Skip to main content

Affidavit, 24 June 1843 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A]

  1. Home > 
  2. The Papers > 
Introduction to JS v. Reynolds and Wilson Praecipe, 23 June 1843 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Affidavit, 24 June 1843 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Capias ad Respondendum, 24 June 1843 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Recognizance, 1 July 1843–A [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Recognizance, 1 July 1843–B [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Declaration, circa 17 August 1843 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Praecipe, circa 11 September 1843 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Subpoena, 12 September 1843 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Pleas, circa 13 September 1843 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Demurrer, circa 14 September 1843–A [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Demurrer, circa 14 September 1843–B [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Asa B. Searles, Affidavit, 15 September 1843 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Notice, 7 November 1843 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Affidavit, 7 November 1843 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Praecipe, 18 April 1844 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Subpoena, 20 April 1844–A [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Subpoena, 20 April 1844–B [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Replication, circa 7 May 1844 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Demurrer, circa 8 May 1844 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Replication, circa 8 May 1844 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Attachment, 9 May 1844 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Verdict, 10 May 1844 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Asa B. Searles, Affidavit, 10 May 1844 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] John Dixon, Affidavit, 10 May 1844–A [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] John Dixon, Affidavit, 10 May 1844–B [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Harmon Wasson, Affidavit, 10 May 1844–A [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Harmon Wasson, Affidavit, 10 May 1844–B [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] William Clayton, Affidavit, 10 May 1844 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Lucien Sanger, Affidavit, 10 May 1844 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] John B. Nash, Affidavit, 10 May 1844 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Benjamin Wasson, Affidavit, 10 May 1844–A [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Benjamin Wasson, Affidavit, 10 May 1844–B [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Stephen Markham, Affidavit, 10 May 1844–A [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Stephen Markham, Affidavit, 10 May 1844–B [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Fieri Facias, 23 January 1845 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Bill of Costs, 23 January 1845 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A] Docket Entry, Certificate of Levy, 14 April 1845 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A]

Affidavit, 24 June 1843 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A]

Source Note

JS, Affidavit, before Charles Chase, , Lee Co., IL, 24 June 1843, JS v. Reynolds and Wilson (Lee Co., IL, Circuit Court 1844); handwriting of and ; signature of JS; certified by Charles Chase, 24 June 1843; docket by Charles Chase, [, Lee Co., IL, 24 June 1843]; notation by Charles Chase, 24 June 1843; docket by unidentified scribe, [ca. 25 June 1843]; three pages; first leaf of bifolium at BYU; photostat of verso of second leaf in JS v. Joseph H. Reynolds and Harmon T. Wilson, 1843–1845, CHL.
Bifolium measuring 12¼ × 7½ inches (31 × 19 cm). The affidavit was folded, and the leaves subsequently became separated. The second leaf is apparently not extant.
After its creation and use in JS’s legal proceedings, the document was presumably stored in the Courthouse during the remainder of the nineteenth century and for much of the twentieth century. By 1973, photostats of the first leaf and the verso of the second leaf had been donated to the Church Historical Department (now CHL). It is unclear from the photostats whether the leaves were still connected at that point. In 1982, Lee County Circuit Court files were transferred to the Illinois Regional Archives Depository at Northern Illinois University in DeKalb, Illinois. On an unknown date, the affidavit was removed from the case file. By 1998, the first leaf, which contains the text of the affidavit, was acquired by Brigham Young University. The second leaf has not been located.

Footnotes

  1. [1]

    See Johnson, Register of the Joseph Smith Collection, 5, 9.

    Johnson, Jeffery O. Register of the Joseph Smith Collection in the Church Archives, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Salt Lake City: Historical Department of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1973.

  2. [2]

    Inventory, 25 Oct. 1982, Lee Co., IL, Circuit Court Case Records, 1840–1940, Founders Memorial Library, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb.

    Inventory, 25 Oct. 1982. Lee Co., IL, Circuit Court Case Records, 1840–1940. Founders Memorial Library, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb.

  3. [3]

    See Case File for JS, Deposition, 24 June 1843, BYU.

    Nineteenth-Century Western and Mormon Manuscripts. BYU.

