--- title: Times and Seasons description: Issues of 1840 to 1841. authors: - Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints editors: - Ebenezer Robinson - Don Carlos Smith - Smith, Joseph, Jr. - Taylor, John collections: - periodicals tags: - newspaper - times-and-seasons - nauvoo - nineteenth-century periodical: Times and Seasons volume: 2 number: 23 published: 1841-10-01 publisher: E. Robinson and D. C. Smith; later John Taylor publisher_place: Commerce and Nauvoo, Illinois language: en type: article reference: "“Anti-Mormon Slanders Refuted,” *Times and Seasons* 2, no. 23 (October 1, 1841): 558–562." printed_title: Anti-Mormon Slanders Refuted. source: url: https://archive.org/details/per_utah-and-the-mormons_times-and-seasons_1841-10-01_2_23 transcription: Text from the Centerplace.org transcription (https://www.centerplace.org/history/ts/v2n23.htm), with its page breaks; this Internet Archive scan is the reference copy (its OCR was used only as a witness for OCR repair) identifier: per_utah-and-the-mormons_times-and-seasons_1841-10-01_2_23 start_page: 558 end_page: 562 curator_note: A Mormon newspaper published by the church in Nauvoo; included for historical study. Inclusion does not imply endorsement. rights: status: public-domain basis: US publication 1841 (Nauvoo, Illinois); published before 1931, so public domain in the United States source: https://archive.org/details/per_utah-and-the-mormons_times-and-seasons_1841-10-01_2_23 publication_year: 1841 --- # Anti-Mormon Slanders Refuted To the Editors of the Ledger: Gentlemen:-The following remarks were written under an irresistible impulse occasioned by reading a catalogue of charges, of a criminal nature, preferred against the Mormons, by the Editors of the Saturday Courier, in their paper of the 10 of July. The conductors of that journal having declined publishing it, under an impression that their characters as true chroniclers of events would become somewhat tarnished, you will please give it an insertion in your valuable paper, and in doing so aid the cause of truth, which is the only object the writer has in view. To the Editors of the Sat. Courier:-Gentlemen: To expect an Editor to publish in his paper any thing calculated to detract from his merit as a man of truth, or to lessen him in the estimation of his readers, is, I am persuaded, "reckoning without our host." Other Editors are not disposed to publish in their journals long essays having a tendency to reflect upon or expose the misrepresentations of their cotemporaries [contemporaries], without levying a heavy tax upon the purse of the writer-hence we find so much rancor and ill feeling in the columns of papers calculated to wound the sensibilities not only of individuals, but of whole societies, pass without notice or refutation, These remarks have been elicited from reading nearly two columns of matter published in the Saturday Courier, of Saturday, the 10th of July, in condemnation of a religious sect of people called "Mormons, or Latter Day Saints." Now, sirs, the writer wishes to be distinctly understood that he is not a Mormon, nor indeed ever will be; to the contrary, he would, if he were able, PERSUADE some of that sect, with whom he is bound by the strongest ties of consanguinuy [consanguinity], to renounce the doctrine and cleave to that of their fathers. But let me recur to the curses and anathemas so unmercifully bestowed upon the poor unoffending Mormons, in the article referred to in the Courier. Indeed, I find it no easy matter to express, in suitable language, my utter detestation and abhorrence of the sentiments you have advanced, believing as I do, that the doctrine you have urged upon the people to adopt towards the Mormons, of EXTERMINATION, is the most illiberal, unjust, unchristian-like in its character, and dangerous in its tendency, that ever emenated [emanated] from the American Press. You must certainly have been amply charged when you were writing the closing part of the article, charging the Mormons with murdering Martin Harris, with the same spirit which caused the enraged Jews to gnash their teeth upon the Prophet Stephen, after he had admonished them and warned them of the consequences which would result to them from the evil course they were pursuing. I would respectfully ask you, sirs, to point me out in the Constitution of the United States, or in that of the State of Pennsylvania, a single clause that warrants any individual to judge his fellow in matters of religion, much less take the life of a fellow creature, because he may think it right for him to give an interpretation of the sacred text different from those who received their diplomas, to instruct others in the mysteries of God, at Yale, Princeton, or Carlisle, and who make religion a matter of merchandise. Being well aware that your labors would be in vain, were you to search for authority