Skip to main content

Proclamation, 16 June 1844

  1. Home > 
  2. The Papers > 

Proclamation, 16 June 1844

Source Note

JS as mayor, Proclamation, , Hancock Co., IL, 16 June 1844. Featured version published [17 June 1844] in Nauvoo Neighbor (Nauvoo, Hancock Co., IL), Extra, 17 June 1844, [1]. Includes dockets and redactions. For more complete source information, see the source note for Notice, 26 Aug. 1843.

Historical Introduction

On 16 June 1844 in , Hancock County, Illinois, JS wrote a proclamation to the citizens of and the neighboring areas explaining the events surrounding the destruction of the Nauvoo Expositor press. Following the of the Expositor on 10 June and the discharge of JS and sixteen others on writs of on 12 and 13 June, public outcry increased throughout Hancock County. On 13 June reports reached Nauvoo that “about 300 mobbers were collectd in ,” Hancock County—about twenty miles southeast of Nauvoo—“to come up[o]n Nauvoo.” The following day, a mass meeting of citizens in , Hancock County—about fifteen miles south of Nauvoo—adopted resolutions “to exterminate, utterly exterminate, the wicked and abominable Mormon Leaders” and anyone who sympathized with JS. On 15 June two Saints from , Adams County, Illinois—about fifteen miles southeast of Warsaw—informed JS that Colonel , a leading officer of the militia in Hancock County, “had demanded the mormons arms,” while others reported on deliveries of weapons to Warsaw.
On 16 June, JS urged the to “be qui[e]t.— make no distubnce [disturbance].” He then called upon the Saints to “send delegates to all the surroudig [surrounding] tow[n]s and villages— & explain th[e] cause of the disturban[ce] and show them all was peace at ,” in an effort to appease those who were angered throughout . That evening, chaired a public meeting in Nauvoo to discuss sending delegates to the surrounding communities to endeavor “to disabuse the public mind, and present a true statement of facts before them as speedily as possible.” Delegates were accordingly appointed to visit towns throughout the county.
Sometime the same day, JS issued this proclamation as another effort to ease the growing tensions in by providing the public with additional information about the destruction of the Expositor. JS explained that it was written specifically to respond to the printed claims of those who wished injury upon the Saints and “to disabuse the public mind” of these false claims. He appealed to the broader community, suggesting that calls to arms made by the Warsaw Signal and other newspapers did not represent the wishes of most of the county’s citizenry. JS asserted that the Expositor was established with the intent to create conflict in , which led to the Nauvoo City Council discussions and the subsequent abatement of the Expositor. As he had in a recent letter to governor , JS cited English common law, the state constitution, and the act incorporating Nauvoo, also known as the Nauvoo charter, regarding the rights of communities to define and abate public nuisances. JS then appealed to Ford and the higher courts of Illinois to adjudicate the matter. JS issued the proclamation, which delivered a warning “in behalf of the Municipal Court of Nauvoo” to any person contemplating illegal action in the city, from the mayor’s office and signed it as mayor.
The 16 June proclamation first appeared in the extra issue of the Nauvoo Neighbor dated 17 June and was then republished in the next regular issue of the Nauvoo Neighbor, which was dated 19 June. The proclamation was received poorly by at least some observers, both near and far. The Warsaw Signal criticized the proclamation, stating that JS issued it “in his usuall arrogant style.” The newspaper took particular issue with JS’s concluding statement that he would triumph over oppression, stating merely, “Go it Joe, and we will go it too.” Much farther downriver, the Daily Picayune referenced that same statement by JS and stated that it showed JS was “extremely saucy and impudent.”
There is no extant manuscript version of the 16 June proclamation, but copies of both the 17 June extra issue and the 19 June regular issue survive. The extra, the earliest printed version, is featured here.

Footnotes

  1. See “Joseph Smith Documents from 16 May through 28 June 1844”; Petition to Nauvoo Municipal Court, 12 June 1844; and Docket Entry, ca. 13 June 1844.

  2. JS, Journal, 13 June 1844.

  3. The resolutions were first adopted during an earlier meeting of Warsaw citizens, were subsequently adopted by Carthage citizens at a mass meeting on 13 June, and were reaffirmed by Warsaw citizens on 14 June. (Warsaw [IL] Signal, Extra, 14 June 1844, [1].)

    Warsaw Signal. Warsaw, IL. 1841–1853.

  4. JS, Journal, 15 June 1844.

  5. Discourse, 16 June 1844–B.

  6. “Public Meeting,” Nauvoo Neighbor, 19 June 1844, [3].

    Nauvoo Neighbor. Nauvoo, IL. 1843–1845.

