FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Difference between revisions of "City of Nauvoo/City charter"
(→Subtopics: fix link) |
(→Question: rm) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
==Question== | ==Question== | ||
What was unique about the city of Nauvoo's charter? Why did it anger some non-Mormons? | What was unique about the city of Nauvoo's charter? Why did it anger some non-Mormons? | ||
| − | |||
{{CriticalSources}} | {{CriticalSources}} | ||
Revision as of 21:13, 4 February 2010
| Answers portal |
| Joseph Smith, Jr. |
|
 RESOURCES
|
|---|
|
|
|
|
 PERSPECTIVES
|
 MEDIA
|
| OTHER PORTALS
|
This page is based on an answer to a question submitted to the FAIR web site, or a frequently asked question.
Question
What was unique about the city of Nauvoo's charter? Why did it anger some non-Mormons?
To see citations to the critical sources for these claims, click here
Subtopics
Response
To understand the Nauvoo charter, we must first review the history which preceded it. We will start with Joseph Smith's incarceration in Liberty Jail.
Liberty Jail
- 9 April 1839
- Grand jury indicts Joseph and Co. for "murder, treason, burglary, arson, larceny, theft, and stealing."[1] During their transport to another county from Liberty Jail, the judge, sheriff, and guards conspire to allow them to escape, probably because the state did not feel they could get a conviction.
- 20 April 1839
- completion of evacuation of Saints from Missouri to Illinois.
- 22 April 1839
- Joseph and companions rejoin saints at Quincy, Illinois
Nauvoo
- 1 May 1839
- Joseph Smith purchases first land at Commerce (later Nauvoo), Illinois.
- October 1839
- a high council and stake presidency called for Nauvoo
Attempts to Receive Redress for Missouri Persecutions
- 28 November 1839
- Elias Higbee and Joseph Smith arrive in Washington, D.C. to plead for redress because of the Missouri persecutions.
- 29 November 1839
- Joseph and Elias meet with President Martin Van Buren.
- Early Feb 1840
- Joseph and Elias meet with President Van Buren again, and are told “Your cause is just, but I can do nothing for you.”
- 4 March 1840
- Joseph arrives back in Nauvoo from Washington, D.C.
The efforts to obtain redress in Washington came to naught. It seems very clear to a modern reader that the US federal government should have been able to intervene to rectify the injustices done the Saints in Missouri. However, this matter was not entirely clear at the time, and many political leaders (especially those from the South) were of the opinion that such matters were to be left to state authorities.
Joseph Smith clearly favored an expansion of the U.S. Constitution’s powers to allow protection of persecuted minorities:
- I am the greatest advocate of the Constitution of the United States there is on the earth. . . The only fault I find with the Constitution is, it is not broad enough to cover the whole ground.
- Although it provides that all men shall enjoy religious freedom, yet it does not provide the manner by which that freedom can be preserved, nor for the punishment of Government officers who refuse to protect the people in their religious rights, or punish those mobs, states, or communities who interfere with the rights of the people on account of their religion. Its sentiments are good, but it provides no means of enforcing them.[2]
Indeed, the whole debate about what the federal government could and couldn’t force the states to do would eventually be settled only by the Civil War. The Mormons were too early and, frankly, not popular enough to push the matter to that point. Joseph’s view won out, though—the 14th Amendment to the Constitution (passed after the Civil War) gave all naturalized or natural-born Americans “citizenship” status in both their state and the United States, and provided that
- No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.[3]
Nauvoo and writing the Charter
- 14 September 1840
- John C. Bennett, quartermaster of Illinois, arrives in Nauvoo, is baptized, and begins helping to draft a city charter.
- 16 December 1840
- City of Nauvoo charter, charter for Nauvoo legion, and charter for University of Nauvoo issued by the Legislative Assembly of Illinois with little debate.