Historical Introduction

On 24 June 1843, JS filed an affidavit with the circuit court in , Illinois, recounting his arrest the previous day near , Illinois. governor had issued a warrant for JS’s arrest on 17 June 1843 in compliance with a demand by state officials that JS be apprehended and extradited to stand trial on a charge of treason allegedly committed during the 1838 conflict between the Latter-day Saints and their antagonists in Missouri. JS prepared the affidavit as part of a civil lawsuit against two law officers, Constable of , Illinois, who had served Ford’s warrant, and Sheriff of , Missouri, the agent authorized to transport JS to Missouri.
JS, his wife , and their children had departed on 13 June 1843 to visit Emma’s sister Elizabeth Hale Wasson, who lived with her husband, Benjamin Wasson, at Palestine Grove, Lee County, approximately one hundred and thirty miles northeast of . News of issuing the arrest warrant reached Nauvoo on 18 June, leading JS’s clerk and member to depart the city in an effort to warn JS. Clayton and Markham arrived at the Wasson home on 21 June and informed JS of Ford’s warrant.
It is possible that and were apprised of the Smiths’ trip and sought to arrest JS while he was outside . They approached the Wasson residence the afternoon of 23 June, pretending to be Latter-day Saint missionaries. JS attempted to elude them by exiting through the rear of the house but was intercepted and accosted by Wilson and Reynolds. The lawmen trained their pistols on JS, threatening to shoot him if he resisted. They also struck JS repeatedly with their firearms. JS later stated that when he asked them by what authority they acted, they refused to show him ’s warrant. When attempted to aid JS, the officers threatened him with their guns and warned him not to interfere. Wilson and Reynolds then forced JS into their wagon and drove him about ten miles to , the seat, where they hoped to acquire fresh horses to transport JS to . The two officers confined JS in the tavern belonging to a “Mr. McKennie” and reportedly refused JS access to an attorney. Markham rode ahead to Dixon and met with , who had gone into town earlier in the day, and they worked with local citizens to hire legal counsel. Attorneys and agreed to represent JS; , an attorney who was campaigning nearby for election to Congress, subsequently joined JS’s legal team.
During the evening of 23 June, the lawyers initiated several legal actions intended to delay the extradition and secure JS’s freedom. First, the attorneys brought criminal charges against and before a local justice of the peace for their treatment of JS and during the arrest. The lawyers also helped JS obtain a writ of , a common law writ that would allow an circuit court judge to review the legality of the arrest. They also filed a civil lawsuit against the two lawmen brought under a “,” a common law action referring to “an unlawful act committed with violence, vi et armis, to the person, property or relative rights of another.” The suit sought $10,000 in damages. filed a request asking the Circuit Court to issue a writ of , or a warrant ordering the county sheriff to take Reynolds and Wilson into custody.
law required any request for a writ of capias ad respondendum to be accompanied by an affidavit detailing the wrong committed and showing how the “damages sustained” were “in danger of being lost,” thereby requiring the apprehension of the defendant. During the morning of 24 June 1843, JS prepared the affidavit featured here with the assistance of and , who inscribed the text, perhaps at JS’s dictation. The affidavit claimed that on 23 June 1843, JS “was forcibly and against his will and consent arrested” by the two lawmen, that his life was threatened, and that the arrest was “illegal and without competent authority of Law.” The document included the statutory reference to damages in danger of being lost unless the defendants were apprehended and then held to bail. After JS signed the affidavit, Charles Chase, clerk of the Circuit Court, certified the sworn statement and filed it.
Upon receiving the affidavit, Chase issued the writ of capias ad respondendum, which ordered sheriff James Campbell to arrest and and required both of them to enter into recognizances binding them to appear at the next circuit court session. Campbell arrested Reynolds and Wilson, but the two men were unable to secure their immediate release, as they needed to send for bondsmen. On 26 June 1843, JS, his attorneys, Reynolds, Wilson, Campbell, and a few others departed . Although their stated destination was , Illinois, in order to appear before an judge willing to evaluate the warrant, at some point JS and his attorneys decided instead to appear before the Municipal Court on habeas corpus. The party arrived in Nauvoo on 30 June, and the municipal court discharged JS the following day, citing a lack of “substance in the warrant upon which he was arrested as well as upon the merits of said Case.”
On 1 July, in , Illinois, and were able to secure bondsmen, and they were released from James Campbell’s custody on the condition that they appear at the Circuit Court at the next term for the trial. After being delayed in the September 1843 term, JS v. Reynolds and Wilson was heard in May 1844. A jury found that Reynolds and Wilson had used “unnecessary force and voilence” in the arrest and awarded JS forty dollars in damages.
See also Introduction to JS v. Reynolds and Wilson.

