg 560
https://byustudies.byu.edu/online-chapters/volume-6-chapter-30/ pg 566
Augustine Spencer: Nauvoo Gentile, Joseph Smith Antagonist
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/minutes-10-june-1844/14
1:33:40 Richard Law story in Improvement Era
1:40:00 An Interesting Testimony by Joseph W. McMurrin
1:46:00 Joseph Smith III article in the North American Review
Transcript:
[00:00:00] Welcome to 132 problems revisiting Mormon Polygamy where my mom explores the scriptural theological and historical case for parole marriage. She’s been sick this week and forgot to film her introduction. So she let me fill in but not to worry, this is going to be a great episode. So make sure to like and apply. Thanks for joining us as we take a deep dive into the murky waters of Mormon Polygamy. It’s so cool that mom has one youtube channel. I know doing four episodes on the expositor might seem somewhat excessive. But as I have dug into this, as I said, it is so critical and essential to this narrative to our understanding of it, even to the causes and the events about the martyrdom, which is what we’re going to talk about today that I think it is worth really getting into and understanding. So I want to just do a quick recap because it’s been a little while. It’s been almost a month since I did the first part. I think maybe it has been a month. So just to remind people the first part, we focused primarily on the individuals involved in the novo expositor, I call them the expositor conspirators. I really wanted to get in and understand their characters and look at their motivations in a, in order to be able to respond to the claim that these were just really good men who believed in the gospel and loved Joseph Smith, but just really opposed polygamy and morally couldn’t abide polygamy. So hopefully remember that um episode, this episode is actually going to build directly on that one. So hopefully, you remember some of the things we talk, we talked about in the second part, I took a departure and really looked at the affidavits. Um The I I delved into the polygamy claims in the affidavits, right? And the affidavits, as you recall, William Law, um Jane Law and Austin Powells all claims that Hyrum Smith either brought them the revelation or read the revelation in the High Council, which is universal, virally understood to be section 132 as we now have it. And so in that one, what I really wanted to do was look at the claims of how we got section 132 how it came to be and whether Hiram could or would have read it to the High Council. So as I said, in this part, we’re going to continue on where we left off. In part one, we will look a little bit more about the um at the motives and the stra strategy of the expositor conspirators but we also are going to really look at the destruction of the expositor and investigate the claim that Joseph ordered the press to be destroyed because he was just so desperate to keep his secret polygamy hidden. That’s something we’ll touch on quite a bit. But um I really want us to gain more understanding on what Joseph and the city council did and why, why they did it and whether or not it was justified and look at the fallout from it. I have to say that as I have studied this more and more, I just, I have come more and more in all of my studies to really appreciate and respect and love Joseph Smith and just empathize with him. It is unbelievable what he and his family were put through constantly, continually. And I think that we, we need to understand what kind of a man he was and how he responded to these unthinkable obstacles that most of us can’t even imagine. Like, think about it, how many, you know, if someone is involved in even like one or two lawsuits or prosecutions even worse in their life, that’s enough to cause an immense amount of stress. Do you think of how many? I don’t know if it was hundreds of times, but it was, I think over 100 times that he was either prosecuted or sued or that he had to do legal things. He had a financial problem. Like so meant much time in the courts that this man had to spend, that we should at least empathize for that. I know some people just see that as evidence against him. But I think that’s unfair. I think again, it’s not how many times you were sued or prosecuted, it’s who was doing it and why and what was the evidence they had to see if he really was this perpetrator who just never could be convicted or if he really was a good man with a lot of people who just hated what he was doing for various reasons, which I think is, is worth considering as we look into this. So I, I have tried to come at it as many of, you know, I did, you know, of course, I grew up with such a strong testimony of Joseph Smith. And then I had to investigate all of this and I have come to a place of really wanting to question everything, right? But I will tell you the more I study, the more I again believe that this was a truly good and I would even say Godly man. And so, um and, and so anyway, we’re going to look into that. And then in part four, we are again going to look into the claims of polygamy more specifically, I want to really get in and um investigate and analyze the affidavits themselves. I want to look at all of the different people who left testimony of Hiram reading the, um, the revelation in the High Council. And I, I want to look at everything that William and that William law knew about polygamy or the others based on their later, um, well earlier than this, but based on the lawsuits based on everything that they tried to do to Joseph, I think it becomes abundantly clear that they knew absolutely nothing.
[00:05:32] And so anyway, that’s what it’s gonna be. So this is going to be on the destruction and the motivation. And if you know, investigating the claim of whether Joseph was just being tyrannical and authoritarian and hiding his um his secrets in having the expositor destroyed and, and what happened from there? So that’s what we’re going to look on. So look, look at in this episode, I’m sorry, I’m having a hard time speaking today, but hopefully you can just put up with it. And, you know, again, as I always say, listen to what I mean and not just what I say, if I say something wrong, go ahead and correct me in the comments. I actually really appreciate when people let me know. I said something wrong. So, ok, anyway, continuing on our discussion of the strategy being played played out by the expositor, conspirators. Um You’ll remember I talked about the onslaught of legal charges and lawsuits. They just kept bringing lawsuit after lawsuit trying to get him to Carthage or prosecution after prosecution trying to get him to Carthage, which he, he knew was the strategy to try to have him killed. They already pointed out how much they were working toward trying to actually kill Joseph and Hyrum Smith and the entire Smith family. So we’re going to go on into that a little bit more. But another part of the um of the strategy. Oh, I also talked about the um the, the church that they started, they really were trying to get rid of the Smiths and usurp the their positions in Nauvoo. And so um another part of their strategy, in addition to all of those was really revving up a full blown assault on the, on the church and its leaders, mostly on its leaders in the local newspapers. And so this is an important thing to understand in our claims that um you know, Joseph was trying to hide polygamy and that’s why he destroyed the expositor. So that’s what we’re going to look at right now. I want to talk about what had already been published. So among other things, because there was always, you know, things being said about the Mormons, but it really started in earnest when John Bennett left and just he was the most resentful and unfortunately capable guy. So he worked really hard to make sure that that lots of bad things happened to Joseph Smith and the Mormon. So he had written six letters which were all had already been published in the Sangamo Journal he had already, it was him that we get the uh Martha Brotherton story and the Nazi Rigdon story and the happiness letter. So those were big points that they talked about and he did share the names of those women. It was from him that we get the cryptic list of initials of supposed wives like lb for Louisa Beaman that I am excited to talk about in the future because new developments there, lots of information. See we like, this is all coming out more and more and it’s really exciting. So all of this had already been published in the Sangamo Journal and I believe it was also carried in some major newspapers. I know it was in, I think it was the New York Times and the Chicago Tribune. I think those were the papers that had also been carried in and who knows how many others he also had already published his book. This was Mormonism Exposed by John C Bennett and it had sold like crazy. They had multiple republications in multiple new editions just in the first year. So this was all in 1842 2 years before the Nauvoo expositor. All of this was already out and had been everywhere. So um the Warsaw Signal, you’ll remember Warsaw was only 20 minutes away from Nauvoo and they republished many of John Bennett’s claims. They told the um Martha Brotherton story and the Nancy Rigdon story. They talked about them often. Oh they talked about Sarah Pratt. They kept, they just had an onslaught, a constant stream of articles mocking decrying or vilifying Old Joe as they called him and the Mormons in every possible way. And so, um, and, and as I said, including all of the accusations of polygamy and reprinting all of those things. They have a couple of examples. There are so many, but um some people have shared with me Buckeye’s lamentations. They had two Buckeye publications in February and April. Those are, most people agree that those were written by Wilson Law most um most probably. And so there was nothing literally nothing that Joseph could hope to hide about polygamy. The exponent was hardly the first to print accusations of Joseph’s spiritual wifey. They had literally been all over the country for a full two years, plus who knows how much before that? Right? And so um so I need someone like the claim that Joseph was trying keep these secret things um about polygamy. It’s just ridiculous, like read another expositor. What exactly did it reveal? Every accusation had already been repeatedly made? So by this time, by the, by the time of the expositor, it was literally old news. And so, and like I said, read the expositor. Well, that’s what we’re going to look into next time to see what they knew they had to add to the conversation. Really nothing. It’s become so clear that they just had nothing to contribute to the allegations of Joseph’s polygamy. And so, um, the one thing they did add were the accusations against
[00:10:44] Hiram, which I’ve tried to debate if I can do a whole episode on this or how to handle it. I’ll just cover it really quickly right here because I find it really interesting that all of a sudden when the spotlight had been so much on Joseph and the accusations were against him, all of a sudden they seem to turn and start, um, making out allegations against Hiram Smith. So it started, I think from what I have seen and go ahead, always, you know, add to the conversation because so many people know things that I don’t know. But, um, you’ll remember Oremus Bostwick came to Navoo in November, I believe, and he started making allegations against Hyrum. He only got there in November and by February Joseph was actually suing him for the allegations he made against Hyrum and all of the women of NAVOO. You’ll remember that’s what led to the, um, voice of innocence, the big meetings that they had, it was the claims by Orsamus Bostwick and interestingly guess who represented him as his lawyers, the higbe, right? So it seems to me very, um, very plausible. I think it’s not, um, I, I think it’s very obvious to me that the hig be, were involved in putting Orus Bostwick up to that as we’ll see they did with others. They put the people up to things to help move their motivations along. And so I, I want to talk about that a little bit more because it’s bizarre to me how our historians handle that we actually give Orus Bostwick part of this criminal element that was coming into NAVOO who had no connection to Mormonism had hardly even been there and he starts making allegations against Hyrum Smith immediately, once he gets the gets there, and the Joseph Smith historians actually give him credit for sort of being a polygamy insider. They at least justify his allegations and claims. I find that appalling and very upsetting. To be honest, I’m excited. I’ve asked Britney Horning to come on and talk to me about the, the way that the historians handle so many of these um sources. So I’m really excited to have that conversation with her. She’s, she’s fabulous. So it would be great. But um in any case that was, that was all of a sudden against Hiram instead of against Joseph. And then we have the expositor and the claim started to come out that it was Hiram that brought the revelation to the laws and it was Hiram that read the revelation in the High Council. And I really was like, why in the world are they going after Hiram? But the, the