The Democrats who welcomed the Mormon settlers initially probably hoped to use their block-voting tendencies to control the balance of power in the state. (Indeed, one Assemblyman sarcastically noted that the charter should be renamed “A Bill for the Encouragement of the Importation of Mormons”![4]) Given the potential political power of the large number of immigrants, the state politicians were extra helpful in the matter of the charter, as BH Roberts noted:
- This effort to win the Saints to one political party or the other continued to be a factor in their affairs so long as they remained at Nauvoo. It was owing to this rivalry for their support that doubtless made it possible for the Saints to obtain larger grants of power for their city government, and greater political privileges and influence in the State than otherwise could have been obtained by them. It also was this rivalry for their favor... that made them alternately fulsomely flattered and heartily disliked; fawningly courted, and viciously betrayed.[5]
Powers of the Charter
The Nauvoo Charter granted great latitude to the city. The executive head was the mayor, and he was assisted by four aldermen and nine city councilors. The mayor and aldermen were also judges in the city court, so the charter did not have the strict “separation of powers” that we have come to think of as proper. However, this was not unusual for the time. There were five other city charters granted by the state of Illinois before Nauvoo. A comparison is helpful:[6]
| Nauvoo Charter Characteristic | Compared with other existing charters in Illinois |
|---|---|
| Councilors and alderman | Other cities generally have only one or the other |
| No waiting period for participation in city government (likely because of the large numbers of immigrants from Canada and the British isles) | Other cities required that those in city government be American citizens with a residency requirement. |
| Can pass any law “not repugnant” to the U.S. or Illinois state Constitution | Galena, Quincy, and Springfield had similar provisions |
| Legislative powers to the council | “Nearly identical” to Springfield and Quincy |
| Presence of Municipal court | Alton and Chicago also had courts |
| City courts can issue writs of habeas corpus | Alton charter also grants this right to the city |
| Mayor is chief justice of city court; alderman are associate justices | Not present in other charters |
| Court cases appealed to Hancock County courts (this is more restrictive than the other cities with courts) | More broad powers given to other cities: Chicago and Alton were equal, rather than subservient, to the county courts, and appeals went directly to the Illinois Supreme Court |
It should be noted that Nauvoo's charter was similar to other charters granted, and it was granted by the government of the state of Illinois—the Mormons did not impose it by fiat.
After the charter
- 1 February 1841
- John C. Bennett elected mayor of Nauvoo. Joseph Smith, Sidney Rigdon, Hyrum Smith, and Williams Marks were elected as aldermen and councilors.
- 3 February 1841
- the “Nauvoo Legion” formed—this was a militia controlled by the mayor, while most militia were typically controlled only at the county level. While still subject to the governor, the Nauvoo Legion’s internal organization and policies were under the control of the city of Nauvoo. Joseph was approved by the state of Illinois as “Lieutenant General,” which was a fairly high rank (no one but George Washington held a rank that high until 1847). The state officials later realized that only a jury of his peers (i.e., those with the same or equal rank) could convene a court-martial or otherwise remove Joseph, so they had effectively handed him life-time control over the city militia!
Again, one should note that Joseph did not arrogate the rank to himself; it was confirmed upon him by the state legislature.
Apostasy of John C. Bennett
- May 1842
- John C. Bennett is tried before a Church court. He confessed to “wicked and licentious conduct toward certain females in Nauvoo,”[7] and of past acts of exploiting of women he had attended as a doctor. He may also have performed abortions.[8] He had also frequented, and perhaps operated, a brothel.[9] (Bennett was not alone in this; with his encouragement Chauncy and Francis Higbee—who would write attacks on Joseph Smith in the Nauvoo Expositor—also participated in immoral acts and were disciplined for it.)
Orson F. Whitney said this about Bennett:
- In May, 1842, the treachery and rascality of a man whom the Mormon leader had befriended and loaded with honors, became known to his benefactor. That man was Dr. John C. Bennett, Mayor of Nauvoo, Chancellor of its University, and Major-General of its legion. He had become associated with the Saints soon after their exodus from Missouri. Though a great egotist, he was a man of education, address and ability. That he had little or no principle was not immediately apparent. Considerable of a diplomat and possessing some influence in political circles, he rendered valuable aid in securing the passage by the Illinois Legislature of the act incorporating the city of Nauvoo. Hence the honors bestowed upon him by the Mormon people. Prior to that, and subsequently, he was Quartermaster-General of Illinois. Bennett professed great sympathy for the Saints. He joined the Church and apparently was a sincere convert to the faith.
