Joseph Smith, and the Great West

JOSEPH SMITH, AND THE GREAT WEST How His Prophecy and Preachments Against Slavery Stood Out in Contrast With Those of Other Religious Leaders. By I. K. Russell, Author of "Hidden Heroes of the Rockies" When Joseph Smith took his bold stand against slavery, in 1832, and continued to the day of his death, his pleas to America to solve that issue or meet a disastrous civil war, he had behind him a Church whose membership could not be said to be divided on the issue. The first apostles of the Church had taken up their missionary labors in the New England states, ' in Canada, in Ohio, and in the Indian country, and had not yet preached the gospel to ardent be- lievers in human slavery, nor to slave holders. The record of the "Mormon" Church is as clear on that issue, and as undeviating, as it is on the issue of woman's suffrage, or of supporting the Nation in all its wars from the Mexican war on down to the World war. But what of those churches whose people were divided — part in the South and part in the North, when the breach in feeling occurred that brought on the Civil war? We know that when the pro-slave advocates were running about in Missouri starting stories that the "Mormons" were disguised operators of underground railroads for escaping slaves, certain clergymen led in the clamor for the tar pot and the fagot, as the "cure" for "Mormonism." And these clergymen were also found in the forefront of the first Missouri mobs. "The religious tenets of the 'Mormons,' " charged Clay County, Missouri, citizens as an excuse for expelling them, "are so different from the present churches of the age, that this excites deep prejudice against them. They are also eastern men whose manners, habits, customs, and even dialect are essentially different from the Missourians. They are non-slave holders, and opposed to slavery." (1) "The 'Mormons,' are the common enemies of mankind," wrote the Rev. Finis Ewing, head of the Cumberland Presbyterian Church, "and ought to be destroyed." (2) Thus the preacher, in Missouri, added fuel to the flames of the pro-slave hatreds, and made his cause a common one with theirs. That, of course, was popular in Missouri, but how did it seem in other con- gregations of the same churches? It happens that while Joseph Smith was shepherding his own flock along the trail of American Destiny, other church bodies were being torn asunder. It needed an outside observer to see how this was so. And this outside observer has left us a record in the form of

JOSEPH SMITH AND THE GREAT WEST 325 a book on America written by James Dixon, D. D., an ardent Metho- dist, and President of the British Methodist conference. In the very years when the "Mormon" Church was being driven to Utah and was organizing for its mighty battle to win the Far West from sterility, Rev. Mr. Dixon came to America to see what his church was doing about human bondage. What he found, and printed, was so disturbing to the peace of mind of American methodists that they omitted the whole section con- cerning slavery from the American edition of his book. Over this matter there was great dissension in the Methodist church in England — and in the North. And finally, in 1850, a third American edition was published containing the banned material. (3) Its own editor, J. McClintock, felt at the time much responsi- bility for seeing that hatreds did not flare up to the point of bringing on the disastrous war which Joseph Smith had predicted. He, there- fore, gives us a volume in which the writer of the preface roundly condemns his own author. "From Mr. Dixon's own statements," writes Editor McClintock, in giving us the excoriating denunciation of slavery of the eminent British divine, "it is apparent that he is not in a position to write intelligently upon the subject. It is ungracious to say such things of an author in the Preface to his own book. I avoided it in the former editions, of choice; but my course in the matter has been so greatly misunderstood that no alternative is left but to publish the omitted portion of his work: my duty as editor demands at least as strong aa expression as is given above in regard to its merits." Thus in the persons of Editor McClintock of the Christian Advocate, in America, and the head of the Methodist church in Eng- land, the war was becoming personal long before Johnston's Army had been hustled off to Utah as the fine gesture of pro-slave power in the White House. Editor McClintock wrote this in reproof of a brother Methodist on Jan. 9, 1850. And as one turns to the pages of Dr. Dixon's travel volume, one finds things everywhere to make him glad that God saw fit to choose for the Latter-day work new instruments, among newly settled people in a new land. There were so many old customs to break away from, before a Church organization could arise in the spirit of the Far West, which has become the spirit of America. For instance, here we have a British visitor coming to New York for his first visit, and noting, first of all, that Trinity Church is the most conspicuous church. Where are the stately cathedrals and overawing, costly homes for church prelates? He misses them. He wonders if Americans are to be contented with plain "meeting houses." The "Mormon" Church surely had an answer there. They were worshipping under brush boweries, at the time, in Utah, and digging the clay for their first adobe meeting houses. No pompous; style, ever, was wanted. But a shelter for folk of good: heart towards their neighbors and their God.