to wage your war upon the Mormons, except you practice upon the the plan of the white savages of Missouri, in this massacre of the unoffending Mormons, "declare upon your own hook"-a plan, by-the-by, if you do not exactly recommend in your strictures, you do not certainly condemn. The 1st Article of the Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, adopted 4th of March, 1789, declares "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridge the freedom of speech, or of the press." Now is there a feature or principle in the whole of that sacred instrument more highly prized than that which is intended to secure to us the liberty to worship the Creator according to the dictates of our own consciences? There are but few, I apprehend, to be found among us who are willing to deny this doctrine. Again, Article 9th, Section 3d. of the Constitution of Pennsylvania, the following language may be edifying to the Editors of the Courier: "All men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own conscience; no man can, of right, be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of worship; no human authority can in any case whatever control or interfere with the rights of conscience, and no preference shall ever be given by law to any religious establishments of mode of worship"-those are the privileges vouchsafed to the American people by the framers of their Constitution. Now a few extracts from the Saturday Courier will show how far its Editors breathe the spirit of religious liberty, and how far its Editors breathe the spirit of religious liberty, and how far the salutary provisions of the Constitution accord with their sentiments. In a kind of preface or biography of the founders of that religion the reader is prepared for the marvellous [marvelous]; not one palliating circumstance or charitable motive is ascribed to their acts. You say that , "under pretence [pretense] of raising money for building a Temple and for other purposes, gangs of itinerant vagabond (Mormons) were sent prowling over the country to beg ALMS and to STEAL, mostly under some sanctimonious pretence [pretense]-though we (the Editors of the Courier) have ourselves not the slightest doubt whatever that most if not all the ringleaders STEAL upon every occasion that offers with as much RECKLESSNESS as would any CONVICT in our State prison. We (the Editors of the Saturday Courier) state unequivocally our firm belief that this is their true character, because none other than precisely such men would ever be willing to unite in a piece of VILLANY [villainy] like Mormonism." Now your caldron of venom must have been heaped and running over when you penned the above wholesale calumny. There are not less, from the best data that the writer can collect, than 10,000 of our fellow citizens members of the same great political family, subject to the same laws and government, connected with us by ties of blood, denounced as THEAVES [thieves] AND ROBBERS; and all those persons too, from the most wealthy and respectable citizens, to the poorest among us, professing to be followers of the meek and lowly Jesus. And where is the evidence to justify such sweeping denunciations?-Yours is indeed the evidence of things not seen. For, after stigmatizing the sect by every epithet that Billingsgate vocabulary furnishes, you conclude by saying that you unequivocally and firmly believe that this is their true character, because none other than precisely such men would ever be willing to unite in a piece of villany [villainy] like Mormonism." And has it come to this, that men and women hitherto of spotless fame, and unblemished reputation, may be stigmatized as Villains, Thieves and Robbers, by the Editor of a Newspaper on his simple belief of their guilt, without a jot or tittle of testimony to sustain the charge? There are some of the Mormon Sect in the vicinity of this city that will not passively submit to be coupled with Thieves and Robbers, or the writer much mistakes their character. I will merely notice the letter from your correspondent of Ohio, who you say "so truly describes the Mormons," to show how malignant and false are his accusations. The writer of that letter says that the "leaders and all the heads of the Church have a great desire for riches-that they scoured the Branches of the East for money, and that they resorted to the most culpable and criminal means to obtain it; now, instead of this being the case, abundant evidence is at hand to prove that the leaders of the church are as poor as Lazarus-the clothing upon their backs is in many instances procured by subscription, and that they have frequently been seen in our streets wandering about, without a place to lay their heads, culpably indifferent to the accumulation of wealth, and are especially so, to the perishable honors of this world-preferring rather the things that pertain to