Footnotes

  1. [1]

    Copies of the power of attorney designating Reynolds as the agent authorized to convey JS to Missouri and the warrant are featured with JS’s petition to the Nauvoo Municipal Court. (Petition to Nauvoo Municipal Court, 30 June 1843; Indictment, Daviess Co., MO, [5] June 1843, State of Missouri v. JS for Treason [Daviess Co. Cir. Ct. 1843], Western Americana Collection, Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Yale University, New Haven, CT.)

  2. [2]

    JS, Journal, 13 June 1843; Chase, “Township of Amboy,” 57–58.

    Chase, D. G. “Township of Amboy.” In Recollections of the Pioneers of Lee County, [edited by Seraphina Gardner Smith], 9–157. Dixon, IL: Inez A. Kennedy, 1893.

  3. [3]

    JS, Journal, 18 June 1843; Clayton, Journal, 18 and 21 June 1843.

    Clayton, William. Journals, 1842–1845. CHL.

  4. [4]

    Clayton, Journal, 23 June 1843; “Missouri vs Joseph Smith,” Times and Seasons, 1 July 1843, 4:242; Letter from Edward Southwick, 29 July 1843; JS, Declaration, ca. 18 Aug. 1843, JS v. Reynolds and Wilson (Lee Co. Cir. Ct. 1843), photocopy, JS Collection, CHL; JS History, vol. D-1, 1583–1584.

    Clayton, William. Journals, 1842–1845. CHL.

    Times and Seasons. Commerce/Nauvoo, IL. Nov. 1839–Feb. 1846.

  5. [5]

    Clayton, Journal, 23 June 1843; Edward Southwick, St. Louis, MO, 12 July 1843, Letter to the Editor, Old School Democrat and Saint Louis Herald, 12 July 1843, [2]; “Habeas Corpus,” in Bouvier, Law Dictionary, 1:454; see also “Part 4: June–July 1843.”

    Clayton, William. Journals, 1842–1845. CHL.

    Old School Democrat and Saint Louis Herald. St Louis, MO. 1843–1844.

    Bouvier, John. A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States of America, and of the Several States of the American Union; With References to the Civil and Other Systems of Foreign Law. 2 vols. Philadelphia: Deacon and Peterson, 1854.

  6. [6]

    “Trespass,” in Bouvier, Law Dictionary, 2:449, italics in original.

    Bouvier, John. A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States of America, and of the Several States of the American Union; With References to the Civil and Other Systems of Foreign Law. 2 vols. Philadelphia: Deacon and Peterson, 1854.

  7. [7]

    Praecipe, 23 June 1843, JS v. Reynolds and Wilson (Lee Co. Cir. Ct. 1843), photocopy, JS Collection, CHL.

  8. [8]

    An Act concerning Special Bail [26 Jan. 1827], Public and General Statute Laws of the State of Illinois, p. 88, sec. 1.

    The Public and General Statute Laws of the State of Illinois: Containing All the Laws . . . Passed by the Ninth General Assembly, at Their First Session, Commencing December 1, 1834, and Ending February 13, 1835; and at Their Second Session, Commencing December 7, 1835, and Ending January 18, 1836; and Those Passed by the Tenth General Assembly, at Their Session Commencing December 5, 1836, and Ending March 6, 1837; and at Their Special Session, Commencing July 10, and Ending July 22, 1837. . . . Compiled by Jonathan Young Scammon. Chicago: Stephen F. Gale, 1839.

  9. [9]

    Capias ad Respondendum, 24 June 1843, JS v. Reynolds and Wilson (Lee Co. Cir. Ct. 1843), microfilm, CHL; see also Clayton, Journal, 24 June 1843.

    Clayton, William. Journals, 1842–1845. CHL.

  10. [10]

    Minutes, 1 July 1843, Extradition of JS for Treason (Nauvoo Mun. Ct. 1843), JS Collection, CHL; see also “Arrest of Joseph Smith,” Nauvoo Neighbor, 19 July 1843, [2]; Edward Southwick, St. Louis, MO, 12 July 1843, Letter to the Editor, Old School Democrat and Saint Louis Herald, 12 July 1843, [2]; JS History, vol. D-1, 1587–1592; Clayton, Journal, 30 June 1843; JS, Journal, 1 July 1843; “Part 4: June–July 1843”; and Historical Introduction to Petition to Nauvoo Municipal Court, 30 June 1843.