most um obvious reason I can see is that the common cause the expositor had with the Warsaw signal things that were being published everywhere was their fight against their concern about Hiram running for Senate. Right. Joseph was running for president really didn’t have a very good chance of being elected, but Hiram had a very good chance of being elected in as a state senator. And so that was a massive concern that they were trying to fight against. That was part of the urges to get rid of the Smiths at that at this point. So I think it’s interesting that all of a sudden, I think because of that, the allegation, the accusations started to have to be revved up against Hyrum instead of just Joseph because Hyrum had really been pretty much ignored in most of the accusations before then. But the expositor hit him really hard. So I find that to be interesting. So that is the one thing the expositor adds, I would argue that it was less because they had that additional information and more because they needed to come after Hiram, right? They needed to find a way to um go after him. But anyway, we’ll look at that more in the next episode. And as I said, we looked at it previously. Um the claims that 132 is what Hiram supposedly read. So there’s gonna be a lot more to go into. But in any case, if anybody wants to continue to claim that Joseph was wanted, the press destroyed out of his fear of things getting out about his polygamy, it reveals that just, they are deeply uninformed, they really don’t have any kind of grasp on what has already been published, what the situation actually was. It’s just completely illogical and it simply does not match the historical record at all. So we, that’s a, that’s a very ignorant claim to make and I hope that we can just move on from that as well. So the real danger of the expositor and the central reason for its destruction was the genuine and very valid fear of mob violence, not only mobs from Warsaw and Carthage, but also the very real possibility of the citizens of Nauvoo themselves becoming a mob. That was the danger. Joseph Smith was desperately trying to prevent. So that’s the strategic double blind, double bind that I talked about in the first episode that these men intentionally designed to ensure the death of Joseph Smith. We have so many reports of Joseph Jackson and others saying we’re gonna cause a tumult and in Nauvoo and as soon as we get those people riled up people from outside comment, I I gave some of the quotes in part one. So anyway, that’s the situation that we’re looking at again. So I want to share some examples of this full scale attack and the calls for the mob that were ratcheting up in the newspaper. So May 29th, you. So just a reminder, the um novel Expositor was published on June 7th. So this is all in the like the days building up to that. So May 29th, the Warsaw. It, um,
[00:15:57] let’s see. I think I’ve read part of this in part one, how Joseph’s life was not safe outside of Nauvoo and he would certainly be killed in Carthage. It continued on to say we have seen and heard enough to convince us that old Joe was not safe out of Nauvoo and we would not be surprised to hear of his death by violent means in a short time. And then it goes on to say he has deadly enemies, men whose wrongs have maddened them, whose lives have been sought by Joe and who are prepared at all times to avenge themselves. Just the deep irony of this, like I know we like to claim that Joseph Smith killed people or would kill people. But look at all of these people who did all of this to him and he like even John Bennett, he let him go with like friendship with the hope that he could come back with, you know, like he was so to claim that he was trying to kill anyone. And what is bizarre is that these were the people trying to kill Joseph, right? It’s so much projection throughout this. So it goes on to warn that they are actively looking for, quote, the signal for general hostilities. The feeling of this country is now lashed up to its utmost pitch and it will break forth in and fury upon the slightest provocation. We are, we are no advocates of Moy. Oh no. Listen, what they say on the contrary, we have, we regret that there are any who wish to provoke hostilities without a sufficient excuse. But still we must express our conviction that if one drop of blood should be spilled by the Mormons, the conflict will soon be general and there can be no question as regards the result. Ok. Oh my gosh, it goes on. So June 5th, the worse off signal the law and its agents are mocked and yet if the citizens of this community should rise up and res and resort to the only means left to us to rid ourselves of this pest. There are fastidious moralists who would immediately brand us as Mobo Crats persecuting men for religion’s sake. And every opprobrious epithet would be applied by distant communities to us. And every palliating phrase used toward the vagabonds who have so long merited their fate. When one, when one portion of the community sets the laws at defiance, um are we bound to respect the laws and of our in our actions toward it? That is a question in ethics which moralists they solve theoretically at their leisure. But if we do not much mistake, the people in this vicinity will solve it practically unless there is speedy and effective reform in NAVOO. So again, they keep accusing them of the people in NAVOO of acting above of like not following the law. They were absolutely following the law. They were following their city charter. Just the other people didn’t like the city Charter, they didn’t like what, what it said in the power it gave them. So um into this already heated environment comes the novo expositor. And I’m just reading a couple of snippets. It was really ratcheting up and getting in intent, intense. So the people already knew that this was what was being called for. And then the novel Expositor, this is from the introductory, the question is asked, will you bring a mob upon us? Then it goes on to say we don’t support mobs but kind of similar to the previous one. But if it is necessary to make a show of force to execute legal process, it will create no sympathy in that case to cry out. We are mobbed. There is such a thing as persons being deceived into a fa sympathy once who the second time will scrutinize very closely to know who or which party are the persecutors. So we’re going to mob you, but you’re the persecutors. It is not always the first man who cries out stop thief that is robbed. The well being of society, demand it, demand it at our hands. Our country by whose laws we are protected. Asks us for a manifestation of that patriotism which should inspire every American citizen, the interests of the state of Nuvo require it. And as a citizen of Illinois, we intend to respond to the ver to the voice of Duty. So they were very clearly, obviously outrightly calling for mob violence against NAVOO. Right? And that was the intent. They knew that the people in Nauvoo would read this and, and be, you know, themselves, do anything, anything to, like, destroy the expositor or to, um, these were people who had just experienced such severe mob violence in Missouri, right? They knew exactly what they were doing. So that’s why it said if there’s one drop of blood, if there’s one sign of any kind of upheaval, then the mob will come in. So this was the double bind, right? The genuine thoughts from out the genuine threats from mobs outside Navoo was plain and it it was extremely clear to everybody in Navoo that the expositor conspirators were doing all in their power to stir up their mob to as Joseph Smith said to stir up the mob and bring them upon us. So the fact that this this and this alone was the central concern of the church leaders is made very plain in the city council meeting. So remember it was published on June 7th, the city council met on June 8th and again on June 10th to discuss what to do and reading tho those notes were never intended to be published, right? They are accurate notes of what of,
[00:21:05] of the minutes of the meeting that we have and so you can read what the concerns actually were. And so the um expositor was destroyed on the evening of the 10th after that second meeting. And then we have, um, Joseph Smith was killed on the 27th. So it build up until that, so that’s what we’re going to cover is that time frame. So again, I know I read from the city councils and city council and it’s in the first part, we’re going to read different parts of them again because we’re looking at the, the, the decision of what to do with the expositor. So on June 8th, Joseph Smith said, what the opposition party want is to raise a mob on us and take the spoil from us as they did in Missouri if God ever spoke by me and it will not be five years before this city is, is in ashes and we in our graves unless we go to Oregon, California or some other place, if the city does not put down everything which tends to mob aracy. So they’re saying mobs are our danger. We have to get rid of anything that will lead to mobs. And he includes in that list, we have to put down their murders, bo bogus makers and scoundrels. So it’s like we can’t let this happen anymore in the city. You remember I talked about in the first part about how because of the Nauvoo Charter, a criminal element started to move into Nauvoo and Joseph is like, this is not good for us. We have to be much more firm with these people and get them out of here. And so the mayor said the conduct of such men and such papers as the expositor are calculated to destroy the peace of the city and it is not safe that such things should exist on account of the mob spirit which they tend to produce. This was the concern the mob, right, which they had very good to ex to fear and recent experience with. So Hy Smith spoke in relation to the laws, fosters Higby and Sharp, the editor of the Warsaw Signal and of the importance of suppressing that spirit which has driven us from Missouri et cetera. So um there’s, if you read through the Warsaw Signal, people were taking these ridiculous claims to Warsaw claiming that Hiram said that he was going to kill Thomas Sharp, the editor of the Warsaw Signal and he was going to destroy that press and it’s ridiculous, you can’t find any claim of that anywhere and and Hiram swears affidavits and the others that were at, at these meetings saying no, Hiram never said anything like that. So these expositor conspirators were just revving it up on both sides. Joseph Jackson, as I said, taking reports, reports to Warsaw to rev them up and they of course, just believed anything negative about the Mor Mormons. So that was the situation. That’s what Hyrum actually said, but um Joseph, as I said, was not only concerned about the, the mob coming in to NTU but also the navoo citizens, they were just crying out to him. You can’t let this happen. So he was worried that they were going to destroy the press themselves, which again would lead to the out to the mob coming in from outside. And so his, um Joseph Smith letter to Governor Ford expresses, can it be supposed that after all the indignities to which we have been subjected outside that this people could suffer a set of worthless vagabonds to come into our city and write under our own eyes and protection, vilify and column, not only ourselves but the character of our wives and daughters as was impudently and unblushingly done in that infamous and filthy sheet. There is not a city in the United States that would have suffered such an indignity for 24 hours. Our whole people were indignant and loud, loudly called upon our city authorities for redress of their grievances, which if not attended to, they themselves would have taken the matter into their own hands and have summarily published at the punished the audacious wretches as they deserved. So I I read that out of order that comes a little bit later in the story. But to express what Joseph was worried about what he was dealing with or what the concerns were. So that was the double bind, right? Just as I said, I’ve explained it a couple of times and so the city council met again two days later, that was from the eighth. This is from the 10th. They read extensively from the expositor and discussed the threats to the Charter by ironically, people who had helped pass the Charter and who had held positions on the city council and never had any problem with any of that until they became enemies and weren’t getting what they thought they wanted. Right? So, um so we have like Sylvester Emmons, he was the, he became the editor of the um Novo Expositor and he was a member of the city council and we had all of these others. So anyway, as it is, the um Novo exposure is calling for the destruction of the city charter and the destruction of the city. The mayor says, is it not treasonable against all chartered rights privileges, peace and happiness of the city. And he spoke at great length. And so this was, this was a reasonable charge of treason, right? A quick note on the expositor. So um Dallin H Oaks, wrote a great paper. He wrote actually several great papers. It’s been good for me to get in and read some of his research because he did a really good job um researching a lot of these things and I appreciate that.
