Skip to main content

Letter to Thomas Ford, 22–23 June 1844

  1. Home > 
  2. The Papers > 

Letter to Thomas Ford, 22–23 June 1844

Source Note

JS, Letter, , Hancock Co., IL, to , [, Hancock Co., IL], 22[–23] June 1844. Featured version drafted 22[–23] June 1844; handwriting of ; four pages; JS Collection, CHL. Includes dockets, use marks, redactions, and notation.
Bifolium measuring 12⅜ × 7⅝ inches (31 × 19 cm). A circular embossment appears on the upper left corner of the first page. Before the letter was written, the bifolium was used as an abecedarium. A partial alphabet was written near the top of the first page, while “Riley Eaton’s Writing or Copy Book” was written near the top of the second page. The letter was folded in half twice horizontally for filing. It was later refolded.
The document was docketed by , who served as JS’s scribe from December 1841 until JS’s death in June 1844 and served as church historian from December 1842 until his own death in March 1854. It was later docketed by , who served as JS’s scribe from 1843 to 1844 and as clerk to the church historian and recorder from 1845 to 1865. The document was listed in an inventory that was produced by the Church Historian’s Office (later Church Historical Department) circa 1904. The notation “A.J.” was added to the letter in graphite by Andrew Jenson, who began working in the Church Historian’s Office in 1891 and served as assistant church historian from 1897 to 1941. By 1973 the letter had been included in the JS Collection at the Church Historical Department (now CHL). The document’s early dockets, its listing in the circa 1904 inventory, its notation, and its later inclusion in the JS Collection indicate continuous institutional custody.

Footnotes

  1. JS, Journal, 13 Dec. 1841 and 21 Dec. 1842; Orson Spencer, “Death of Our Beloved Brother Willard Richards,” Deseret News (Salt Lake City), 16 Mar. 1854, [2].

    Deseret News. Salt Lake City. 1850–.

  2. Jessee, “Writing of Joseph Smith’s History,” 456, 458; Woodruff, Journal, 22 Jan. 1865.

    Jessee, Dean C. “The Writing of Joseph Smith’s History.” BYU Studies 11 (Summer 1971): 439–473.

    Woodruff, Wilford. Journals, 1833–1898. Wilford Woodruff, Journals and Papers, 1828–1898. CHL. MS 1352.

  3. “Letters to and from the Prophet,” ca. 1904, [4], Historian’s Office, Catalogs and Inventories, 1846–1904, CHL.

    Historian’s Office. Catalogs and Inventories, 1846–1904. CHL. CR 100 130.

  4. Jenson, Autobiography, 192, 389; Cannon, Journal, 9 Feb. 1891; Jenson, Journal, 9 Feb. 1891 and 19 Oct. 1897; Bitton and Arrington, Mormons and Their Historians, 47–52.

    Jenson, Andrew. Autobiography of Andrew Jenson: Assistant Historian of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. . . . Salt Lake City: Deseret News Press, 1938.

    Cannon, George Q. Journals, 1855–1864, 1872–1901. CHL. CR 850 1.

    Jenson, Andrew. Journals, 1864–1941. Andrew Jenson, Autobiography and Journals, 1864–1941. CHL.

    Bitton, David, and Leonard J. Arrington. Mormons and Their Historians. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1988.