326 IMPROVEMENT ERA Rev. Mr. Dixon noted that the captain of the ship on which he journeyed, wanted to preach a bit himself on Sunday. He took this as a slight to the cloth — almost an invasion of his "trade," one would judge from the spirit in which he noted that a Scotchman present was disgusted with the intrusive captain. But what "Mormon" elder would have such a "peeve" at a layman participating in a service. Here was a "Mormon" Church, that in contrast to old ways, had created a "participating congregation." The elder would have expected, always, that any member of the con- gregation might be called on to address it. And our British visitor noted the absence of men in livery on Fifth Avenue, driving fine ladies1 about. He was startled when he went to the White House and asked to see the President. A black boy took his card and in a few minutes ushered him directly into the presence of James K. Polk. He could hardly believe it — since all the ceremonies of the court were lacking. In the "Mormon" civilization, neither flunkeyism nor cere- monies had ever gotten a start. The greatest talks humbly with the humblest, and the humblest may be exalted by his religion to a hap- pier life than the greatest — in worldly! goods. The smallest cottage meeting may have church "dignitaries" present equally with the largest conference, and none such would think himself demeaned by attendance. These contrasts the English visitor saw, as any "Mormon" might who travels very far afield. We, for instance who grew up in the old Fifteenth ward, of Salt Lake City, knew our Aunt Mary Morris, who taught the "Primary" in an old adobe school house. We knew the clay field whence came the adobies, and Old Brother Jones, who more or less had opened up the adobe business in Salt Lake. But a church seat out of which we must keep because it had been sold to another, we had never met. In New York once as a newspaper reporter, I was assigned to report the funeral of the ruling dignitary of the Episcopal church. I went to the services — and was asked to stand half an hour in the rear, until the ushers could decide whether tardy pew owners might arrive. They told me this church bishop was famous for his great sermons and I applied to his former assistant for a copy of a volume containing them. It was produced, and as I read them over I found every one was a complaint against rich pew holders who bought his pews and left him to preach to their empty seats. There was only one that varied from this theme, and this one was a fierce denunciation of the "Mor- mon" Church. It was an appeal to his congregation to help throw them out of Congress when this was the focus of anti- "Mormon" hatreds. And into the moment when Church hatreds in America were splitting the Methodist church apart, into the Southern and the Northern branch, Rev. Jas. Dixon precipitated himself as a British observer. How different is the slavery story he tells us, from what