[00:26:00] So I will link the um I will link his papers below, but this was a quote that I appreciated. And he said the first and only issue of the Nauvoo expositor was more sensation then distinguished while the paper contained a short story, some poetry, a few news items mostly copied from Eastern newspapers and a scattering of ads. It was principally devoted to attacking Joseph and Hyrum Smith and their unknown unnamed associates in the church and in the government with this is a quote from another, um, someone else with quote lame grammar and turgid rhetoric that Secretary of State John Hay turned dull or laughable. So it was John Hay, the secretary of that said it was lame grammar and turgid rhetoric that was dull or laughable. So truly from top to bottom, the Nauvoo expositor, it is just ridiculous accusations and inflammatory language. So among many other things and I’m not reading this because I’m offended on Joseph’s sake. Just the ridiculous accusations they were making it. It calls Joseph one of the blackest and bases scoundrels that has appeared upon the stage of human exis existence since the days of Nero and Caligula. If you know anything about Nero and Caligula, you’re like what? You know, it’s just, it’s just so silly and then it just goes on, it speaks of other fathers who bled and sacrificed for the laws of the nation. Shall we? Their sons lie still and suffer Joseph Smith to light up the lamp of tyranny and oppression in our midst. God forbid lest the departed spirits of our father cry from the ground against us. Let us arise in the majority of our strength and sweep the influence, the influence of tyrants and miscreants from the face of the land as with the breath of heaven. So you can see how it is calling. It’s a call to action, right? It’s saying take up arms against Nauvoo. It warns that they must arouse from our lethargy and lend a helping hand. Then gentlemen, organize yourselves and prepare for the dead dreadful conflict to suppress this contaminating influence, which is prostrating our fairest prospects and spreading desolation throughout our veil. Call into field your best men under the solemn pledge to go for the unconditional repeal of the novel Charter and you will have our support. So I will repeat Joseph’s question. Is this not treasonable against all chartered rights privileges, peace and the happiness of the city? I would say, yes, it very much is. So Joseph did very well understand the double bind they were in and it is clear how carefully he weighed the risks of each option. So the council decided to quote, pass an ordinance to prevent libelous publication and a lot to prevent conspiracy against the peace of the city, including attempts to take away the charter. So they’re saying you can’t in Nauvoo, you can’t publish this kinds, these kinds of things that are trying to destroy the city and remove the charter. And so, um please notice how hard Joseph and the city council work to follow the law and be sure they were within legal means. And that’s something that becomes apparent as we continue on to read through this. It was those who opposed them who did not, um, the, the, they didn’t like, as, maybe I already said this but they didn’t like the fact that they didn’t have the votes to make sure Hiram Smith couldn’t get elected. Right. They didn’t like the, the, um, legal process being carried out as it was supposed to according to the charter. And they didn’t like the democratic process being carried out if they couldn’t assure their side victory. And so that’s, it’s really interesting to see who was actually the acting within the law and was very much not so Joseph moved that the decision to pass the ordinance needed to be unanimous and Hiram seconded. So that makes it very clear that they understood very well the risk that he was that they were taking and that they needed to make it very clear that it was not just personal, this was not just Joseph offended or trying to hide something for him personally. This, um, this was, um, it wasn’t him just trying to silence his enemies. This was a unanimous decision of the city council for the sake of the city. So, um, there is a lot of careful and thoughtful legal discussion in these minutes. So I just want to share a little bit of it. So you can understand how hard they actually genuinely were working to make sure that what they were doing was legal. So they discussed the legal definition of nuisance in Chit’s Blackstone. So Blackstone was the authoritative book of law at this time and Chitty was the publisher of the 18th edition. And so they reference it often to this is like the legal journal that they’re going for information. It defines nuisance as anything that disturbs the peace of the community. And um they read, they referenced Chivy Blackstone page four private wrongs. Volume two. They, you know, put all of that like they’re, they’re saying, look, here’s our legal case. They needed to find a way to prevent the issuing of any more slanderous communications from the paper, the novo expositor that is exciting our enemies abroad and was designed to incite mobs. So that’s what they were. Um working on
[00:30:55] Joseph moved that the decision to pass the ordinance should be unanimous and Hiram seconded, seconded to me. It makes it very clear that he very well understood the risk he was taking upon himself and the need to make it very clear that this was not just personal, this was not him acting in a tyrannical or authoritarian way or him just trying to silence his enemies for his own sake or to keep his secret. He was, he needed it to be well understood that this was the city council acting in unanimity for the sake of the city, right? And it’s, it’s really good to, to read through some of these um minutes of these meetings to see how carefully and thoughtful they were being to make sure that they were acting within the law. And so they referenced Chitty Blackstone. So this is Blackstone was the authoritative legal journal. Chitty was the publisher of the 18th edition, which is what they refer, what they had at the time. Joseph actually referenced it often to make sure that he understood law correctly. So it in um it defines nuisance as anything that disturbs the peace of the community. And they read that and included it in the notes. And they go on to talk about how they need to find a way to quote, prevent the issuing of any more slanderous communications from the paper that is ex exciting our enemies abroad. It was designed to incite mobs and that’s what they needed to prevent. So a commentary explains that Blackstone whose definitive work on the common law um was studied by the counselors to determine the legality of the prop of the proposed action states that certain nuisances may be abated by the aggrieved party without notice to the person who communicate, who committed them. So it was their actions were justified in the foremost legal journal of the time they still however looked for and considered any other possible solutions. They suggested issuing fines but realized that that was impossible for a varie variety of reasons. The conspirators had no respect for the law and would not comply. And Joseph and the others had no way to go to Carthage to prosecute without being killed. So there was no way to enforce any law that they would pass or any fine that they would pass and it would have no effect. So the discussion continued and they realized that the only the option they had was to abate the nuisance. In other words, destroy the press. Really. When there are no good choices, you have to try to make the least bad choice. And I think that’s what they very much did. So here are a few examples of the um, of the opinions that were voiced. Elias Smith considered that there is but one course to pursue, they were out of the reach of the law. One course to put an end to the thing at once. He believed that if the city did not do it, others would by what, by what he had heard. So it was that same concern. Um Orson Spencer accorded with the view expressed that this paper is a nuisance did not consider it wise to give them time to trump it. 1000 lies this property and, and they did not have the property to pay for if we pass only a fine or imprisonment. Have we any confidence that they will desist? None at all. He found these men covenant breakers with God and their wives and we have we any hope of them doing better. Their characters have gone before them and you’ll recall all of what we’ve studied in the first, the first one, right? The um these were not general, these were not good guys. Even William Law who you could argue was the best of them. He had had an, he was an adulterer, right? So he had had an affair. So anyway, conti um Phineas Richards said he referenced the scurry at Hans Mill and the death of his son at that place said he could not sit still when he saw the same arising in this place. You see what I mean? This is really like hard stuff to read. He considered the publishers of the expositors as much murderers at heart as David was before the death of Uriah. They were making short work of it. He was prepared to, to take his stand by the mayor and wherever he proposed would stand by him to the last, the quicker it is stopped, the better. Sorry, it’s hard to read these minutes because they’re um you, well, you’ll see what they look like. Um Phillips said he had investigated the Constitution Charter and laws, the power to declare that office a nuisance is granted to us in the Springfield Charter as and a resolution declaring it a nuisance is all that is required. So then Har Alderman Harris spoke from the chair expressed his feelings that the press ought to be demolished. The resolution of the printing press was read and passed. And so, um, that was, that was what the discussion was and you can see truly what the concern was. Right. It very much was we need to prevent another Missouri episode. We need to prevent another Hans Mill. And, um, that’s, um, let’s see, the council made the decision and passed the ordinance and Joseph, by order of the council issued the order to destroy the press and it was carried out. So now another really important point to consider is how the abatement of the press was carried out. They were abating a nuisance. So the abatement of the press is the of the press, right? It was intentionally done in as un mob like a way as humanly possible, right? That there, I’ll explain why, but there was um there were many testimonies of how it was done both by enemies and friends, both by non Mormons and Mormons people inside and outside the city. There was a lot of testimony about this and it all agreed at the two subsequent court trials for riot that we talk about numerous witnesses,
[00:36:19] including several visitors from cities outside Illinois testified without significant contradiction that the whole transaction was accomplished quietly and without noise or tumult, 7 to 12 men went inside and carried out the press and type witnesses agreed that there was no violence and nothing was destroyed or damaged that did not pertain to the press. So that was the summary by um Oaks. In fact, if you read the testimonies of these um trials that we’re going to talk about, the only shouting or threats were from Francis Higby and Charles Foster who were both there when the press was calmly carried out to be destroyed. And despite the author authorization given in the order to arrest any who stood in the way, they were not arrested and were allowed to leave, unhindered, exposing the complete lie of all of law’s inflammatory claims that their lives were in danger could not be further from the truth. It is hard for me to understand how anyone who actually reads the sources could see Joseph Smith as the bad guy here, he or the city council. It really was the entire city council, right? But we just blame it all on Joseph Smith and claim he was a tyrant trying to hide his polygamy. And if you read the sources that is so clearly false, people need to do more than just believe these claims without doing any research on them. And as to the saying that the expositor was destroyed because of Joseph’s desperation to hide his supposed polygamy. There is absolutely nothing anywhere in the historical record to allow for that idea. It, it you can’t believe that if you know anything, the concerns, conversations and decisions are extremely well documented and make it clear that the entire issue was about trying to do whatever they possibly could to preserve the peace and safety of NAVOO. So you just can’t say that it was just Joseph trying to cover up polygamy if, if polygamy entered the picture at all, which it barely did. It was only as a cheap site accusation that conspirators could use to try to further defame Joseph and increase the outrage against him. But it had nothing to do with their desire to kill Joe. And with the city council’s decision to destroy the press, nothing at all. That is that is a myopic narrative that just reveals that you are completely ignorant of the facts and the evidence and the sources. So um the navoo neighbor um the newspaper navoo summed up the situation. Well, it said a burnt child dreads the fire, the church as a body and individually has suffered till forbearance has ceased to be a virtue, the cries and pleadings of men, women and Children with the authorities will, will you suffer that servile murderous paper to go on and vilify and slander the innocent inhabitants of this city and raise another mob to drive and plunder us again as they did in Missouri, they explained the legality and the order destruction and the ordered destruction of the press and then said, and in the name of free men and and in the name of God, we beseech all men who have the spirit of honor in them to cease from persecuting us collectively or individually, let us enjoy our religion, rights and peace like the rest of mankind, why start presses to destroy rights and privileges and bring upon us mobs to plunder and murder? We ask no more than what belongs to us, the rights of Americans. So that’s, that’s where that every single account we have. So I know that people still can say, well, Joseph was just doing this secretly, but you have to find some evidence for that. We have the minutes, we have the discussions, we have all of his letters, we have what was printed in the newspapers. You can’t find anywhere to like truly to try to claim that this was about polygamy that Joseph destroyed it. About polygamy is just complete in complete contradiction to the entire historical record. So we need to just put that claim to rest. So now we are going to look at whether Joseph, well, the City Council really, it wasn’t Joseph’s decision to, to, to destroy the press. It was the City Council’s decision, but we always blame it on Joseph. We need to look at whether that was authoritarian, tyrannical, illegal or at the very least a bad decision. I would argue very strongly that it was not. So, um again, that perspective relies on a great deal of ignorance. So a few facts that people need to know in this discussion, the Expositor Press was by no means the first nor the last press to be destroyed in 19th century America, there are dozens and dozens of examples. So, um, what was unique about the n the Expositor Press is that it was actually calling for violence more than any of these other presses. I’m going to talk about were so, um, so it’s kind of an inversion of the situation, but let’s, let’s go over a few of these. So you may recall the Mormons themselves had, had their own press is destroyed multiple times. 11 years earlier, their press in Missouri was destroyed. The building burned to the ground and the men tarred, tarred and feathered. Remember when I talked in the episode on Emma about her lost hymn book, that was that time, four years later, their Kirtland press was destroyed and the building torn down around it never with any legal consequences, any prosecution and nobody was ever held accountable. And it wasn’t just the Mormons. It was actually a common occurrence in Illinois alone, presses were destroyed 16 times. That’s just in Illinois in the decades before and after the expositor. So it wasn’t only happening before it continued to happen after. And not, that’s not to mention the rest of the country there.