  7. Letter to Thomas Ford, 14 June 1844.

  8. “Proclamation,” Nauvoo Neighbor, Extra, 17 June 1844, [1]; “Proclamation,” Nauvoo Neighbor, 19 June 1844, [3]. Two advertisements in this issue are dated 19 June. While it is possible that the paper was published on 19 June, the inclusion of these advertisements suggests that this issue came out later than the 19 June issue date. (“Take Notice,” Nauvoo Neighbor, 19 June 1844, [3]; “Notice.—Wanted,” Nauvoo Neighbor, 19 June 1844, [3].)

    Nauvoo Neighbor. Nauvoo, IL. 1843–1845.

  9. “Joe’s Proclamation,” Warsaw (IL) Signal, 19 June 1844, [2].

    Warsaw Signal. Warsaw, IL. 1841–1853.

  10. “The Mormon Troubles,” Daily Picayune (New Orleans), 27 June 1844, [2].

    Daily Picayune. New Orleans, LA. 1837–1914.

Asterisk (*) denotes a "featured" version, which includes an introduction and annotation.
*Proclamation, 16 June 1844
Proclamation, 16 June 1844, as Published in Nauvoo Neighbor History, 1838–1856, volume F-1 [1 May 1844–8 August 1844] “History of Joseph Smith”

Page [1]

Proclamation.
Mayor’s Office, , June 16, 1844.
As there are a number of statements in circulation which have for their object, the injury of the “,” all of which are false and prompted by blackhearted villians: I therefore deem it my duty to disabuse the public mind in regard to them, and to give a plain statement of facts which have taken place in the within a few days past, and, which has brought upon us the displeasure of the unprincipled and the uninformed, and seems to afford an opportunity to our enemies, to unite and arouse themselves to mob; and already they have commenced their hellish operations by driving a few defenceless Mormons from their houses and homes in the vicinity of and .
A short time since a press was started in this which had for its object the destruction of the institutions of the , both civil and religious: its proprietors are a set of unprincipled scoundrels who attempted in every possible way to defame the character of the most virtuous of our community, and change our peaceful and prosperous into a place as evil and polluted as their own black hearts. To rid the of a paper so filthy and pestilential as this, become the duty of every good citizen, who loves good order and morality; a complaint was made before the City Council, and after a full and impartial investigation it was voted—without one dissenting voice, a public NUISANCE, and to be immediately destroyed; the peace and happiness of the place demanded it, the virtue of our wives and daughters demanded, and our consciences demanded it at our hands as conservators of the public peace. That we acted right in this matter we have the assurance of one of the ablest expounders of the laws of , viz: [William] Blackstone— the constitution of the State of , and our own chartered rights. If then our charter gives us the power to decide what shall be a nuisance and cause it to be removed, where is the offence? What law is violated? If then no law has been violated, why this ridiculous excitement and bandying with lawless ruffians to destroy the happiness of a people whose religious motto is “peace and good will toward all men?”
Our is infested with a set of blacklegs, counterfeiters and debauchees, and that the proprietors of this press were of that class, the minutes of the Municipal Court fully testify, and in ridding our young and flourishing of such characters, we are abused by not only villainous demagogues, but by some who from their station and influence in society, ought rather to raise than depress the standard of human excellence. We have no disturbance or excitement among us, save what is made by the thousand and one idle rumors afloat in the country. Every one is protected in his person and property, and but few cities of a population of twenty thousand people, in the , hath less of dissipation or vice of any kind, than the city of .
Of the correctness of our conduct in this affair, we appeal to every high court in the , and to its ordeal we are willing to appear at any time that His Excellency, shall please to call us before it. I therefore, in behalf of the Municipal Court of , warn the lawless, not to be precipitate in any interference in our affairs, for as sure as there is a God in Israel, we shall ride triumphant over all oppression.
JOSEPH SMITH, Mayor [p. [1]]
View entire transcript

|

Cite this page

Source Note

Document Transcript

Page [1]

Document Information

Related Case Documents
Editorial Title
Proclamation, 16 June 1844
ID #
1408
Total Pages
1
Print Volume Location
Handwriting on This Page
  • Printed text

Footnotes

  1. In June 1844 the mayor’s office was in JS’s brick store, where it had been since March 1843. (JS, Journal, 14 Feb. and 28 Mar. 1843.)

  2. On 12 June the Warsaw Signal published a rumor claiming that JS had issued threats against his own people during the deliberations of the Nauvoo City Council. Another article in that same issue rumored that JS was involved in counterfeiting. (“Further Particulars from Nauvoo,” Warsaw [IL] Signal, 12 June 1844, [2]; P. S., “For the Signal,” Warsaw Signal, 12 June 1844, [3].)