JOSEPH SMITH AND THE GREAT WEST 327 it is as Joseph Smith pictured it, and as the "Mormon" people saw it work out in volcanic wrath. He pictures hisi own British congregation as horrified by it, but on arrival in America he found one preacher subscribing to the doc- trine of abolition, but working half a dozen slaves because his wife inherited them. And in his defense he plead that he could not do otherwise and retain his influence in the Southern community where he worked. The church had to amend the rigors of its rule to let such a clergyman hold caste through holding slaves. He found it utterly im- possible for Methodism in the United States to clarify their position. Thus, in the Methodist discipline the first stand was vigorous and it was- departed from in every successive amendment up to the Civil war: 1. We declare that we are as much as ever convinced of the great evil of slavery; therefore, no slaveholder shall be eligible to any official station in our Church, hereafter, where the laws of the state in which he lives will admit of emancipation, and permit the liberated slaves to enjoy freedom. 2. When any traveling preacher becomes an owner of a slave, or slaves, by* any means, he shall forfeit his ministerial character in our Church, unless he execute if possible a legal emancipation of such slaves, conformably to the laws of the state in which he lives. 3. All our preachers shall prudently enforce upon our members the neces- sity of teaching their slaves to read the word of God; and to allow them time to attend upon the public worship of God on our regular days of divine service. That was the way in the beginning. During our Revolu- tionary war, Dr. Coke had put the Methodists in America on record as believing slavery was "against the laws of God, man, and nature, and hurtful to society; contrary to the dictates of conscience and pure religion, and doing that which we would not others should do unto us and ours." ; But three years later the same Methodist conference, which voted with Dr. Coke in 1780, had to pass on the question: "What shall we do with our local preachers who hold slaves contrary to the laws which authorize their freedom in any of the United States?" The answer was the first of fifty years of difficulty in meeting such issues. "Try them another year," was the compromise adopted for an answer. From Baltimore, from Virginia, from the Carolinas, came preachers to conference in trouble because they owned slaves and their flocks owned slaves. The Rev. Mr. Dixon mingled with men from all these states-, saw their slaves pitifully at work in the cotton fields, "doing as little as possible," and then wrote this conclusion as to his church and the issue on which Joseph Smith's stand was so bold and uncompromising: "This fearful power (the slave oligarchy's) has hitherto been too great for the Methodist church and the Christian party desiring freedom for their fellow-creatures. It was soon found necessary for the conference ' to relax their rules; they could not

328 IMPROVEMENT ERA occupy the high ground at first taken; they practically were foiled in their attempts tot carry their resolutions into effect, as we have seen. And even Dr. Coke, on his second visit, for the sake of preaching the gospel and extending the knowledge of the Savior's name, considered it expedient to waive the slavery question. There seems to have been from the beginning more or less of internal agitation on this subject; and hence the constant changes taking place in legislation of the church. A fixed and absolute principle condemnatory of slavery, was, as we have seen, at first resolved upon. This not only brought the church into collision with public opinion and private interests in the slave-holding states, but also with the laws and authorities of these states themselves. "If (our people) obey the church law, the spiritual republic, the ecclesiastical state — then they are deemed traitors to the civil state, disloyal to the laws, rebels against the supreme power. If, again, they adhere to the civil system, they expose themselves to ecclesiastical penalties, — to censure and degradation, to expulsion, as the case might be. This is exactly the manner in which the matter went on; and, of necessity, must do when two co-ordinate powers, antagonistic to each other, are made to work on the same soil amongst the same people. * * * "The whole question evidently lay in a very narrow compass; namely, whether they ought to modify these rules to meet the case' of the slave-holding states, or whether they would allow themselves to be driven out of them as incendiaries, or otherwise run the hazards of martyrdom. The age of martyrdom had passed away." On the copy of Rev. Mr. Dixon's Tour in America, which I purchased in an old book shop in Washington, D. C, is the name of "The Reverend Johnson," on the front page. He, or some other reader, had underscored many passages in pencil, but none which streaks so heavy and black as that sentence, "the age of martyrdom had passed away." All who have ever preached "Mormonism" know that the great- est charge reiterated against its authenticity is that it claimed divine revelations when "the age of miracles and revelations had passed away." There is no need to follow the story of slavery as the older churches met it. They were caught with people on both sides, and the tearing apart of the Methodist branches has not even yet been healed. The Northern branch has its hand out at this writing, with the olive branch in it, but the Methodist church, South, has not yet received the offering. Thus we have a glimpse of the way our fathers had to divide their lives1 into that portion which was before the Civil war and that portion coming after the Civil war, even as we youngsters do, as to the World war. One good friend who has read this series of articles so far, writes that the slave holders were always a small part of the people, even of the South, and so could hardly have dominated Southern and National politics in the way I have pictured. He also doubts that so small a minority could have fixed their eyes on the Far West, before it was settled, and more than half explored, and could have domin- ated National politics to the point of starting a war for its possession. Fortunately, on this score, our friend from England, the Rev. Mr. Dixon, comes equally to our rescue with Abraham Lincoln. The English investigator of slavery gathered the census of the slave-holding