[00:41:56] It was probably happened hundreds of times. I just don’t have, I only know about Nauvoo. The most famous and most applicable example was Eliza Elijah Lovejoy. He was a fearless abolitionist who had presses destroyed four times when um both in Missouri. And in Illinois, when his first press was des destroyed and thrown in the Missouri river. In 1836 he was forced like the Mormons to flee Missouri. Missouri barely escaping with his life. There was never any prosecution, never any compensation. Um When he started his fourth press still facing serious death threats, he gave a speech saying as long as I am an American citizen and as long as American blood runs in these veins, I shall hold myself at liberty to speak, to write and to publish whatever I please being amenable to the laws of my country for the same. And again, just like Eliza, Elijah lovejoy and the Mormons, they weren’t calling for mobs, they weren’t calling for destruction. They were preaching things that were, that we now recognize as good, right? He was an abolition saying we shouldn’t have men in slavery and the Mormons were Mormons saying, hey, this is how we worship God. So nobody was called, this was a really unique situation with the expositor press calling directly for mobs to come in and kill the people destroy the city. So it’s not exactly um applicable, but it still is interesting when um let’s see, he gave that speech and he acquired 1/4 press which he kept hidden in a warehouse in Illinois. But the fourth attack came in November of 1837. This time, in addition to his press being destroyed, he was shot five times by the mob that was made up primarily of Missouri as well. Sounds familiar. Right. And he was killed. And this time there actually were trials from this fourth destruction, but none of them had anything to do with the destruction of the press. The first trials were for them were, um, the men who were in the building with Lovejoy who survived the attack and they were charged and stood trial for unlawful defense If you can believe that um for the trying to defend themselves and the building and press, the moers were then put on trial but only for murder, not for the destruction of the press. And again, it was only a show trial. The jury foreman was foreman was one of the leaders of the mob and all were found not guilty. So, you know, this wasn’t. Um anyway, I just, I’m trying to show that like our idea that Joseph was so out of line doing this is completely, completely wrong. These were all riots, right? These were very riotous acts, nobody was accused of riot, nobody held was held accountable in any way. And um and remember, this was not the only case, the destruction of printing presses was literally part of the order of the day. It was commonplace and I think I called it something like the um oh something of the times, the just just it was, it was just something that happened a lot. But while the destruction of the Expositor press was not unique and it wasn’t unique that it was destroyed. What was unique is that this was the first time the destruction of a, of a press met with this kind of violent outrage and even more impactful and troubling was legally prosecuted in the way that it was so Joseph had carefully since and thoughtfully done the very best he could, he could possibly do to follow the legal protocol and the precedent. But still the intentional double bind played out. Responses were immediate and intense as the expositor cons conspirators continued to do all they could to ensure things played out according to their strategy, to lead to Joseph’s to, to the Mormon’s death to Joseph and Hyrum death. So this is, this was published the next day July 11th in um in the Warsaw signal, we received the above communication by the hand of Charles A Foster at about half past 11 o’clock. Today, we have only to state that this is sufficient exclamation point, war and extermination is inevitable. This is all with exclamation points and capitals citizens arise one and all three exclamation points. All caps can you stand by and suffer such capitalized infernal devils with two exclamation points? Just I won’t, I just know that this is how the whole thing is written to rob men of their property and rights without avenging them. We have no time for comment. Every man will make his own. Let it be made with powder and ball. So the very day Charles Foster ran off to Warsaw to say, ok, it’s happened. We did it, let’s go. Right. And they were, they put it in press that, that same day June 12th, it said we have one chance left. Joe will doubtlessly have the power to oppress. But if he attempts to exercise it, we will throw ourselves on our reserved rights justice. We will have if law is che if the law is cheated out of its efficacy and can no longer protect our persons and property, we have the consolation to know that steel and gunpowder can again the projection that they’re claiming they’re protecting their persons and property while they
[00:47:00] are going in to attack and mob navoo, right and destroy navoo. So while Charles Charles Foster sped with the news to Warsaw Francis Hicky raced to Carthage and swore out complaints accusing Joseph Smith of riot, demanding his arrest as well as that of the entire city council and the leaders of the police who carried it out instead of submitting to the. So that’s what they went different directions, right? You work on the newspaper angle, I’ll work on the legal angle. We will get the arrest, this is gonna do it. And so, um so that led to uh uh uh Marshall came and tried to arrest Joseph Smith and 18 other men, but instead of submitting to the arrest and extradition to Carthage, which everybody knew was a death sentence. Everybody knew that this was all leading to Joseph’s death that if he went to Carthage, he would be killed. Joseph again, relied on Navoo City’s habeas corpus statute that I talked about in part one and he submitted, he did submit to a full day trial in NAVOO. Um It, it lasted all day 27 witnesses from both sides. That’s where, that’s one of the trials where we get those reports of how calmly and peaceably, the destruction of the press was carried out. And, um, it was determined that there had been no riot, which is very true. If you read through all of the reports, the quote is the main tumult in the entire episode came from shouts and threats from the publishers of the expositor and that the city council had added, acted under proper legal authority. An identical charge was filed the second time this time for so, um, a, a judge that came into town said, hey, that people aren’t going to stand for this. You can’t just have the trial be in their own court. So they had a second charge brought, that was the same and he actually stood full of this. The, the first was just a hearing for a habeas corpus hearing to see if, if there was, um, if it was just to have him extradited and they decided, no, it wasn’t. The second one was an actual full blown trial with a non Mormon judge and it was still held again the entire next day, again an entire day. And um lots of testimony and the defendants again were dis and this was on the advice of a non Mormon judge who was out of town saying this is what you need to do, giving them legal advice and they submitted and did it so you can read through the trial notes. I’ll link below the case was very clear, there was no riot and that was the only charge for arrest. And yet that the threats continued. The Warsaw signal um printed an extra on June 14th reporting on a mass meeting that had been held in Carthage the day before where both chauncey Higby and especially Francis Higby and some of the other conspirators were were um major participants and speakers. So here’s, here’s quoting from that um extra published on the 14th. The only recourse left is to take up arms. They passed a series of resolutions resolved to command the efforts of the services of every good citizen to put an immediate stop to the career of the mad prophet and his dem dem demoniac coad. We must not only defend ourselves from danger but we must resolutely carry the war into the enemy’s camp. We do therefore declare that we will take full vengeance, terrible vengeance. Should the lives of any of our citizens be lost in the effort that we hold ourselves at all times in readiness to cooper with our fellow citizens in this state, Missouri and Iowa to exterminate utterly exterminate the wicked and abominable. Mormon leaders and authors of our troubles. That was one of the resolutions. Here’s another resolved to notify all persons in our township, suspected of being the tools of the prophet to leave immediately on pain of instant vengeance. So every Mormon is gonna get kicked out and then resolved that the time in our opinion has arrived, when the adherence of Smith as a body should be driven from the surrounding settlements into navoo. So they’re going going to drive them into NAVOO, gathering them like this is really chilling to think about it when the Nazis were gathering all of the Jews into the ghettos so that they could destroy them altogether, right? That’s kind of what they were saying. We have to drive them out of all of the surrounding settlements into navoo that the prophet and his miscreant adherent should then be demanded at um that the prophet and and his miscreant here should then be demanded at their hands. And if not surrendered, a war of extermination should be waged to the entire destruction if necessary for our protection of his adherence. So hear that again, we in order to protect ourselves, we have to gather every Mormon man, woman and child into the city and kill all of them for our protection. So man, this like projection is insane, hereby pledging ourselves to aid to the utmost, the complete consummation of the object in view that we may be that we may thereby be utterly relieved of the alarm, anxiety and trouble to which we are now subjected. They are the ones subjected to alarm and trouble. We’re going to kill all of you so that we don’t any longer need to be afraid of you is basically what they were proposing and resolving to do,
[00:52:12] resolve that every citizen arm himself and be prepared to sustain the resolutions here and contained. So that’s what was published in the Warsaw Signal. They immediately began to put these resolutions into action. There were several you can read through the church history of this time period. There are so many affidavits gathered and there were several reports coming in from um um from Mormons in areas outside aside Nauvoo being visited by men being told that they needed to either take up arms to help arrest Joseph and the others or they needed to surrender their arms and pack up their families and go immediately to NAVOO. They were told they had until Monday the 17th. So this started to be actually carried out. This was the situation Joseph wrote immediately to Governor Ford telling him quote that an telling an energetic attempt is being made by some of the citizens and of this and the surrounding counties to drive and exterminate the Saints by force of arms. I ask at your hands, immediate counsel and protection. Do you hear he’s asking for his counsel as well as his protection. Judge Thomas Judge who he’s been listening to so far has been here and given his, his advice in all in the case, which I shall strictly follow until I hear from your excellency. That’s true. He had sought his advice and strictly followed it and now he’s asking for direction from the governor, what should I do? This is what’s happening and in all cases shall adhere to the Constitution and laws. And Joseph had followed the constitution and laws the very best he possibly could. The Nabu legion is at your service to quell all insurrection and support the dignity of the common wheel. That means the well being of the, the well being of the commonwealth. Um So he already said here, I will give you command of the n legion to help what whatever you command us to do we will do. I wish urgently. I I wish urgently wish your excellency to come down in person with your staff and investigate the whole matter without delay and cause peace to be restored to the country. And I know not, but this will be the only means of stopping an effusion of blood. So you can hear it was actually judge Thomas that told Joseph the governor needs to come here and see this. That’s the only thing that’s going to stop this from happening. So Joseph wrote that, please come if he were the one in the wrong, would he be telling the governor, please come and see what’s happening, please and tell me what to do. I will follow all of your advice and here is control of the Novo legion that’s important to know for what comes later. So, Governor Ford did not come. I, we’re gonna talk a little bit about this guy, not as much as we should, but a little bit. So news of the impending mob attack continued to pour, nob mob attack continued to pour into Nauvoo. With um here are some of the details from these various affidavits, 1500 Missourians that was reported by many different people along with the Quincy Grays. That’s another militia and other companies from surrounding counties would all assemble at Warsaw the morning of the 17th, they had five cannons and were going to NAVOO to demand to take Joseph and Hyrum Smith and the entire city council also the leaders of the police. I think there were Joseph Smith plus 18 others. And if the people did not give them up, they would blow up the city and kill and exterminate all the inhabitants. That was literally what was happening. And so just remember what these people had already experienced. The attack was planned for Wednesday the 19th. So people had until Monday the 17th to leave their homes and go to NAVOO or join the Moers, right? And they, the attack was scheduled for Wednesday the 19th and these men that they had to turn in, like you think of, like they knew they were all going to be killed. So what, what were these people supposed to do? It was under this extreme threat that Joseph who had already twice been found not guilty of the only charges against him, the only charges against him were riot. He had had a hearing and then he had stood full trial with a non Mormon judge on the advice of another non Mormon judge. And um that’s what he had already already done and this is what was happening. So he wrote the following letters on Monday the 17th letter to the Marshal Sir, complaint having been made to me on oath that a mob is collecting at sundry points to make an account on an attack on this city. You will therefore take such measures as measures as shall be necessary to preserve the peace of said city according to the provisions of the charter and the laws of the state. And with the police and legion, see that there is no vi that no violent act is committed. So this is what he’s doing. He’s saying, hey, we need to protect the city and he’s doing it all legally through legal orders that were reported to the commander of the NVA Legion. He wrote, you are hereby commanded to order the N legion to be in readiness to assist said Marshall in keeping the peace and doing whatever may be necessary to preserve the dignity of the state and city, perform all services with as little noise and confusion as possible. Um, he tells him to prevent any groups of men, any boats from landing in any groups of armed men from becoming ashore. That’s like he’s telling him the points to watch for. It’s so clear what they were worried about and why they did all of this and if any places, if attack is threatened, what are they supposed to do? Right.