the Kingdom than the mammon of this world, which Theologians esteem of paramount importance. I deem it unnecessary to notice further the base slanders of your Ohio letter writer, whose every word (however inconsistent with truth in relation to the circumstances he pretends to detail) the Editors of the Courier swallow as a precious morsel, and vomit forth again, charged with increased venom. I have not time nor inclination to notice the remarks of a Mr. Lee, said to reside somewhere in the neighborhood of Frankford, made at a Mormon meeting held in that place; indeed I would not notice him at all, were it not for the manner you are pleased to introduce that GENTLEMAN. You say that he was very plain and much to the purpose, that he cam directly to the point-what point? For, as Lee says he would not attempt to expose the Mormon imposture (refute the Mormon doctrine) or combat the creed. You say that though his remarks "WERE harsh in his terms, they appear fitting to the occasion, and contain facts not generally known as they should be." I perfectly agree with you that he was very plain and harsh in his terms, but that he came directly to the point and that his remarks were fitting to the occasion, I utterly deny. We are led to the conclusion that Lee went to the meeting to hear what would be said in favor of the tenets of Mormonism, and when requested, with others, to refute, if he could, what he had heard from the preacher, he commences a tirade of abuse, only equalled [equaled] by your own published account of the Leaders of the Mormons before referred to. In his simile, Mr. Lee has shown himself an apt scholar, at least so says the Courier, and who shall gainsay such high authority? His comparing the Minister who had just ceased speaking to a "pliant cat's paw" must have produced a ludicrous scene, highly interesting to Mr. Lee's accomplices. The manner, too, with which he interlarded his speech with the word Liar, Imposters [impostors] , Swindlers, Villains, Hypocrites, &c., is an evidence of a great lack of wit and very weak intellect, to say nothing of common courtesy, a characteristic of a true gentleman The Editors of the Courier call this coming to the point, and fitting to the occasion, and whether it be so or not I will leave others to judge. But how the Courier could ever charge Lee with using "harsh terms," is truly surprising, when they themselves had but a few moments before charged the Mormons with being Thieves and Robbers. I have done with Mr. Lee, and will just notice one or two other charges brought against the Mormons in the same paper, and which cannot be shuffled on to the shoulders of a letter writer from Ohio, or that of a Mr. Lee, but will stick to the backs of the Editors of the Courier as doth the bark of the tree of which it forms as component part. It is needless for me to say that I allude to your justification of the cold blooded butchery of upwards of nineteeu [nineteen] men, women [women] and children, (Mormons) by the inhabitants of Missouri, without color of law. But the sentence throughout exhibits such a thirsting after the blood of that people, by the editors of the Courier, that I must copy it entire. It reads-"Of their treatment in Missouri we know nothing, except that they no doubt well deserved the punishment meted out to them:" and in the next sentence which follows, you class them with murderers and pirates. Now one thing is certain, that up to the time, yea, the very moment of the massacre, the editors of the Courier, nor no man living, can point to one single act of the Mormons deserving of censure, much less of the horrible punishment they received. But it is necessary for me to recur back to the declaration of the Courier, that "of their treatment in Missouri we know nothing." Yes, this is your language: and when I first read it, shame and indignation filled by breast, to think that an editor in these United States, conducting one of the most popular journals of the day, a paper that I have esteemed above all others, and as an evidence of it have been a subscriber from its birth to the present day, and have otherwise aided to increase the subscription list, should be guilty of such a palpable derelection [dereliction] from truth. It may be safely asserted, that there is not an intelligent man of mature age in the United States or in Great Brittain [Britain], who has not heard of the massacre of the Mormons in Missouri; yet you, gentlemen, a long time conductors of a public journal, whose circulation is co-extensive with the United States, and who are in the weekly receipt of papers from all parts of the country, yet of the treatment they received, these you say "you know nothing.'" But alas for you, the fact is self-evident to every man, that you do know, and did know at the time you penned the article, all the circumstances connected with that tragedy, and your declaring that "they deserved the punishment meted out to them," is in plain English saying, that they deserved the punishment of death without trial, in the most barbarous manner because they chose to worship God, Jehovah, or because they would not worship him according to some of the various approved fashions of the world.