  5. See the full bibliographic entry for JS Collection, 1827–1844, in the CHL catalog.

Historical Introduction

Late into the night of 22–23 June 1844, JS composed a letter from , Illinois, to Governor in , Illinois, responding to a letter Ford had sent to JS on 22 June and defending the legality of his recent actions in ordering the destruction of the Nauvoo Expositor’s press and in using the powers of Nauvoo’s municipal court. Ford had written his letter after hearing evidence from and reviewing affidavits and other documents carried by and —envoys sent by JS to explain to Ford the Nauvoo City Council’s decision to the Expositor. In his letter, the governor concluded that the abatement was illegal and told JS that he and the others responsible for the destruction of the press must submit to arrest and come to Carthage to appear at a hearing. Ford warned that if they did not, he would be compelled to call out the militia, despite his concern about his ability to prevent militia members from attacking the people of Nauvoo.
delivered his letter to Captain Christopher Yates and a posse of between ten and thirty individuals around five o’clock in the afternoon. Yates’s posse immediately left for with and , arriving at approximately ten o’clock that night. Upon their arrival, JS immediately called a council at the to receive a report from Bernhisel and Taylor and to consider Ford’s letter. Taylor later recalled, “Br. Joseph was very much dissatisfied with the Governors letter and with his general deportment, and so were the council; and it became a serious question, as to the course we should pursue.” The council discussed a variety of actions, but it came to no definitive conclusions “for some time.” At some point during these discussions, JS excused himself and met with two sons of secretary of state who had made a brief stop in Nauvoo that evening during a tour of the western United States. JS gave them “a full description of his difficulties, and also an exposition of his faith.” He then returned to the council meeting.
After returning, JS composed his late-night reply to , apparently dictating the text to , who inscribed the draft. In the letter, JS rejected the governor’s charge that he was unwilling to submit to a court outside . He explained that he and others had been reluctant to go to because of the personal danger they felt they would face there. JS also maintained his belief that his and the city council’s actions had been in accordance with legal requirements. If they had acted inappropriately, JS continued, he was willing to accept correction from the Supreme Court. On the larger issue of the legality of the Expositor’s , JS reiterated his stance that the Illinois state constitution, the act incorporating Nauvoo, or Nauvoo charter, and legal precedent allowed the city to declare the newspaper a public nuisance and destroy it. JS also responded to rumors that Nauvoo officials had detained individuals for violating JS’s 18 June declaration of martial law. He explained that all those who had been arrested had violated city ordinances and had been released by the time he wrote the letter. Finally, responding to Ford’s insistence that JS and others submit to arrest and come to Carthage, JS explained that he questioned Ford’s ability to guarantee his safety. Rather than come to Carthage, JS informed Ford, he intended to go to and appeal his case to the federal government.
’s draft of the letter is dated “June 22. 12. 〈oclock〉 P. M.” Because the letter was written in response to ’s letter to JS dated 22 June, which JS received that evening, it is certain that the letter was not written at noon on 22 June. The draft was likely begun shortly before midnight on 22 June and was then finished in the early morning hours of 23 June. After the draft was completed, Richards or another clerk presumably made a fair copy to send to Ford. Instructions were apparently then given for the letter’s delivery. All of this evidently occurred before around two o’clock in the morning, when JS and Richards left with and and crossed the into , apparently to make their way toward —presumably intending to take a route of travel around rather than through the state of .
The midnight letter was presumably received by in on 23 June. Although no reply has been located, it is apparent that the letter was sent, because JS referenced it in another letter he sent to Ford later that day. It may be that Ford did not attempt to send a reply to JS in or anywhere else because JS had informed Ford that he planned to leave Nauvoo and travel to the nation’s capital.
The letter JS sent to is apparently not extant. The draft inscribed by is featured here.

Footnotes

  1. JS sent Taylor and Bernhisel to Carthage with various documents on the evening of 21 June. (JS, Journal, 21 June 1844; John Taylor, Statement, 23 Aug. 1856, 20–24, Historian’s Office, JS History, Draft Notes, CHL; see also Letter to Thomas Ford, 21 June 1844.)

  2. Letter from Thomas Ford, 22 June 1844.

  3. 1850 U.S. Census, Hancock Co., IL, 294[A]; John Taylor, Statement, 23 Aug. 1856, 24–25, Historian’s Office, JS History, Draft Notes, CHL; Message of the Governor, 9; Clayton, Journal, 22–23 June 1844; Events of June 1844; Richards, Journal, 22 June 1844. Taylor later recalled returning to Nauvoo around eight or nine o’clock in the evening, but his recollection was written approximately twelve years later.

    Census (U.S.) / U.S. Bureau of the Census. Population Schedules. Microfilm. FHL.

    Message of the Governor of the State of Illinois, in Relation to the Disturbances in Hancock County, December, 21, 1844. Springfield, IL: Walters and Weber, 1844.

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

    Richards, Willard. Journals, 1836–1853. Willard Richards, Papers, 1821–1854. CHL. MS 1490, boxes 1–2.

  4. John Taylor, Statement, 23 Aug. 1856, 25, Historian’s Office, JS History, Draft Notes, CHL; Cannon, “John C. Calhoun, Jr., Meets the Prophet Joseph Smith,” 776–777, 779; Welch, “Joseph Smith’s Iowa Quest for Legal Assistance,” 122. Taylor later recalled that the council consisted of him, Bernhisel, JS, Hyrum Smith, Willard Richards, and one or two other individuals.

    Cannon, Brian Q. “John C. Calhoun, Jr., Meets the Prophet Joseph Smith Shortly before the Departure for Carthage.” BYU Studies 33, no. 4 (1993): 772–780.

    Welch, John W. “Joseph Smith’s Iowa Quest for Legal Assistance: His Letters to Edward Johnstone and Others on Sunday, June 23, 1844.” BYU Studies 57, no. 3 (2018): 111–142.