[00:57:23] They were doing exactly the, the very best they possibly could. And I would like to hear anyone else say what they should have done instead the same day, the nun neighbor printed an extra explaining the situation. And I really think the entire thing is worth reading to understand what was actually happening and how they were trying to keep things calm, give people courage and explain the situation. So I’ll link it below. But let me just read these two sections. This is how it begins as a soft breeze in a hot day mellows the air. So does the simple truth calm the feelings of the, of the irritated. And so we proceed to give the proceedings of the city council relating to the removal of the novo expositor as a nuisance. I’ll skip down. It says the men who got at the press were constantly engaged in resisting the authority or threatening something. If they were fined an app if they were fined, an appeal was taken. But the slander went on, that’s, we couldn’t find them. And when the came, the course and plan was to destroy the city was marked out the destruction of the city charter and the ruin of the Saints was all was the all commanding topic. So they all knew what the expositor was trying to do and they, it goes on and on. But um if the people had actually, if people will actually read the record, you will see that this is very true. This was the central goal and purpose of the Novo expositor. There’s no way to claim that these were good men trying to just and put down immorality. These were selfish, greedy, resentful, bitter men trying to wrest control of Nauvoo and determined to get revenge and wreak havoc if they couldn’t. That was the true situation. So Tuesday the next day, June 18th at 145 in the afternoon with the imminent attack planned for the next morning, Joseph finally declared martial law. This is why he wrote to the marshal of the city of Nauvoo from the newspapers around us and the reports as brought in from the surrounding count country. I have good reason to fear that a mob is organizing to come upon this city and plunder and destroy said city as well as murder the citizens and by virtue of the authority vested in me. And as mayor and to preserve the city and lives of the citizens. I do hereby declare that said city with within the limits of its incorporation under martial law, the officers therefore of the nuel the police as well as others will strictly that no persons or property pass in or out of the city without due orders, Joseph Smith, the mayor. And now you also, it’s, I read um many letters of just private citizens in the city writing to those who were out of the city like they were terrified, the people were terrified. And I think that Joseph Smith did exactly what he needed to do and exactly what he should have done. If any of you like Joseph Smith haters listening to this, I would be interested to hear how you think he should have handled this and what you think he should have done and how you think it, he was in the wrong here if you do so. Anyway, II, I think that it would to try to claim that he was in any way a dictator or a tyrant or that he was paranoid. These are all things that I hear thrown around about him based on his decision to declare martial law, what should he have done and what would you want have wanted him to do if you were a citizen in nue? Right? He then addressed the legion. It’s really a beautiful empower speech. It’s filled with heartbreaking sincerity and he addressed them for an hour and a half. I wish that we had it all recorded, but you can read various records people took where he again laid out the case and explained. That’s another thing. These are contemporaneous records. They are completely consistent. He lays out this case again and again and again, you can read it in the city council minutes, you can read it in the newspapers, you can read it in the letters he said, and you can read it in this speech. It’s really hard to claim that there’s anything else going on here. The record is so consistent. So he again laid out the case and explained how he and the city council were innocent and had followed the law in every regard and they were literally innocent. They had been found not guilty of the charges against them. And so, um he assured the people that he would do on his power to defend them in their rights and protect them from the same unthinkable abuses they had already endured in Missouri. And then I’ll quote him. Now. He asked the legion, will you all stand by me to the death and sustain at the peril of your lives, the laws of our country and the liberties and privileges which our fathers have transmitted unto this un unto us, sealed with their blood.
[01:01:50] I shouted thousands. He continued expressing his love for them and declaring that he would sacrifice his, his life for their preservation. So he was doing the very best he could. I think that you should read this speech. So if, especially those who don’t like Joseph Smith, read all of these documents and try to find out if I didn’t say it before, I, I might have said it in one of the times that I deleted. But like reading through this, my gosh, I really have gone on a journey with Joseph Smith to where I used to just have such a testimony of him. And then I went through this, you know, learning all of these things as so many of us do and having all of these questions. And I will tell you the more I study about this man about his life, about the things that he endured and suffered, the, the things that he had to experience that most of us can’t even imagine. And the way that he dealt with them, the more respect I have for him, not just out of blind testimony, but out, out of truly reading the record reading about his life. Most people cannot even imagine like, like going to trial even once or twice in your life is so stressful that I think most people would like to never experience that let alone being like prosecuted for a serious crime or being taken to prison. This man stood trial like I think it was well over 100 times that charges were brought against him or that he had to be involved in lawsuits. And some people look at that just as evidence that obviously, you know, where there’s smoke, there’s fire. Obviously he deserved it. I think instead of looking just at, at it that way you need to look at again each individual piece, each individual suit the evidence behind it, the prosecution, the motivations. What happened, how illegally he was held in prison, the destruction that he and his people experienced and really like be fair with the sources because I’ll tell you as I read through this, watching him just his patience, his gentleness, his forbearance, his courage and, and his wisdom is really, really just amazing to me. I really am like developing a new genuine love for Joseph Smith, but in an, in an entirely new way this time, completely informed and, and reading the record, I think that people need to read more than just the ce s letter, read the actual records. So anyway, I’m gonna go on the legion’s show of force which I interpret as Joseph’s attempt to try to forestall the attack until Governor Ford could and Governor Ford could come help. It seemed to work. The mob did not attack the next morning Wednesday morning. So there are a couple of questions we could ask, was it just scare tactics trying to get the people to give away their husbands and fathers and their leaders? Right? Or what I think is maybe possible. Is it turns out that mobbing in the light of day when you’re not completely drunk and you’re not attacking, attacking helpless victims. And when you know that you are acting illegally, that takes more courage than most moers can easily muster. And so, um, I think there’s, I’m gonna take a little sidetrack because it’s worth noting that Joseph and Hiram had written to Brigham Young at the very beginning of these troubles and told him to come home and to write to the other 12 and have them all come home. Um, I haven’t looked into it enough to know why Brigham apparently didn’t respond and didn’t obey and why the rest of the 12 didn’t return either. So that’s maybe people can give me resources for that. There was a lot to research. So I didn’t have time to go into really looking into this. I just find it something to consider. And so I know that, um, what I, I have read, like I read Hebrew and the late letters during this time and Hebrew learned on, I think it was July 11th. He learned of the martyrdom by reading it in the newspaper. And the truth is he had been summoned home like a month or two or well, at least a month earlier than that, they had written to tell all of the 12 to come home, but they hadn’t come home. So I’m not sure why of that, why on that? And I would be interested to hear more of that why they were all just absent for this. So, the standoff between the mob and the NAVOO Legion, the people, you know, lasted for a few days until Governor Ford finally did arrive. But he didn’t arrive in NAVOO as Joseph had requested. He instead went to Carthage where he met with a group which included Wilson and William Law, Robert Foster, Francis and Chauncey Higby and Joseph Jackson. And I don’t know who else, but I know that those, at least all of those men were there. He only listened to their side. He literally refused to hear anything from Joseph’s representatives that he had asked to come to fill him in on their side. He cited 100% with the mob and insisted that Joseph come unescorted unarmed and thus completely unprotected to Carthage to stand trial for the charge of riot. He threatened that if he didn’t, the city would likely be destroyed and the people exterminated. This was coming from the governor as I alluded to before, the more I have studied this, the less respect I have for Governor Ford.
[01:07:07] I truly, oh, I can’t cover it in this episode, but I truly see him as a villain in the story. He was just like a member of the mob. He just like them hoped to solve the problem by having Joseph and Hyrum killed and the Mormons either killed or driven from the state. So you should read the speech that he gave in navoo to the people while Joseph and Hyrum were being murdered, it’s just appalling. So anyway, I’m gonna read a little bit, um, like, I think that is worth reading, but even more than that, I recommend reading Forbes and Joseph’s letters back and forth. I’ll talk about them a little bit. His letters make it clear that he would not understand the situation. He did not understand it. And I would say he refused to understand it. He literally compared the expositor to newspapers that printed even offensive things against him as if this was just about Joseph being offended or having his feelings hurt. If you think about all of the things that had been said and printed about Joseph Smith, like whatever was said or printed about Governor Ford, couldn’t hold a candle to what Joseph had just, you know, let roll off his back. Things were constantly said about him. And I, I find it just incredibly obtuse and unbelievably arrogant and offensive that Governor Ford responded to this in this way and made these comparisons and his letters, the, the threats, the blatant threats that he includes. It’s just, it’s just awful. So read those letters. So, um, Joseph’s letter to Governor Ford, make it clear these were sent, they had letters exchanged, June 22nd, 1844 Joseph’s response does again make it clear that I, I think this is essential reading for anyone who wants to understand Joseph and the situation with the expositor and everything le leading up to his death. Uh What I was going to say is makes it clear how careful and thoughtful he had been in trying to understand and following the law and how sincerely he was trying to act within legal means. He made very good legal arguments to Governor Ford who didn’t have any anything. I didn’t have a leg to stand on. He just wanted to side with the Moers. So he explained how he had been following legal legal advice and made very well reasoned legal arguments. Sorry, I’m repeating myself a bit. He cited the City Charter and again cited Blackstone as well as the precedents for legally destroying presses to preserve the peace and avoid quote. You have intimated that no press has been abated as a nuisance in the United States. We refer to your excellency to Humphrey versus Press in Ohio who abated the press by his own arm for libel and the courts decided on no on prosecution, no cause of action. So he’s saying, look, there’s an exact precedent I can give you a case you can look at and we do know that it is common for police in Boston, New York, et cetera to destroy scurrilous prints. Um He then explained why they didn’t come to Carthage for trial. Quote, we pled a habeas corpus as a last resort to save us from being