-These are your sentiments published to the world Leaving the murdered men out of the question, nineteen of whom were ooly [coolly] and deliberately shot in a Smith's shop, through the appertures [apertures] between the logs, the circumstance of the murder of the poor boy Sardius Smith scarcely nine years of age, and consequently incapable of any moral turpitude, who was shot with a ball out of a rifle in the hands of a villain by the name of Glaze, of Carroll county, should have excited your pity, as you cannot believe that poor Sardius "merited the punishment meted out to him." Indeed it has never been pretended that the boy was guilty of any offence [offense]; he with the men had sought refuge in the Blacksmith's shop, and through fear had crawled under the bellows, where he remained till the massacre was over, when he was discovered by a Mr. Glaze, who presented his rifle near the boy's head, and literally blowed off the upper part of it. Glaze, the murderer, afterwards publicly boastd [boasted] of the heroic deed all over the couutry [country]; and at this late day we find the editors of the respectable journals commending the act, and declaring that hey merited the punishment meted out to them without assigning any cause whatever for the bloody deed. I cannot close these remarks without noticing another plain and palpable misrepresentation of facts, to be found in the closing paragraph of the Courier. It reads thus-"Without note or comment, we append the following paragraph from a letter to the Boston Traveler" "Cruel Murder.-Martin Harris, one of the earliest supporters of the Mormons, and the only wealthy man among them in their origin, has been murdered. He spent all he was worth in supporting the delusion under which he labored, furnishing all the funds for the publication of the Mormon Bible. "He abandoned the Mormons not long since, and delivered some lectures in opposition to their doctrines, and two or three weeks ago was found dead, having been shot through the head with a pistol." Now what an unlucky circumstance it was that Martin Harris would not stay murdered! The cup containing the very quintessence of all that is lovely is placed to the lips of the Boston Traveller [Traveler], the Saturday Courier and Spirit of the Times, and snatched away again ere they have drank half of its contents. The murder of Martin Harris!-Why nothing could have happened so opportunely, and a standing article that was to overthrow Mormonism, is knocked into pi by the stubbornness of that bad man. The Courier, in which this letter from the Boston Traveller [Traveler] is published, was issued from the press on the 10th day of July, and the reported murder of Martin Harris was officially contradicted by numerous persons who had seen and conversed with that gentleman two weeks, at least, before the 10th of July, and no person in the country was better informed of the fact of the existence in the flesh of Martin Harris, than the editors of the Courier at the very time they published the account of his murder without comment. Alas! to what base uses are the faculties which God hath given to man sometimes employed! Were the people to examine for themselves the writings of the enemies of Mormonism with that care and circumspection that other subjects receive, (some, too, of far less importance) they would soon discover who it is that mocks them and practises [practices] gross and wicked impositions. The persecution of the people, called "Mormons," commenced by the mob in Missouri. Their remote habitations were sacked and burned, and the inhabitants were either butchered or taken captive and confined in dungeons-their property was confiscated to the cupidity of lawless ruffians, and, what was most remarkable, the press throughout the country commended the act, and legislators and grave senators in Congress echoed the war cry of extermination: it appeared that Mercy had left her seat and fled to brutish breasts, and men had lost their reason. The same spirit of persecution has been fanned and kept alive by hired priests of certain sects, and supported and encouraged by a portion of the public press professing a religion in unison with the clergy. These facts should operate as a warning to other religious denominations, camparatively [comparatively] few in numbers, to look well to the rights bequeathed to them by the framers of the constitution. To a portion of our brethren, even now, the sacred rights guaranteed to every American citizen have become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. J. L.