Page
Page
Letter to the Church and Others, 23 June 1842, in JSP, D10:180–182. For more on Bennett’s excommunication, see Notice, 11 May 1842, in JSP, D10:40–45.
JSP, D10 / Kuehn, Elizabeth A., Jordan T. Watkins, Matthew C. Godfrey, and Mason K. Allred, eds. Documents, Volume 10: May–August 1842. Vol. 10 of the Documents series of The Joseph Smith Papers, edited by Matthew C. Godfrey, R. Eric Smith, Matthew J. Grow, and Ronald K. Esplin. Salt Lake City: Church Historian’s Press, 2020.
See Historical Introduction to Letter to the Church and Others, 23 June 1842, in JSP, D10:178–180. JS referenced these “evil reports” on 19 May during the Nauvoo City Council meeting. During the meeting, JS asked Bennett to address his claims that JS had authorized him to engage in extramarital sexual relations. Bennett responded by saying that JS had not “given me authority to hold illicit intercourse with women.” (JS, Journal, 19 May 1842.)
JSP, D10 / Kuehn, Elizabeth A., Jordan T. Watkins, Matthew C. Godfrey, and Mason K. Allred, eds. Documents, Volume 10: May–August 1842. Vol. 10 of the Documents series of The Joseph Smith Papers, edited by Matthew C. Godfrey, R. Eric Smith, Matthew J. Grow, and Ronald K. Esplin. Salt Lake City: Church Historian’s Press, 2020.
Nauvoo High Council Minutes, 20 May 1842; see also Woodruff, Journal, 27 May 1842.
Nauvoo High Council Minutes, 1839–1845. CHL. LR 3102 22.
Woodruff, Wilford. Journals, 1833–1898. Wilford Woodruff, Journals and Papers, 1828–1898. CHL. MS 1352.
Though the high council minutes of 20 May 1842 do not identify the women, the minutes of 24 May 1842 provide their names. (Nauvoo High Council Minutes, 24 May 1842.)
Nauvoo High Council Minutes, 1839–1845. CHL. LR 3102 22.
Nauvoo High Council Minutes, 24 May 1842; Margaret Nyman, Testimony, Nauvoo, IL, 21 May 1842; Matilda Nyman, Testimony, Nauvoo, IL, 21 May 1842; Sarah Miller, Testimony, Nauvoo, IL, 24 May 1842, Testimonies in Nauvoo High Council Cases, CHL.
Nauvoo High Council Minutes, 1839–1845. CHL. LR 3102 22.
Testimonies in Nauvoo High Council Cases, May 1842. CHL.
Illinois law defined “sexual” slander as falsely speaking or publishing words “which in their common acceptation shall amount to charge any person with having been guilty of fornication, or adultery.” This act authorized plaintiffs to bring a civil action at the circuit court level, but as a justice of the peace, Robinson lacked jurisdiction to try slander cases. (An Act Declaring Certain Words Actionable [27 Dec. 1822], Public and General Statute Laws of the State of Illinois [1839], p. 660, sec. 1; Robinson v. Harlan, 1 Scammon 238 [Ill. Sup. Ct. 1835]; see also Dinger, “Sexual Slander and Polygamy in Nauvoo,” 1–22.)
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.
Scammon / Scammon, J. Young. Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of the State of Illinois. 4 vols. St. Louis: W. J. Gilbert, 1869–1870.
Dinger, John S. “Sexual Slander and Polygamy in Nauvoo.” Journal of Mormon History 44, no. 3 [July 2018]: 1–22.
It is unclear what statute Robinson relied on for the prosecution. He may have used the Illinois libel law, which defined libel as “a malicious defamation, expressed either by printing or by signs or pictures, or the like” in order “to impeach the honesty, integrity, virtue, or reputation” of a person and “to expose him or her to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule.” As the statute indicates, libel was generally seen as slander that took written or published, rather than oral, form. Spoken slander could prompt criminal charges if the words led to a breach of the peace, but there is no evidence that Robinson saw Higbee’s words as a breach of the peace. Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, covering terminology of this period, stated: “If the matter be understood as scandalous, and is calculated to excite ridicule or abhorrence against the party intended, it is libellous, however it may be expressed.” (An Act relative to Criminal Jurisprudence [26 Feb. 1833], Public and General Statute Laws of the State of Illinois [1839], p. 220, sec. 120; Starkie, Treatise on the Law of Slander and Libel, 2:184–187; see also “Libel,” in Bouvier, Law Dictionary, 2:40–41.)
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.
Starkie, Thomas. A Treatise on the Law of Slander and Libel, and Incidentally of Malicious Prosecutions. Vol. 2. Albany, New York: C. Van Benthuysen, 1843.
Bouvier, John. A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States of America, and of the Several States of the American Union; With References to the Civil and Other Systems of Foreign Law. 2 vols. Philadelphia: Deacon and Peterson, 1854.
Although McRae was not named in the subpoena, Robinson listed him on the verso of the subpoena document among the witnesses who testified. (Subpoena, 24 May 1842 [State of Illinois v. C. L. Higbee].)
Recognizance, 24 May 1842 [State of Illinois v. C. L. Higbee]; An Act to Regulate the Apprehension of Offenders, and for Other Purposes [6 Jan. 1827], Public and General Statute Laws of the State of Illinois [1839], p. 238, sec. 3. Robinson worded the recognizance so that it bound Higbee to appear before the circuit court “to answer a charge of slander and defamation against the character of Joseph Smith”; it is unknown whether the omission of Emma Smith’s name was intentional.
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.
Subpoena, 19 Sept. 1842 [State of Illinois v. C. L. Higbee]. JS allegedly proposed plural marriage to Latter-day Saints Nancy Rigdon and Sarah Marinda Bates Pratt. John C. Bennett in his book History of the Saints further accused JS of attempting to seduce Emeline White and Melissa Schindle, married women who were not Latter-day Saints. According to Bennett, Higbee was the one who obtained an affidavit from Schindle about JS for him. (Bennett, History of the Saints, 226–247, 253–255.)
Bennett, John C. The History of the Saints; or, an Exposé of Joe Smith and Mormonism. Boston: Leland and Whiting, 1842.
Subpoena, 14 Sept. 1842 [State of Illinois v. C. L. Higbee]; Subpoena, 19 Sept. 1842 [State of Illinois v. C. L. Higbee]. There are no docket entries in the October term mentioning an indictment against Higbee. (Hancock Co., IL, Circuit Court Records, 1829–1897, vol. C, p. 319–334, microfilm 947,496; Hancock Co., IL, Circuit Court, Index to Court Papers, 1830–1865, vol. A, p. 75, microfilm 955,126, U.S. and Canada Record Collection, FHL.)
U.S. and Canada Record Collection. FHL.
© 2024 by Intellectual Reserve, Inc. All rights reserved.Terms of UseUpdated 2021-04-13Privacy NoticeUpdated 2021-04-06