thrown in the into the power of the mobo Crats who were then threatening us with death. We told the constable, the one who had been sent to arrest them on the charge of riot, that our lives that on our lives. We dare not go to Carthage for trial and pled with him to go before any county magistrate. He pleased in our vicinity. So are they, our lives might be saved from the threats thus, thus already issued against us. And that’s true. They had said, take us anywhere. He says the same thing to Ford, send me anywhere. I will go stand trial again anywhere, just not in Carthage. Um He pointed out the fact that that if what the city council ordered was somehow wrong, it should be handled through proper legal channels, which mean it meant over being churned by the Supreme Court, not by Joseph’s personal rest. And he’s exactly right on that. It was ridiculous. He pointed out the constitutional problems with again being tried for the same charge, quote for the constitution expressly says that no man shall twice be put in jeopardy of life and limb for the same offense. But notwithstanding this, we would not hesitate to stand another trial according to your excellency’s wish. Were it not that we are confident our lives would be in danger? We dare not come, sir. We dare not come for our lives would be in danger and we are guilty of no crime. He says it again and again, we dare not come, they will kill us. And we are innocent reading this letter. I just, I don’t know, I find it heartbreaking. He tried in the most sincere and expressive language he could to make Ford understand that their lives genuinely were in danger and that the lives of the entire city were in serious danger, especially if he went to Carthage Ford, then accused him. Also, he also accused him of um declaring martial law as if that was a crime, especially for anyone who understood the situation. That was another of the things that he listed that Joseph has done wrong. So this is Joe response to that as to martial law, we truly say that we were obliged to call out the forces to protect our lives and the constitution guarantees to every man that privilege. We have never gone contrary to the constitution so far as we have been able to learn it
[01:12:18] by ever, he goes on to say by everything that is sacred. We implore your excellency to cause our helpless women and Children to be protected from mob violence and not let not the blood of innocents cry to heaven against you. We say again, if anything wrong has been done on our part and we know of nothing, we will make all things right. If the government will give us the opportunity, disperse the mob and secure to us constitutional privileges that our lives may not be endangered when on trial. So I, I mean, again, what more could he have done? And again, when, when Ford accuses him that he was wrong to declare martial law, please recall that Joseph had already written to ask for advice to say he would do whatever Ford told him to do and to give Ford control of the Nabu Legion. So all of this is just really hard to understand other than that they wanted to kill them. So I think it should be clear that Joseph had honestly and sincerely done everything he could to try to preserve the peace within the and to act within legal precedent and through legal and constitutional means. And he was simply asking Governor Ford to do the same. But Governor Ford refused. As Joseph Smith said, there is no help there. Even though Joseph had offered to give Ford full control of NAVOO and the Navoo Legion, he was only met with the exact same awful threats the mob had been making, but now they were from the governor. So I’ll quote from the Governor’s letter, he said, quote, I am anxious to preserve the peace. A small indiscretion may bring on a war. The whole country is now up in arms and a vast number of people ready to take the matter into their own hands. Such a state of things might force me to call out the militia to prevent a civil war. And such is the excitement of the country that I fear that the militia when assembled would be beyond legal control. If by refusing to submit, if you by refusing to submit shall make it necessary to call out the militia. I have great fears that your city would be destroyed and your people, many of them exterminated. And the entire letter goes on in this way, it is filled with nothing but blatant threats using the most loaded words, words possible. He is literally telling a people who just fled a literal extermination order that they are going to be exterminated. This is the governor of the state doing this. It is, it is terrible. It’s unbelievable and it just goes on repeating the same threats again and again in different words numerous times. So that’s when Joseph painfully realized and said there is no help there from Governor Ford and that there would be no support or protection when that happened. He again wrote to the President of the United States to plead for help and they tried to decide what do um in the end, he along with Hiram and 14 other defendants went to Carthage to stand trial for riot, which he had already stood trial for and been acquitted of by the Non Mormon judge in his precinct. Right? So while we think we know the rest of the story, there’s actually more to understand that again shows how dedicated the expositor conspirators were to ensuring the death of Joseph and Hyrum Smith, I wanted to go into all of that situation about the destruction of the expositor because I think it is important to help us understand what, what the situation really was and who Joseph Smith really was so that we can get rid of these claims, these false claims about him. Right. So now we’ll go on to the situation at Carthage, Joseph and the company arrived at Carthage just before midnight on the 24th. And um from so many reports with all of the militia, Moers and anti Mormons and camped and running wild. Carthage was out of control. It was far more of a riot than anything had ever been in Nauvoo. Remember that’s the only trial, that’s the only charge right now riot, right? Both Joseph’s party and his enemies, including William and Wilson Law, Francis and Chauncey Higby Robert and Charles F. Foster, Henry O Norton, who will talk about a little in a minute, John, a Hicks and Augustine Spencer who will also talk a little bit a little bit more. All stayed at the Hamilton House. All of them had been involved in the expositor, Cyrus Wheelock who was part of Joseph’s party reported that hicks bragged that quote, it had been determined to shed the blood of Joseph Smith, not only by himself, but by the laws, Higby Fosters Joseph H Jackson and many others, whether he was cleared by the law or not. So they were, they were celebrating. They were like saying we’re going to kill him no matter what they knew, they didn’t have a chance legally in the trials, but they were going to kill him anyway. We, we lock reported this to Governor Ford who treated it with perfect indifference and just let it happen. So the next day at 12 minutes to four, this is also reported in the history report came to Joseph that William and Wilson Robert D, Foster, Chance L. Higby and Francis M Higby had said that there was nothing against these men. The law could not reach them but powder and ball wood and that they should not go out of Carthage alive. So they were, they heard these reports that, yeah, there’s,
[01:17:31] there’s nothing against them. We can’t charge them with anything in the law, but we can kill them anyway. They won’t go out of Carthage alive. So the reports were clear and it was clear who was involved and what the goal was here from, um, from the beginning of the trial, it was clearly a sham and that and, and it was clear that all of Ford’s promises were worthless. The judge of the hearing was not, um, Ford had told him he needed to come stand trial for the original judge who wrote out the order, but it wasn’t, the judge was Robert F Smith who just happened to be the captain of the Carthage Grays. And he also was the head of the anti Mormon party. So I hadn’t heard of that. That was uh founded in 1841 by Thomas Sharp, the, um, editor of the War Warsaw Signal who wrote all of those things about powder and ball and go, you know, that was trying to stir up the mob. He started the party and now, um, Joseph F Smith was the captain of was the head of it and he was the one who was the judge for this. So anyway, it, it was ridiculous. The purpose of that party, the anti Mormon party, it was the sole purpose was to unite Democrats and whigs to drive the Mor Mormons from Illinois. So that’s who these people were. The case was actually not tried that day the 25th, but put over until October, which would have been three months later because a key witness, Francis Higby who had been the one to file the charges was conveniently not there. So I it’s hard for me to see this as anything other than just this plotting and strategizing and scheming to keep Joseph Smith in, in Carthage as long as possible. They could have just tried the tra case that day, but Francis Higby didn’t show up and they were like, oh, can’t try it without him. And so instead they um they planned to set it three months later and they set bail for the minor misdemeanor of riot. The bail was set at the equivalent of almost $260,000 in today’s money for these men. So they were like, no, we’re not gonna try you today. We’re gonna try you in October. And by the way, your bail for riot is $260,000. It was $500 for each man. And that added up to a total. That is the equivalent of $260,000. Today, I did the I did the calculation. Um So it was a clear effort to hold the defendants in custody in Carthage indefinitely. But man, like amazingly miraculously, the nau citizens came through, many of them brought their deeds to their homes and their farms and their property and put it up as collateral to pay the bail. So the prisoners were free to go and, and to return for the October. So this was obviously not acceptable. So the same day, both Joseph and Hyrum and I think just the two of them were served with new arrest warrants now for the charge of treason signed by that same judge Robert F Smith, the captain of the Carthage Grays, the head of the anti Mormon party. So like, oh no, they made bail, ok? Well, now it’s treason and um riot was a minor charge, but treason was not. It carried a penalty of death by hanging if found guilty. And more importantly, it did not allow bail. If you were charged with treason, you could not be given bail. So Joseph and Hyrum were now not free to go. So these are the machinations that were happening and I have to point out that like, look at like just think about this legally, the um Joseph Bennett, uh Joseph Bennett I think is his name. Anyway, I’ll include his paper below. It’s called Road to Martyrdom and he does an excellent breakdown of these charges. He is actually a lawyer so he can speak about them very well and, and how valid they were or were not. And so, um but I, but I do want to point out charges needed to be brought, Robert Smith, the judge, no matter how much he hated Joseph and Hyrum, he couldn’t just make up charges, someone need to, needed to bring them. So it’s important to know who was behind these new charges of treason. Being brought. The charge against Joseph Smith was ostensibly filed by Augustine Spencer. So he, I said we talk about him again. He was staying at that same hotel with the um rest of the expositor conspirators. He was the troublemaker in that I talked about in part one that assault on his brother where he choked his brother. And that’s what started all of the riot when he was, they tried to arrest him when um Chauncey Higby, I think aimed a gun at Joseph Smith. No, it was, it was true. Foster aimed again at Joseph Smith and Robert Foster and Chauncey Higby threatened his life. It was, it was that same day. This is, this is the guy that it was, that choked his brother and, and, um, started the co, the chaos that day. He was the one who, 00. And it’s interesting to know that Chauncey Higby, I think it was. Chauncey Higby defended him in his trial. Right. So, that’s an interesting thing to know. And I did, I’ll attach an interesting paper I read about Augustine, um, Augustine Spitzer. He was a bad, bad guy. He just like, there’s nothing good about this guy that, um, you can, he even like embezzled his, the inheritance from his siblings when his and his mother, when his father died. It’s just bad news all around. So, um, let’s see. And then the charge against, and then, as I said, it was the Higby that defended him in his trial when he was, when he was arrested for assaulting his brother. The charge against Hiram was filed by Henry O Norton. The other name I mentioned who was staying in the hotel with them.