    Warsaw Signal. Warsaw, IL. 1841–1853.

  3. Among the resolutions adopted in Warsaw and Carthage earlier in June was one “to notify all persons in our Township suspected of being the tools of the Prophet, to leave immediately on pain of instant vengeance.” On 15 and 16 June, JS learned about instances of such ultimatums being issued to Latter-day Saints in and around Isaac Morley’s settlement. (Warsaw [IL] Signal, Extra, 14 June 1844, [1]; Letter from Isaac Morley, 16 June 1844; Thomas Wilson, Affidavit, Nauvoo, IL, 16 June 1844, JS Office Papers, CHL; see also JS, Journal, 15 June 1844.)

    Warsaw Signal. Warsaw, IL. 1841–1853.

  4. In the prospectus of the Nauvoo Expositor, the publishers stated that they deemed it “a sacred duty they owe to their country and their fellow citizens, to advocate, through the columns of Expositor, the Unconditional REPEAL of the NAUVOO CITY CHARTER.” They further stated that they would advocate “free toleration to every man’s Religious sentiments, and sustain ALL in worshiping their God according to the monitions of their consciences” but that in doing so, they would oppose “the Insupportable OPPRESSIONS of the MINISTERIAL powers, in carrying out the Unjust, Illegal, and Unconstitutional Ordinances” of the city charter. (Prospectus of the Nauvoo Expositor [Nauvoo, IL: 10 May 1844], copy at CHL, emphasis in original.).

    Nauvoo Expositor Prospectus. Nauvoo, IL: ca. 10 May 1844. Copy at CHL.

  5. For similar accusations against the publishers of the Nauvoo Expositor, see Minutes, 8 June 1844; and Minutes, 10 June 1844.

  6. On 8 June 1844, JS complained to the city council that “such papers are calculated to destroy the peace of the city.— and it is not safe that such things should exist— on acount of the mob spirit. which th[e]y tend to produce.” JS then “called the witnesses to prepare the council to act in the case.” (Minutes, 8 June 1844.)

  7. The Nauvoo City Council debated how to respond to the Expositor in its meetings on 8 and 10 June. City councilman Benjamin Warrington proposed that instead of destroying the Expositor, the city assess a fine “of $3000.00 for every libel” it printed and then declare the newspaper a nuisance if its publishers and editor would not desist publishing offending materials. Warrington did cast a dissenting vote on the issue. (Minutes, 10 June 1844; see also Minutes, 8 June 1844; “A List of Votes, of the City Council, of the City of Nauvoo, by Yeas & Nays.— Taken upon the Respective Days, Herein. 1843. & 1844,” Nauvoo, IL, Records, CHL.)

    Nauvoo, IL. Records, 1841–1845. CHL. MS 16800.

  8. William Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England was an influential treatise on English common law that went through multiple printings, including an edition that was edited by another English legal commentator, Joseph Chitty. An 1840 edition of Blackstone’s Commentaries published in the United States included notes taken from Chitty’s edition. In this American edition, on the page referenced in the city council minutes, Blackstone defined a nuisance as “whatsoever unlawfully annoys or doth damage to another.” The same page also included a footnote, borrowed from Chitty’s edition, that considered how nuisance law might be applied to a newspaper. It read “So it seems that a libellous print or paper, affecting a private individual, may be destroyed, or, which is the safer course, taken and delivered to a magistrate.” (Blackstone, Commentaries, vol. 2, bk. 3, p. 4; see also Chitty, Commentaries, 3:5–6.)

    Blackstone, William. Commentaries on the Laws of England: In Four Books; with an Analysis of the Work. By Sir William Blackstone, Knt. One of the Justices of the Court of Common Pleas. In Two Volumes, from the Eighteenth London Edition. . . . 2 vols. New York: W. E. Dean, 1840.

    Chitty, Joseph, ed. Commentaries on the Laws of England: By the Late Sir W. Blackstone. 4 vols. London: William Walker, 1826.

  9. During the 10 June meeting of the city council, JS argued that “the Constitution did not authorize” newspapers “to publish Libels,” likely referring to the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. William W. Phelps also read from the Illinois state constitution’s provision guaranteeing freedom of the press. Phelps may have similarly argued that the city council’s proposed action did not violate the state’s constitution. (Minutes, 10 June 1844; see also U.S. Constitution, amend. 1; Illinois Constitution of 1818, art. 8, sec. 22; and Oaks, “Suppression of the Nauvoo Expositor,” 891–895.)

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

    Oaks, Dallin H. “The Suppression of the Nauvoo Expositor.” Utah Law Review 9 (Winter 1965): 862–903.