- Governor Thomas Ford, in his history of Illinois, styles Bennett "probably the greatest scamp in the western country." But this was not until long after the Mormons, thrice victimized, had become aware of his villainy.[10]
Assassination Attempt on Lilburn Boggs
- 6 May 1842
- an unknown assailant shoots former Missouri governor Boggs through his window, severely wounding him. Later, John C. Bennett encourages Boggs to press charges against the Mormons for their alleged role in the attack.
- 8 August 1842
- a warrant is issued for Joseph Smith’s extradition to Missouri to face charges in the attempted murder of Boggs; the claim is that Joseph Smith was an “accessory before the fact,” and encouraged Orin Porter Rockwell in the deed. Joseph easily proved he had been in Illinois on the day of the shooting (hundreds of miles from Missouri) and obtains a writ of habeas corpus.
- 1 September 1842
- D&C 127 in letter from Joseph, who was in hiding to prevent further writs from being served on him.
- 6 September 1842
- D&C 128 in letter from Joseph, still in hiding.
- December 1842
- the state Supreme Court of Illinois finds that the writ voiding the governor’s warrant was illegal. However, Joseph went before a federal judge to again challenge the warrant, and this court found that the warrant “lacked foundation” since it went beyond the statements which Boggs had made in his affidavit. The state Legislative Assembly considers repeal of the Nauvoo charter, but does nothing.
- February 1843
- Joseph Smith announces he will run for President of the United States.
- June 1843
- Missouri again attempted to extradite Joseph for trial. Joseph proceeded to Nauvoo, was welcomed by cheering crowds, and was again granted a writ of habeas corpus by the Nauvoo municipal court, voiding the warrant. The city council then made it illegal to arrest Joseph within Nauvoo, and gave the mayor (Joseph Smith, since the excommunication of Bennett) power to approve any outside warrants. This only increased the non-Mormons’ sense that Joseph was combining religious and civil power in an effort to put himself “beyond the law.”
For subsequent events, please see the entry on the: Nauvoo Expositor
Conclusion
The Nauvoo Charter granted great power to the city, but it was not unique in this respect—the other charters in Illinois were similar. Nauvoo's court system was more restrictive than other cities', since it was under the jurisdiction of the country court, while other cities' were not.
The powers granted Nauvoo were not seized by the Saints; they were granted lawfully, and could have been removed lawfully by the legislature. Unfortunately, efforts by anti-Mormons and apostates to take the law into their own hands led to the murder of Joseph and Hyrum, and the eventual departure of the Saints from Illinois, and the United States.
Endnotes
- [note] Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 volumes, edited by Brigham H. Roberts, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1957), 3:423. Volume 3 link
- [note] Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 volumes, edited by Brigham H. Roberts, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1957), 5:55–56. Volume 5 link
- [note] U.S. Constitution, Amendments, Article XIV, off-site
- [note] Edwin Brown Firmage and Richard Collin Mangrum, Zion in the Courts : a Legal History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1830–1900 (Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1988), 133. ISBN 0252069803.
- [note] Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 volumes, edited by Brigham H. Roberts, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1957), 4:xxi. Volume 4 link
- [note] Derived from Zioncourts|start=85|end=onward}}
- [note] Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 volumes, edited by Brigham H. Roberts, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1957), 5:18–19. Volume 5 link
- [note] Susan Easton Black, Who’s Who in the Doctrine and Covenants (Salt Lake: Deseret Book, 1997), 14; see also Zeruiah N. Goddard, affidavit, August 28, 1842 in Affidavits and Certificates, Disproving the Statements and Affidavits Contained in John C. Bennett's Letters (Nauvoo, no publisher, 31 August 1842); cited by Danel W. Bachman, “A Study of the Mormon Practice of Polygamy Before the Death of Joseph Smith,” (1975) (unpublished M.A. thesis, Purdue University), 225.
- [note] Bachman, “Polygamy Before the Death of Joseph Smith,” 225; citing L.D. Wasson to Joseph Smith, 29 July 1842 in Times and Seasons 5:891-892.