[01:22:55] And it’s it convenient that two separate charges were brought by two separate men at the exact same time, identical charges for treason. Hm. That seems a little bit ironic, doesn’t it? So, um, obviously these were not legitimate charges and bizarrely Norton had also been charged for assaulting his brother. I couldn’t find as much information about him. But, um, Joseph said something about him assaulting his brother who was apparently lame and helpless. And so in any case, these were two great guys. Right. John Taylor described them as two worthless fellows who, whose word wouldn’t be taken for five cents. But the really interesting thing is who was actually behind these charges. They had these guys sign them, but you guessed it, it was actually chance chauncey Higby and Robert Foster who as lawyers understood very well, the implications of treason charges that there would be no bail. And these two were the ones who brought the information and actually filed the charges just getting these two jokers, Augustine Spencer and Robert O Norton to sign their names to them. And so anyway, that’s, this follows the pattern I talked about before of like putting people up, like putting, putting out um what’s his name? Um Bostwick up to bring it to accusing Hiram Smith right now, putting these guys up to charging Joseph and Hyrum when it was really them, the lawyers that were making all of this happen. So you can see that these novo um expositor conspirators were involved up until the very end, making sure that this happened and that this was carried out that Joseph and Hyrum were indeed killed. So the charge of, of treason against Joseph and Hyrum is completely ridiculous. There is no justification for it whatsoever. Well, first of all, it was Joseph that declared martial law, it was justified by because Joseph declared martial law. Hiram didn’t declare martial law so you can’t even defend it that way. But also it’s not illegal to declare martial law to protect your city. That’s not treason. Joseph had already again. I’ve said this so many times but he had asked the governor for direction and he had put the governor in charge of the militia. Right. There was absolutely no treason at all. Um, let’s see. Who is it that sums it up? Well, oh, this is Joseph Bentley. That’s who it is. Joseph Bentley wrote, murdered in the paper. I said, I’d attached, he says, sensing that no objective judge or jury would convict him if he were able to stand trial, his enemies acted to hold him in jail until they had achieved their purposes. And that seems to be very clearly the case. So Joseph’s lawyer, this happened on the 25th, Joseph’s lawyer asked for a, for one day to prepare their defense. So the trial was set for the morning of the 27th. But then after the hearing was over and everyone was out of the courtroom, the Judge Robert Smith on his own by his, by his himself changed the day of the trial to the 29th. So apparently to keep Joseph, I imprisoned in Carthage a little longer. So I don’t know if they actually had a plan to kill them or if they just wanted to drag it out and keep them in Carthage long enough to give someone a chance to kill them. So in addition to the clear problems with the judge, the state’s five prosecuting attorneys, so they had a team of five that were going to prosecute this and they included Thomas Sharp, who’s the editor of the Warsaw Signal and the founder of the anti Mormon party that now Judge Robert Smith was the head of Sylvester Emmons. He’s the member of the NAU City Council who was the editor of the Expositor along with Chauncey Higby. So clearly, this was not simply a legal case and this was never going to be an actual fair trial. Um So of course, the case never went to trial as Joseph and Hyrum who were genuinely innocent of all of the charges against them, both riot and now the ridiculous treason charge, they were both killed the morning of the 20 on, on June 27th, 1844 before the case could go to trial. So the questions of what actually happened in that upper room are beyond the scope of this episode, but they are well worth investigating and looking into there are many questions. So regardless of however, the murders were carried out and whoever was involved and who the actual gunmen were. The. Um a few things are certain that the expositor conspirators were integrally involved in and ranging and ensuring the deaths of both of the Smiths and not in any way because of polygamy which is what we will look into in the next part. But it’s ridiculous to claim that that had anything to do with it. So we’re coming to the end of this episode. I hope this wasn’t too much of a trudge. I do find this information just really fascinating and important to see the legal machinations of expositor, conspirators and how they did in fact lead directly to the murders of Joseph and Hyland Smith. It makes it that much more clear to see that this was the central purpose and motivation for the novo expositor. And I hope I’ve also made it more abundantly clear why Joseph, well, the city council, it wasn’t Joseph,
[01:27:51] it was the city council ordered it to be destroyed and then why Joseph declared martial law, we have to understand what he was actually doing if we want to make any claims about him at all. But just in case there is any doubt, let me read just a few more sources. So this is uh an affidavit that Joseph Jackson himself actually swore out before WW Phelps on June 21st. He said that on Tuesday, June 11th, he was in Nauvoo when Francis M Higby while speaking of the destruction of the printing press said he was very sorry for the proprietors had set up that press for the destruction of the city and that he meant to kill Joe Smith and Hiram Smith. And he said no further. So there’s an affidavit with Joseph Jackson himself saying it. But if there’s still any doubt because yes, Joseph Jackson was also going and telling the Warsaw signal that Hiram the the editor that Hiram Smith had threatened his life and threatened to destroy his press. So Joseph Jackson is a mess. But in case there’s any doubt again, let’s go to our prime witness, William Law, right, the central conspirator and let’s let him clear it up for us in his own words. So I am again quoting from his 1887 1887 correspondence. This is um the first letter he wrote on January 7th, 1887. When I left NAVOO, I left Mormonism behind believing that I had done my part faithfully done my part faithfully even at the risk of my life and believing also that the expositor would continue to do the work. It was intended to do. Did you hear that believing the expositor would continue to do the work? It was intended to do dismissed thought they had killed it whereas, but by destroying the press, they gave it a new lease of life and extra power to overthrow them and drive their followers from the state. Then the um the doctor we who he was writing to wrote back and said, oh, did the expositor continue? He asked for clarification. So in his January 20th letter, he provided that pro provided that clarification. You asked me if the expositor continued? No when I spoke of its word continuing, I meant that its destruction it new life and power to destroy its destroyers. For it was the chief factor in bringing about the deaths of the Smiths and the expulsion of the Mormons from the state of Illinois. So right there law makes it very clear what his goal was from the beginning with the establishment of the Nauvoo Expositor. So I know that this was a lot, but I think it was valuable. I um I, I don’t think I need to summarize it, but we made those points clear. I hope you will look forward to the next step episode where we will talk about any, any connections, there were any evidence there is in the novel Expositor or, or any of the testimonies surrounding the claims in it to, to prove that Joseph was guilty of polygamy in any way. So that will be our next episode. Thank you again for joining me. Oh, and if you feel so inclined, go ahead and stick around for the bonus content about another very problematic source about William Law. We’ll see you next time. Now for this episode’s bonus content, I decided to include it here because it is about William Law. So it seemed to apply to this episode and yet it didn’t really fit in with the episode anywhere else. So hence bonus content. So let’s get into it. I want to address an interesting and lesser known source that some of you may have heard of the reported recollection of William Law’s son. So I’ll read portions of it first and then we’ll get into it and talk about it. It was written in 1903 by elder elder Joseph W mcmurrin who was one of the first presidents of the 70 who was serving in Boise Idaho where he met Mr Richard S Law. I’m quoting now not connected with the church who has related a circumstance concerning the teachings of Joseph Smith that is of sufficient importance to be preserved. This is what he goes on to say. Shortly after my arrival in Boise, I was introduced to a gentleman by the name of Richard S Law. I was greatly surprised, also very much pleased to learn that he is the son of William Law who in the early days of the church was a counselor to the prophet Joseph Smith. Mr Law is now 77 years of age. He goes on to describe him. I have enjoyed several conversations with the gentleman during the few weeks where that I have been located here among the various themes we have discussed the topic in which I have had the most interest has been plural marriage. Mr Law was quite surprised to learn that Mr Joseph Smith, the president of the reorganized church or Joseph Church. So that’s Joseph Smith the third has often denied and again, recently denied in an article in the New American review that his father, the prophet Joseph introduced the doctrine of plural marriage in the church of Jesus Christ of latter day Saints. Mr Law’s testimony. Mr Law has related to me and to others the following circumstance about the year 1842 he was present present at an interview between his father and the prophet Joseph. The topic under discussion was the doctrine of plural marriage. William Law with his arms around the neck of
[01:33:02] the prophet was pleading with him to withdraw the doctrine of plural marriage which he had at that time commenced to teach to some of the brethren. Mr Law predicting that if Joseph would abandon the doctrine, Mormonism would in 50 or 100 years dominate the Christian world. Mr Law pleaded with this, pleaded for this with Joseph with tears streaming from his eyes. The prophet was also in tears but he informed the gentleman that he could not withdraw the doctrine for God had commanded him to teach it and condemnation would come upon him if he was not obedient to the commandment. During the discussion, Joseph was deeply affected. Mr Richard S Law said the interview was a most touching one and was riveted upon his mind in a manner that he has kept fresh and distinct in his memory as if it had occurred. But yesterday, Mr Law also says that he has no doubt that Joseph believed he had received the doctrine of plural marriage from the Lord, the prophet’s manner, being exceedingly earnest, so much so that Mr Law was convinced that the prophet was perfectly sincere in his declaration. So it goes on from there and of course, this will be linked in the notes. So this account is definitely not universally recognized. For example, those who hate Joseph, don’t have any use for it and never refer to it. But um but it’s not recognized by others for some reasons that we’ll get into. So it has been however, a comforting story for some, particularly those who believe Joseph was a prophet, but who also recognize that polygamy was not ok and are troubled by what they believe to be his practice of polygamy. So it, it at least allows them to think that Joseph was sincere in his belief that God commanded it. I see some problems with this interpretation. But mainly if I, if you recognize Joseph was a prophet and you think that He believed God sincerely commanded it, you either have to believe that God did indeed command it perhaps as some sort of cruel test, which I don’t think is how we want to understand God. I don’t think that’s the true nature of God or you have to believe that Joseph who you believe was a prophet got something this major and this evil, this wrong, right? So I don’t think that that is necessarily a good interpretation. Just believing that Joseph was sincere doesn’t make it ok. For example, I have no problem believing that the La Barons or the lafferty, or maybe even the D bells were to some degree convinced and convinced that God was commanding them to do what they did and were perhaps sincere in their beliefs. I don’t know. But whether or not they were sincere doesn’t make it, ok. Joseph being sincere doesn’t make things that are wrong, not wrong. Right. And so anyway, but there’s a much more important way to address this than just the problems of the interpretation. And that is those are the massive problems with the validity of the story itself, which I think make it very clear that this is not in any way good evidence that Joseph was a polygamist and it should not be relied on. So first, the more basic and obvious problem is that this story is a third hand account written 60 years after the fact, it first appeared in 1903 when it was published in the improvement era. So I wanna talk about that a little bit before we go on to the other problems that are much more obvious. I just want to delve into this very interesting time that this report came into the conversation. 1903 was right in the middle of the massive polygamy confusion in the church. The first manifesto which had just been for show had been issued in 1890 but polygamy was very much still the central doc doctrine of church leader of church leadership who were all polygamists and of many faithful members who had been raised, being taught that the church could never abandon polygamy or it would be an apostasy and many polygamous marriages were still occurring. And so in January 1903, just a few months before this story was published, the US, the US Senate had very nearly refused to seat Reed smoot because he was an LDS apostle. So the four year Reed smoot hearings were just about to get underway just a few years before that the House of Representatives had refused to see BBH Roberts. Um Unlike so Roberts was a polygamist and he was not allowed to fulfill his election as a state representative. Um Smoot wasn’t a polygamist. So there was some concern, some discussion about it just being a an apostle of a polygamist church made it so he could not be part of the Senate. That’s why the four year hearings came about. So this was right at the beginning of that time, right? This was just two years before John W Taylor and Mathias Cowley were asked by Joseph F Smith to resign as apostles because they continued to perform Mar polygamous marriages. And that was hurting the church’s credibility in the Meet Reed Smoot hearings. And even after that, they continued to um to perform marriages in Mexico and Canada until they finally, um in 1911, John W Taylor was excommunicated and Mathias Cowley in a very unusual and kind of bizarre compromise wasn’t excommunicated but was instead stripped of his priesthood. So that’s, that’s where things were coming from and where they were going.