  5. John Taylor, Statement, 23 Aug. 1856, 25, Historian’s Office, JS History, Draft Notes, CHL. The two sons were Patrick Calhoun, twenty-three years old, and John C. Calhoun Jr., twenty-one years old. (Cannon, “John C. Calhoun, Jr., Meets the Prophet Joseph Smith,” 773–774, 777.)

    Cannon, Brian Q. “John C. Calhoun, Jr., Meets the Prophet Joseph Smith Shortly before the Departure for Carthage.” BYU Studies 33, no. 4 (1993): 772–780.

  6. Willard Richards, Journal Excerpt, 23–27 June 1844; JS History, vol. F-1, 147.

  7. Letter to Thomas Ford, 23 June 1844.

Asterisk (*) denotes a "featured" version, which includes an introduction and annotation. *Letter to Thomas Ford, 22–23 June 1844 History, 1838–1856, volume F-1 [1 May 1844–8 August 1844] “History of Joseph Smith”
Press in — and [illegible]— who the press, by his own arm,— & for Libel & the courts decided on prosecution no cause of action. And we do know that it is common for police in &c to destroy scurrilous <​libellus​> prints, and we think the Loss of chara[c]ters by Libels, & the loss of life— by mobocratic prints,— to be a greater loss than a little prope[r]ty, all of which Your “says we are wrong life alone excepted, we have sustained,— brought upon us by the most unprin[c]ipled outlaws. Gamblers, countefeters, & Such characters as are seen have been standng by m[e] & probably are now standing around your durig the <​namely those men who have brought these evils upon us​>
We are compelled to
We have no knowledge of men’s being Sworn to pass our , and upon the recipt of your last message. the was disba[n]ded— and the left to your s disposal
How it could be possible for you <​us​> now to be tried constitunaly [constitutionally] by the same who first issued the writ at we cannot see, for the Constitutin expressly says no man shall twice be be put in jeopardy of life & limb <​for the same offenc​> and all you <​the ◊​> refer to have since the issure of the been complied of <​with​> by for the same offence, & tried before Justice of Peace for , and after a full investigatin ware discharged;— but notwithstanding this we would not hisstitate to stand another trial according to your s wish, were it not that we are confident our lives would be in danger, we dare not come.— Writs, we are assured, are issued agnst us in various parts of the , for what? to drag us from place to place, from court to court across the creeks & prairis— till some blood thirsty villain can find his opportuny to shoot us.— We dare not come, though your promises protectin, yet at the same time you have exprssd fears that you could not control the Mob— in which case we are left to the mercy of the Merciless— Sir we dare not come, <​for our lives would be in dagr [danger]​> And in takig a view of— And we are gu[i]lty of no crime
You say “it will be aginst orders to be accmpanid [accompanied] by others,” if we come to trial.— This we have been obliged to act upon in — and when our witnesses were sent [p. [3]]
View entire transcript

|

Cite this page

Source Note

Document Transcript

Document Information

Related Case Documents
Editorial Title
Letter to Thomas Ford, 22–23 June 1844
ID #
1434
Total Pages
4
Print Volume Location
Handwriting on This Page
  • Willard Richards

Footnotes

  1. TEXT: Possibly “cabbot”.

  2. In June 1836 Van R. Humphrey destroyed the press of the Ohio Observer in Hudson, Ohio. The Observer had threatened to publish “certain resolutions which implicated him in licentious conduct.” Rather than pursuing legal measures against the Observer, Humphrey procured a sledgehammer from a blacksmith’s shop and “smashed the forms all up, and knocked the press to pieces,” leaving the press and type “in a battered condition.” The proprietors of the Observer evidently decided not to pursue “any action for damages” and instead were able to use public contributions to obtain a new press. JS was likely aware of the circumstances because Humphrey was the presiding judge of the Geauga County Court of Common Pleas for part of the time that JS resided in Kirtland. (“Daring Outrages upon the Press,” Advocate of Moral Reform [New York City], 15 July 1836, 103; Briggs, “Leaves from an Old Lawyer’s Note-Book,” 316–317.)

    Advocate of Moral Reform. New York City. 1835–1845

    Briggs, James A. “Leaves from an Old Lawyer’s Note-Book.” Magazine of Western History 12, no. 3 (July 1890): 314–319.