- [note] Orson F. Whitney, History of Utah, 4 volumes, (Salt Lake City: George Q. Cannon and Sons Co., 1892-1904), 1:193–194; cited in Roy W. Doxy, Latter-day Prophets and the Doctrine and Covenants, Volume 4, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1978), 255–257.
Further reading
FAIR wiki articles
Life and Character |
|
Youth |
|
Revelations and the Church |
|
Prophetic Statements |
|
Society |
|
Plural marriage (polygamy) |
|
Death |
Joseph I. Bentley, "Legal Trials of the Prophet: Joseph Smith's Life in Court"
Joseph I. Bentley, Proceedings of the 2006 FAIR Conference, (August 2006)From my years of research and work on the Joseph Smith Papers Project, I have gained a deeper appreciation of Joseph’s achievements, despite intense and unrelenting adversity. Among his other tribulations was the fact that his ministry was shadowed by many persistent legal prosecutions. Anyone who has been through even one lawsuit knows how all-consuming it can be. It can demand your time, assets, body and mind.The legal charges and trials of Joseph began almost before his ministry began, and they continued for many years after it ended.
So far we’ve found over two hundred total suits involving Joseph Smith–whether as a defendant, plaintiff, witness or judge. (Yes, as Mayor of Nauvoo, he was also a Justice of the Peace and Chief Magistrate of the Nauvoo Municipal Court.) That makes an average of about fourteen cases per year. As best we can tell, he endured an average of one lawsuit per month during most of his ministry!
Brigham Young said that he had to defend himself in forty-eight criminal cases, including many personally involving Brigham–but that Joseph was never convicted in any of them. We believe that this count of criminal cases against him is quite accurate. We’ll focus mainly on some criminal charges that took his liberty, his assets and ultimately his life. Knowing that not once was he found legally guilty of any charges against him has strengthened my own faith and regard for Joseph Smith–the man and the Prophet. This is a unique way to tell the history of the Church through lawsuits and court records.
From the time of his First Vision, Joseph said he got used to “swimming in deep water.” This was also true of his experience with the law. The Lord told him at the start of his ministry: “Be patient in thine afflictions for thou shalt have many. But endure them, for lo I am with thee, even unto the end of thy days.”1 Also: “Be firm in keeping the commandments … and if you do this, behold I grant unto you eternal life, even if you should be slain.“2 Finally: “And even if they do unto you as they have done unto me, blessed are ye, for ye shall dwell with me in glory.”3 These verses connected him to the Lord himself. But how is that for a mission call?
Click here to view the complete article
How many times was Joseph Smith involved with legal issues?
"Joseph Smith was persecuted in courts of law as much as anyone I know. But he was never found guilty of any crime, and his name cannot be tarnished in that way"
It seems that Joseph Smith was constantly involved with legal issues during his life. How many times was Joseph involved in such matters and what were their nature?
Concluded one author:
Joseph Smith was persecuted in courts of law as much as anyone I know. But he was never found guilty of any crime, and his name cannot be tarnished in that way.[1]
Entire books have been written on the legal history of the Church in its early days.