[01:38:26] So, in 1903, polygamy really was a complete wild card. Many members were gleeful that Brigham’s doctrine was finally over, at least. So that thought, but many were still devoted to it and believed that it would and could never be over. So I tried to find collections of speeches from this time period. But so far, I haven’t had a lot of luck. The journal of discourses ends in 1886. And I haven’t found anything similar for after 1886 when the journal of discourses ends. So if anyone knows of some sort of anthology or some search tool that I’m missing, please let me know like there’s, there seems to be a big gap in speeches that we can get, I can start to get some about 1926. But before that, I haven’t been able to find any. So I would love to know where I can find sermons and speeches from this time. But in any case, my strong suspicion is that polygamy at this time period was very much not being preached. I’m guessing everybody knew it was there, but nobody wanted to talk about it was the quintessential elephant in the room. Nobody knew whether it was coming or going or whether it was more faithful to be quietly supportive of polygamy or to follow the prophet and reject it. I think this was an extremely confusing time for many of the members other than those who had always just deplored polygamy and were happy that they were going this direction. I think for many of the members, there was a lot of confusion and not understanding which way to go. So this complicated relationship with polygamy is apparent even in the publication of this story just a few years earlier. Any time before 1890 this would have been front page news spread everywhere, preached in sermon after sermon, be it would have become a real talking point. But in 1903, it was buried in the middle of the auxiliary magazine. The title cha the, this magazine was called The Improvement Era. In 1960 the title changed to the new era. So it really was like the auxiliary magazine mainly for the and it wasn’t even the front page of the that it was buried on page 33 on, on the leak I give you. But it’s the, the magazine’s pages are cumulative. So it was 500 something. But that was the only place it was ever published and it was only published under the title and interesting testimony. So that’s really telling, right? I haven’t found any explicit teachings on polygamy by Joseph W mcmurrin. The um the president of the 70 responsible for this story. But from what I have found. I think it is fair to assume that he probably also had a very complicated relationship with polygamy. I did some digging. This is what I found out. He married his wife in 1880. So he would have had time to take a second wife unless definitely that next 10 years. But remember that polygamy continued on at least until 1904, if not later for like my grandfather who got married in Mexico and was always in good standing in the church and held my colleagues called by Joseph F Smith to do it. So anyway, I talked about that a bit, but um then Joseph mcmurrin never took another wife. And on the other hand, his father uh after 26 years of marriage to Joseph’s mother and nine Children with her, he took a barely 15 year old second wife. He was 49 at the time, his second wife was the same age as his sixth daughter with his first wife. I can relate to this. My husband and my six sixth child is currently 16. My husband is 50. This is whoa, this is really not a good story. He went on to have eight more Children with this 15 year old second wife. And so I know that this, this bonus was supposed to just be a this source. But I have to quickly tell a little bit about these women’s stories because we have to understand this So Jeanette Irvine, the 15 year old second wife, she was the oldest of eight Children to an LDS couple in Scotland. He, the father had been blinded in a work accident. Both were already illiterate and then he became blind. And so they were a very impoverished family and could not afford to come to Zion despite their humble circumstances. And I’m assuming, I don’t, I couldn’t find anything but I assume with the prodding from the church and the missionaries and perhaps with the, with help from the perpetual immigration fund, which really was sort of a um indentured servitude that the church used that the church had, they sent their oldest Children to Utah without them. So I have to assume that they did this in great faith, believing that while they may, may never see their Children again, at least they would be giving them a better life where they would be safe and protected in what they were taught was the kingdom of God. That’s how I have to interpret that. So 15 year old Jeanette was the oldest and the only girl sent, she arrived in August on, she arrived August 21st, 1869 and two months later, she was married to the 48 year old for 48 year old father of nine. It was always the unprotected girls who didn’t have fathers there to keep them safe from basically being sex trafficked into the polygamist economy. And so Margaret Laing. The first wife who had from everything I have seen, truly loved her husband and had born nine Children to him, seemed to have very little say in the matter. Um I found two short life sketches of her and this is what they say when her beloved husband married a second wife, it was a sore trial for her. She was told two days before it happened
[01:43:59] and the new wife entered her home. So this woman had a 15 year old, the age of her six daughter move in with her as her husband’s second wife. Oh, heavy stuff. So it goes on to say, but I guess it was a trial to all concerned, which is probably true. She was loyal and true to the end with the hopes of a glorious resurrection. And you can see that’s what these women would have to do is hope that somehow this suffering they experienced would be swallowed up in the glorious promises that they were constantly promised that kind of future faking. Don’t worry about now because it’s gonna be glorious later. So she, I think for those who understand like mind, body connection, right? And energetic inputs into our help. She painfully, she died of very painful facial facial cancer several years later. So I have to imagine that William who was Margaret’s oldest son. Margaret was the first wife, William was her oldest son that he was very likely also very troubled by this. And had perhaps and and was perhaps desperately hoping that this mess he saw was somehow what somehow was indeed of God and not simply as horrible as it appears. So this is the personality behind the reported testimony. And I think it helps us understand why polygamy looms so large in his mind that even in 1903, that was what he most wanted to talk about when he apparently met, who he thought was William Law’s son. And especially since the R LDS leaders claimed that Joseph had not been a polygamist, right? So that was probably something he struggled with and at least I’m assuming that. So that is another very interesting element to this story is the R LDS denials of polygamy. After a long lull in the polygamy debates, Joseph Smith the third had just barely published a new article on the topic in that what they mentioned the North America review. This was a highly regarded journal where most of the discussion on um Mormonism in including the debates between the R LDS and the LDS on Joseph Smith’s polygamy had taken place, but there hadn’t been anything published for a very long time, but now with the election of Reed Smoot, um Mormonism was again national headline news. And so I think that spurred Joseph Smith the third on to again enter the discussion and he wrote this article which I um he, he wrote it. I, as I’ve read it, I’ll and I’ll link it below as well. He basically was explaining again that polygamy began with Brigham Young, not his father, which by the way, I’ll do an episode on this in the future, but which had was already the consensus. That was the belief at this time for every, everywhere outside of Utah, everyone knew this to be the case. So as I said, we’ll go into that more in the future. Um And he was also discussing why the government had failed to eliminate polygamy. Um Despite it being illegal, the paper was called polygamy in the United States has a political significance. So it was him voicing in on this question of the Reed smoot hearings. And again, since Mormonism was in front page news being like, hey, we’re not them, you know. So this was the end of his paper. It says this article is written and an earnest wish is expressed that statesmen and politicians shall not again be fooled or outwitted into permitting such a political menace to continue. So this paper was published in March of 1903 and this report was published in April of 1903 just a few weeks later. So despite the, now we go on to the report, despite the unlikely coincidences that right after Joseph Smith, the third’s article was published, Joseph W mcmurrin would just happen to run into a 77 year old physician from San Francisco who had traveled to Boise quote to explore mining opportunities and was quote, waiting for the weather to moderate in order that he may get into the mountains and commence, commence work upon a mine recently purchased. He was 77 and was a physician from the report itself. And but a 77 year old was gonna hike up the mountain and start mining and that he would of course, um and also the coincidence is that he would of course figure out that this 77 year old man was the son of William law. And then of course, start talking about polygamy and hear this heartwarming story. So none of these issues or coincidences prove this report is false. But they do help us understand the climate and the context of how this story came into being in the first place. So now on to the more substantial problems with this account and why nobody should accept it. So the real Richard Law, the son, the first child of William and Jane Law was born in 1834 and would have been seven or eight in 1842 when this tearful conversation between his father and Joseph supposedly took place. So we are supposed to believe that Joseph Smith had this conversation right in front of him right in front of this seven or eight year old child regarding a practice that was so super secret that Joseph’s own almost 12 year old son who was supposed to be the next leader didn’t know anything about it even two years later. Right. So that’s, that’s the first thing also we are to believe that this child, the seven or eight year old child not only knew about polygamy but understood it and its implications so well that he fully comprehended
[01:49:25] the meaning and impact of this discussion discussion sufficient sufficiently to recall it perfectly over 60 years later. I have an eight year old son. Yeah. No, no, that’s not happening there. No. So in addition, this supposed conversation took place in 1842. Ok. So remember in the summer of 1842 William law was wholeheartedly defending Joseph Smith against John Bennett’s claims that Joseph taught or practiced spiritual wifey. He wrote this affidavit this in July of 1842 and then law himself in his expos affidavit and in his later um letters and interview claim claims that he didn’t learn about polygamy until Hiram brought him the revelation, which obviously couldn’t have happened until after July 12th, 1843 when it was supposedly finally written down. So in 1842 law would have known nothing about polygamy. William Law would have known nothing about polygamy. And by the beginning of 1843 he was already actively plotting against Joseph Smith, which again had nothing to do with polygamy as we’ve already covered. And we’ll go into more even according to his own claims, he didn’t know about polygamy after um he didn’t know about polygamy until after he was already plotting with the Missourians to turn Joseph Smith over to them. So you can get that from the timeline of all of the reports he gives. So there is literally no period where this conversation could have possibly occurred. There’s no time period where William Law knew about polygamy but was still in such good, good connection with Joseph that they would have had this tearful conversation together. It never happened. So, um but the biggest problem of all we’re gonna keep going on is that mcmurrin clearly states that this man Richard law, supposedly the son of William and Jane law was 77 years old in 1903. This would mean he was born in 1826 William and Jane Law were his parents who were, who were supposedly his parents were married in June, 1833 1826 they were married in 1833 and they had their first child, Richard, who we have no records and know nothing about beyond his birth. He was born February of 1844. And it’s interesting, I’ll just point out that according to the dates, they would have already would have already been conceived before. Um they were married. So that’s an interesting point to keep in mind. But anyway, Jane was only 18 when she married William and gave birth to their actual actual son, Richard. So in 1826 when this 77 year old man would have been born, Jane would have been either 10 or 11 years old. So I think we can safely say whoever this 77 year old man may have been if he existed at all. He was certainly not the son of William William of Jane Law. William and Jane Law. And I have to say, I am just genuinely amazed that people don’t even do basic math before accepting, accepting these sources. So the fact is as I mentioned before, other than his birth and one census record that might be about him living in Pennsylvania in 1850 we have absolutely no information about Richard Law. We don’t know where he lived beyond 1850. We don’t know where or when he died. We know nothing at all about him. So there is no way to verify this record. Even Brian Hales doesn’t include it, which says a lot because in my opinion, he includes a lot of dubious claims if they happen to fit his narrative. So I think we can very, very effectively authoritatively throw this source out and assume it has no validity. I don’t know how this story came into being or who the BS or was, whether it was mcmurrin, whether it was this random old man. I don’t, I, I’m not going to make any claims about that, but whatever the explanation, it seems very likely to me that this testimony did somehow or other grow out of mcmurrin desperate wishful thinking. This was a man who had witnessed some of the very worst pol polygamy had to offer in his own home. After seeing his agonized mother put all of her hope and the glorious reward um her suffering would earn for her. He had then watched polygamy disappear as a salve Solvi doctrine taking away even that hope. So he had watched his mother suffer like this, watched his father take a new wife who was close to his age and watched his mother deal with it the best she could putting her hope in the next life. Then you’d watch that hope disappear. I can imagine this would be that Joseph mcmurrin was likely at least as confused as anybody could possibly be about polygamy at this difficult time. So he must have desperately wanted to make sense of this myths and find some purpose and or meaning in it. At least that’s my interpretation of what I know about his life. So this testimony which supported the sincerity of Joseph Smith and justified the necessity of polygamy. While also somehow acknowledging the pain it caused both men were in tears, seems to have been the best possible answer he could hope to provide. So honestly, my heart does go out to Joseph W mcmurrin and everybody else traumatized by
[01:54:45] the pain that this abomination of polygamy polygamy inevitably caused and continues to cause. But this report yet again emphasizes how essential it is to evaluate sources critically instead of just accepting them at face value because they were written somewhere by someone and we see them and we desperately want them to be true. That’s what I hope we will continue to do with all of the sources. So thank you again for sticking around and I will see you next time.