  3. Taylor later recalled that when he and Bernhisel met with Ford, the governor was “surrounded by some of the vilest and most unprincipled men in creation,” including Wilson Law, Francis M. Higbee, Chauncey L. Higbee, Joseph H. Jackson, one of the Foster brothers, and possibly William Law—all avowed opponents of JS. (John Taylor, Statement, 23 Aug. 1856, 21, Historian’s Office, JS History, Draft Notes, CHL.)

  4. On 19 June, Nauvoo officials began taking affidavits from community members who were leaving Nauvoo in which they swore that they were “not opposed to” and did not have “any hostile feelings to the Citizens of Nauvoo” and that they would not give support “to the mob, or any one belonging to the mob.” They also affirmed that they would not “carry out of Nauvoo any arms or ammunition whatever.” Several individuals made this or similar affidavits between 19 and 22 June. (Affidavit Form, between 19 and 22 June 1844, JS Office Papers, CHL; see also, for example, James Camron, Affidavit, Hancock Co., IL, 19 June 1844; H. Rosenkrantz, Affidavit, Nauvoo, IL, 22 June 1844; Luther Taylor, Affidavit, Nauvoo, IL, 22 June 1844, JS Office Papers, CHL.)

  5. In his record of events for the period, Jonathan H. Hale, an acting colonel in the legion, wrote, “Sunday morning [23 June] orders come to dismiss the troops untill further orders and each one go home Without any excit[e]ment.” (“Second Cohort Nauvoo Legion Ordered out,” Second Cohort Activities, 17–23 June 1844, Nauvoo Legion Records, CHL; Hale, “Account Keept of the Nauvoo Legion,” 23 June 1844.)

    Hale, Jonathan. “An Account Kept of the Nauvoo Legion.” Jonathan Hale, Papers, 1835–1845. CHL. MS 3214, fd. 1.

  6. In his letter to JS, Ford expressed his desire that “any and all of you who are or shall be accused to Submit yourselves to be arrested by the Same Constable, by virtue of the same warrant and be tried before the same magistrate whose authority has heretofore been resisted.” Thomas Morrison was the justice of the peace who had originally signed the warrant for JS and the other individuals charged with riot. (Letter from Thomas Ford, 22 June 1844; Petition to Nauvoo Municipal Court, 12 June 1844.)

  7. Illinois Constitution of 1818, art. 8, sec. 11.

    Illinois Office of Secretary of State. First Constitution of Illinois, 1818. Illinois State Archives, Springfield.

  8. In an effort to alleviate concerns over the destruction of the Nauvoo Expositor’s press, JS and sixteen others were arrested on a new warrant and appeared at a preliminary examination on 17 June before Wells, who discharged the prisoners from custody. (Historical Introduction to Statement, 17 June 1844; JS, Journal, 17 June 1844.)

  9. In his first letter to Ford regarding the legal ramifications of the destruction of the Expositor’s press, JS stated that he was willing to be tried at Springfield. However, Ford believed that nothing short of JS and the other Nauvoo officials accused of riot standing trial at Carthage would “vindicate the dignity of violated law, and allay the just excitement of the people.” (Letter to Thomas Ford, 14 June 1844; Letter from Thomas Ford, 22 June 1844.)

  10. The Warsaw Signal published several threats against JS’s life and questioned whether it was possible for him to receive an objective trial in Hancock County because of the Latter-day Saints’ power and influence in the county. In a 12 June editorial, the editor concluded, “We have one chance left . . . we will throw ourselves on our reserved rights. Justice we will have. 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 gun powder can.” Similarly, several of the affidavits that JS sent to Ford included testimonies that threats had been made against the lives of JS and others. (“Can Joe Smith Have a Fair Trial in This County?,” and “Unparalleled Outrage at Nauvoo,” Warsaw [IL] Signal, 12 June 1844, [2]; see also, for example, Thomas Wilson, Affidavit, Nauvoo, IL, 16 June 1844; Joseph H. Jackson, Affidavit, Nauvoo, IL, 21 June 1844, copy, JS Office Papers, CHL.)

    Warsaw Signal. Warsaw, IL. 1841–1853.

  11. Ford promised JS that he would “guarantee the safety of all such persons as may thus be braught to this place from Nauvoo either for trial or as witnesses for the accused.” (Letter from Thomas Ford, 22 June 1844.)

  12. In his letter to JS, Ford expressed his concern that if he called out the militia, its members might be “beyond legal control,” given their hatred of JS. (Letter from Thomas Ford, 22 June 1844.)

  13. In his letter to JS, Ford stated, “In case the persons accused should make no resistance to an arrest it will be against orders to be accompanied by others.” (Letter from Thomas Ford, 22 June 1844.)

Go to page