  10. The Nauvoo charter drew directly from earlier charters for various Illinois cities, including Springfield, in establishing a provision for the city government “to make regulations to secure the general health of the inhabitants, to declare what shall be a nuisance, and to prevent and remove the same.” (Act to Incorporate the City of Nauvoo, 16 Dec. 1840; An Act to Incorporate the City of Springfield [3 Feb. 1840], Laws of the State of Illinois [1839–1840], p. 9, art. 5, sec. 7; see also Minutes, 10 June 1844.)

    General Laws of the State of Illinois, Passed by the Eighteenth General Assembly, Convened January 3, 1853. Springfield: Lanphier and Walker, 1853.

  11. The day after the newspaper was destroyed, Francis M. Higbee made a complaint before Hancock County justice of the peace Thomas Morrison accusing JS and seventeen others of riot because they “unlawfully & with force burned & destroyed the printing press, type & fixtures” of the Nauvoo Expositor. Although JS here defended the legality of the action, Illinois law indicated that a riot could also be “a lawful act” performed “in a violent and tumultuous manner.” In other instances where they defended the abatement of the Expositor, JS and others emphasized that the press was destroyed “without riot, noise, tumult, or confusion.” (Petition to Nauvoo Municipal Court, 12 June 1844; An Act Relative to Criminal Jurisprudence [26 Feb. 1833], Public and General Statute Laws of the State of Illinois [1839], p. 220, sec. 117; Letter to Thomas Ford, 14 June 1844; John M. Bernhisel, Nauvoo, IL, to Thomas Ford, Springfield, IL, 14 June 1844, [1], JS Office Papers, CHL; Sidney Rigdon, Nauvoo, IL, to Thomas Ford, Springfield, IL, 14 June 1844, [2], Sidney Rigdon, Collection, CHL.)

    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.

  12. See Luke 2:14. Church members had used some iterations of this phrase since at least 1838. During a July 1838 sermon, Sidney Rigdon stated, “In times of peace, it ought to be our aim and our object, to strengthen the bonds of the Union by cultivating peace and good will among ourselves.” In an 1842 editorial in the Times and Seasons, JS stated that while the kingdoms of men “were founded in carnage and bloodshed, and sustained by oppression, tyranny, and despotism,” God designed “to promot[e] the universal good, of the universal world;— to establish peace and good will among men.” Finally, in the 26 March 1844 memorial to Congress and the 30 March 1844 memorial to John Tyler, JS stated his trust “in the God of Liberty, that he has designed Universal peace and good will Union and brotherly love to all the great family of Man.” (Discourse, ca. 4 July 1838, 5; “The Government of God,” Times and Seasons, 15 July 1842, 3:855; Memorial to the United States Senate and House of Representatives, ca. 24–26 Mar. 1844; JS, Memorial to the President of the United States of America, 30 Mar. 1844, [1], draft, JS Collection, CHL.)

  13. The records of the Nauvoo Municipal Court indicate that Francis M. Higbee, Chauncey L. Higbee, Charles A. Foster, and Robert D. Foster had each been charged with breaches of city ordinances during previous months. (See Historical Introduction to City of Nauvoo v. F. M. Higbee, F. M. Higbee v. JS–A, F. M. Higbee v. JS–A on Habeas Corpus, and F. M. Higbee v. JS–B; and Historical Introduction to City of Nauvoo v. C. L. Higbee et al.)

  14. Estimates of Nauvoo’s population were generally overstated at the time. An 1845 census listed Nauvoo’s population as 11,057. The population in June 1844 was likely closer to that number than the stated 20,000. (“Mobocracy,” Times and Seasons, 15 Nov. 1845, 6:1031.)

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

  15. JS likely hoped to have the matter adjudicated before either the Illinois Supreme Court or the United States Circuit Court for the District of Illinois, which court JS appeared before during efforts to have him extradited to Missouri in 1842 and early 1843. During December 1842 Ford provided legal advice to JS and then assisted him by issuing a new warrant for his arrest, which allowed JS to appeal for a writ of habeas corpus from the United States Circuit Court for the District of Illinois. Ultimately, Judge Nathaniel Pope ordered that JS be discharged from arrest on that occasion. While it is not entirely clear what role JS was hoping Ford would play in June 1844, he was almost certainly remembering Ford’s assistance with that earlier hearing. The determination of legal jurisdiction, however, remained a judicial matter and was thus beyond the scope of Ford’s authority as governor. (Letter from Thomas Ford, 17 Dec. 1842; Petition to Thomas Ford, 31 Dec. 1842; Petition to the United States Circuit Court for the District of Illinois, 31 Dec. 1842; JS, Journal, 4–5 Jan. 1843; see also Letter to Thomas Ford, 14 June 1844.)