    Nauvoo Neighbor. Nauvoo, IL. 1843–1845.

    Old School Democrat and Saint Louis Herald. St Louis, MO. 1843–1844.

    Clayton, William. Journals, 1842–1845. CHL.

  11. [11]

    Illinois law required the sheriff to take “sufficient security in a penalty of double the sum for which bail is required.” Since Chase had set the bail amount at $200, Reynolds, along with his bondsman, signed a recognizance for $400, while Wilson and his bondsman signed a separate recognizance for the same amount. (An Act concerning Special Bail [26 Jan. 1827], Public and General Statute Laws of the State of Illinois, p. 88, sec. 2; Recognizance for Harmon T. Wilson, [Carthage, IL], 1 July 1843; Recognizance for Joseph H. Reynolds, [Carthage, IL], 1 July 1843, JS v. Reynolds and Wilson [Lee Co. Cir. Ct. 1843], microfilm, CHL; [Edward Southwick], “Statement,” Warsaw [IL] Message, Extra, 12 July 1843, [1].)

    The Public and General Statute Laws of the State of Illinois: Containing All the Laws . . . Passed by the Ninth General Assembly, at Their First Session, Commencing December 1, 1834, and Ending February 13, 1835; and at Their Second Session, Commencing December 7, 1835, and Ending January 18, 1836; and Those Passed by the Tenth General Assembly, at Their Session Commencing December 5, 1836, and Ending March 6, 1837; and at Their Special Session, Commencing July 10, and Ending July 22, 1837. . . . Compiled by Jonathan Young Scammon. Chicago: Stephen F. Gale, 1839.

    Warsaw Message. Warsaw, IL. 1843–1844.

  12. [12]

    Clayton, Journal, 9–10 May 1844; Verdict, 10 May 1844, JS v. Reynolds and Wilson (Lee Co. Cir. Ct. 1844), microfilm, CHL. The case was postponed until May 1844 because “there were so many cases on the docket.” (JS, Journal, 23 Sept. 1843; see also Historical Introduction to JS v. Reynolds and Wilson.)

    Clayton, William. Journals, 1842–1845. CHL.

verily believes illegal and without competent authority of Law for the Same, and this deponent says that he is informed and verily believes it to be true that it is the intention of said defendants to convey this deponent to the State of , whereof wherefore and by reason whereof this deponent saith he is injured and hurt sustained damage and injury <​and that the same is in danger of being lost unless said defendants be held to bail​>— to the amount of and claims damages to the amounount of ten thousand dollars—
Joseph Smith
Subscribed and Sworn to)
before me this 24th day of)
June AD 1843)
Charles T. Chase Clerk Cir Courts [1/2 page blank] [p. [2]]
View entire transcript

|

Cite this page

Source Note

Document Transcript

Document Information

Related Case Documents
Editorial Title
Affidavit, 24 June 1843 [JS v. Reynolds and Wilson–A]
ID #
2333
Total Pages
4
Print Volume Location
JSP, D12:399–403
Handwriting on This Page
  • Edward Southwick
  • Joseph Smith Jr.
  • Charles Chase

Footnotes

  1. [2]

    In JS’s petition for habeas corpus presented to the Nauvoo Municipal Court on 30 June 1843, he listed several specific challenges to the legitimacy of the 17 June arrest warrant. (See Petition to Nauvoo Municipal Court, 30 June 1843.)

  2. [3]

    The Illinois statute that regulated writs of capias ad respondendum and special bail indicated that if a plaintiff filed an affidavit stating that the “damages sustained” would “be in danger of being lost,” then the apprehended defendant would be required to post bail. (See An Act concerning Special Bail [26 Jan. 1827], Public and General Statute Laws of the State of Illinois, p. 88, sec. 1.)

    The Public and General Statute Laws of the State of Illinois: Containing All the Laws . . . Passed by the Ninth General Assembly, at Their First Session, Commencing December 1, 1834, and Ending February 13, 1835; and at Their Second Session, Commencing December 7, 1835, and Ending January 18, 1836; and Those Passed by the Tenth General Assembly, at Their Session Commencing December 5, 1836, and Ending March 6, 1837; and at Their Special Session, Commencing July 10, and Ending July 22, 1837. . . . Compiled by Jonathan Young Scammon. Chicago: Stephen F. Gale, 1839.

  3. new scribe logo

    Signature of JS.

  4. new scribe logo

    Edward Southwick handwriting ends; Charles Chase begins.

Go to page