JOSEPH SMITH AND THE GREAT WEST 329 states for 1848. And while the slave holders were few, the slave richest were enormous and were growing greater every year. And concerning what the slave oligarchy could do with its few numbers, to command the expulsion of the "Mormons" from Missouri, to bring on "Bleeding Kansas," to drive( Johnston'si army against Brigham Young in Utah, and to seek by every means to possess the West, Abraham Lincoln wrote this little estimate of slave-holder power. He addressed it to his intimate friend, Joshua F. Speed, on August 24, 1855, when he was still comparatively unknown in public life: (6) "The slave-breeders and slave-traders are a small, odious, and detested class among you (of the South) ; and yet in politics they dictate the course of all of you, and are as completely your masters as you are masters of your own negroes." I have had sent me a History of Virginia with passages marked to show how few the slave holders were, so that they could hardly have dominated policies as claimed here. But the letter from President Lincoln keys the case as the mass of evidence shows the truth to be. And here is the story of the growth of slave-holding, until over- breeding forced the South to see the Great West as an outlet for its blacks. The figures are from the compilation of Rev. Mr. Dixon, prepared, as he put it, "to show the Methodist body in England the progress of their system of religion in the United States." Slave Distribution by States Slaves Slaves State In 1790 • In 1840 Ma ry land 103,036 89.737 Virginia 2 03,427 488,987 North Carolina 100,572 245,817 South Carolina 10 7,094 327,038 Georgia 29.264 253,532 Kentucky 11,830 182,258 Tennessee 3,417 183,059 Missouri in 1810 3,011 58,240 Arkansas in 1820 1,617 19,935 Alabama in 1820 41,879 258,532 That is a vivid picture, in statistical form, of the slave pressure which caused a bursting-over into the new territory of the Far West. Each of those slaves had a market value of from $500 to $1,000, and the one and only way to keep the market from collapsing was to "release the slaves from the prison states of the South." As he turned his back upon America, Rev. Mr. Dixon prayed that this church would make these slaves "free men in Christ," by preaching to them and converting them. As to the institution of slavery he had none of Joseph Smith's prophetic vision for he de- clared, "If Christianity is to prepare the slaves for liberty, and Method- ism is to be its agent, ages and ages must intervene betwixt thesd wretched people and the mighty boon." The English investigator wrote just a dozen years before the issue hardened into one of the world's worst civil wars. His own church

330 IMPROVEMENT ERA burst apart into Southern and Northern conferences in the very year Joseph Smith was martyred on the fringe of the middle-western slave vortex. In our next number we will show how the issue followed the Saints out of Illinois, as it had followed them out of Missouri, and how, turning from the Saints to the Northern' settlers who followed them in, it made the former "Mormon" territory a living hell for another decade. Letters of comment are sought from readers! of these articles. They are printed frankly as a "fishing expedition" for comment and pos- sible suggestions preparatory to putting the theme into more permanent form. The field is so large no one man can map it all, and the reactions to others on the data given may be of the greatest help. References 1. B. H. Roberts, Missouri Persecutions, p. 169. 2. B. H. Roberts, Missouri Persecutions, p. 73. 3. James Dixon, D. D., A Tour Through a Part of The United States and Canada, New York, 1850. 4. Dixon, Tour in America, p. 43 3. 5. Dixon, Tour in America, pp. 440-442. 6. William H. Skaggs, The Southern Oligarchy, N. Y., 1924, p. ix. Life's Game It isn't always the greater trials That eat into the soul and bring trouble, But the petty cares that weigh us down And the little trials that make us stumble. With strength we rise to a crisis oft', And with courage face tragedy real; But true spirit it takes petty hazards to meet With a smile that it's harder to feel. But let us pretend that all life is a game, That we must play skillfully and fair, To smile if we lose, and laugh if we win, No matter the pleasure or care. Then surely we'll find that it's joyous to live Whatever the pathway we take, And the world will be better for having us, too, And many the friends we will make. Visa, Arizona IDA R. ALLDREDGE.