Introduction
Wrote a leading scholar of Joseph's legal history:
Joseph Smith believed that his enemies perverted legal processes, using them as tools of religious persecution against him, as they had been used against many of Christ's apostles and other past martyrs. Although he often gained quick acquittals, numerous "vexatious and wicked" lawsuits consumed his time and assets, leading to several incarcerations and ultimately to his martyrdom. Beginning soon after his ministry began and continuing throughout his life, Joseph Smith was subjected to approximately thirty criminal actions and at least that many civil suits related to debt collection or failed financial ventures.[2]
Ohio
After the Church moved to Kirtland, Ohio, in 1831, several religious-based charges were prosecuted against Smith and other LDS leaders, but were dismissed on the grounds listed following each charge: assault and battery (self-defense), performing marriages without a valid license (one was procured), attempted murder or conspiracy (lack of evidence), and involuntary servitude without compensation during the Zion's Camp military crusade to Missouri (won on appeal). In turn, Church leaders successfully instituted charges and recovered damages for assaults occurring while they were acting in a religious capacity. However, the financial Panic of 1837 swamped the Prophet and others with civil debt-collection litigation. Worse still were suits for violating Ohio banking laws when the Kirtland Safety Society Anti-Banking Company (see Kirtland Economy) failed soon after it was organized in 1836 without a state charter. Charges of fraud and self-enrichment were raised but not proven; a jury conviction was appealed, but Joseph Smith left Ohio for Missouri before it was heard.[2]
Missouri
In Missouri, most actions against the Latter-day Saints were extralegal, brought by non-Mormon vigilantes prejudiced against the Saints' opposition to slavery, their collective influx, and Smith's religious teachings concerning modern revelation and the territorial establishment of Zion in Jackson County. Civil magistrates routinely refused to issue peace warrants for Mormons or to redress their personal injuries or property damage. For example, despite being beaten and tarred and feathered and having the printing office destroyed, the LDS printer was awarded less than his legal fees and the Presiding Bishop received "one penny and a peppercorn." All three branches of state government seemed paralyzed or supportive of mob action, as the Saints were repeatedly dispossessed and expelled from county to county.[2]
Illinois
In 1838-1839 the Saints settled in Nauvoo, Illinois, after their wrongful expulsion from Missouri. To avoid the "legal" persecutions suffered in earlier states, they obtained a liberal Nauvoo city charter for Nauvoo, which granted broad habeas corpus powers to local courts. These helped to free Joseph Smith and other Latter-day Saints when they were sought on writs by arresting officers from outside of Nauvoo. In 1841 state judge Stephen A. Douglas set aside a Missouri writ to extradite Joseph for charges still pending there, and in 1843 a federal judge did the same for a similar requisition after the alleged shooting of then ex-governor Boggs. However, the increasing use of the writ of habeas corpus by Nauvoo magistrates, preempting even state and federal authority, escalated distrust among non-Mormons who felt that Joseph Smith considered himself above the law.[2]
Does Doctrine and Covenants 98:4-11 instruct Latter-day Saints to disobey secular law?
The revelation is telling the Saints to support honest and wise men as leaders, not to disobey the law
The quote is from D. Michael Quinn, and is his interpretation. The revelation is not telling the Saints to "disobey secular law and civil leaders"—it is telling them to "befriend" the law of the land, and seek to support "honest men and wise men" as leaders.
4 And now, verily I say unto you concerning the laws of the land, it is my will that my people should observe to do all things whatsoever I command them.
5 And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me.
6 Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;
7 And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil.
8 I, the Lord God, make you free, therefore ye are free indeed; and the law also maketh you free.
9 Nevertheless, when the wicked rule the people mourn.
10 Wherefore, honest men and wise men should be sought for diligently, and good men and wise men ye should observe to uphold; otherwise whatsoever is less than these cometh of evil.
11 And I give unto you a commandment, that ye shall forsake all evil and cleave unto all good, that ye shall live by every word which proceedeth forth out of the mouth of God. (D&C 98꞉4-11)
Joseph Smith's 1826 trial
Summary: Tried and acquitted on fanciful charge of being a “disorderly person,” South Bainbridge, Chenango County, New York. New York law defined a disorderly person as, among other things, a vagrant or a seeker of “lost goods.” The Prophet had been accused of both: the first charge was false and was made simply to cause trouble; Joseph’s use of a seer stone to see things that others could not see with the naked eye brought the second charge. Those who brought the charges were apparently concerned that Joseph might bilk his employer, Josiah Stowell, out of some money. Mr. Stowell’s testimony clearly said this was not so and that he trusted Joseph Smith.Claimed mismanagement of the Lawrence estate
Summary: Joseph Smith was appointed the guardian of two daughters, Maria and Sarah Lawrence, and their inheritance. He later married them in plural marriage. The evidence shows that Joseph Smith faithfully discharged his legal duties, despite the claims made by some nineteeth-century and modern critics.
Notes
- ↑ Joseph I. Bentley, "Legal Trials of the Prophet: Joseph Smith's Life in Court," (2006 FAIR Conference presentation). (Key source)
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 Joseph I. Bentley, "Smith, Joseph: Legal Trials of Joseph Smith," in Encyclopedia of Mormonism, 4 vols., edited by Daniel H. Ludlow, (New York, Macmillan Publishing, 1992), 3:1346–1347.