By Jensen Reed Oler
December 4, 1998
Religion 341
Professor Bennett
Introduction
On May 6, 1842, an attempt was made on the life of former Missouri
governor, Lilburn W. Boggs. The event would be noteworthy to Latter-day
Saints merely for his dark history with the church, but the Mormon involvement
is even greater than it might appear. Two months following the failed
attempt, Boggs filed an affidavit, backed by a request by Missouri Governor
Reynolds, charging Orrin Porter Rockwell and the Prophet Joseph Smith with
attempted murder.
The event may have been overlooked and even forgotten had it
not been for some serious anti-Mormon sentiment on the American frontier
during that time. In the following I would like to give examples
of this negative rhetoric, which existed despite the facts, during this
period in history.
‡
Historical sentiment on the matter
In the months and years following the incident, there have been generally
two sides to the story. Mormon scholars commonly see little evidence
to support the claim that Mormons were responsible for the assassination
attempt. In fairness, these writers obviously have an interest in
preserving the sanctity of the Prophet’s memory as well as the good name
of the church.
Non-Mormons, on the other hand, seem to agree that the small
amount of evidence surrounding the incident points to the Mormons.
This does not mean, however, that the scholars consider the Mormons guilty
of the offense; most of the opinions I have read recognize that there was
never enough evidence to blame any one party. They merely write,
in essence, that if they had to choose someone to blame, it would be safest
to blame the Mormons.
Non-Mormon Monte McLaws published one of the most comprehensive
articles on the subject of the assassination attempt. Addressing
evidence against Rockwell, he makes several statements. While recognizing
the fact that Rockwell was and still is the popular suspect, he writes,
“there are inconsistencies that cast a definite shadow of a doubt on Rockwell’s
guilt.”
An integral problem McLaws notes is that “any number of brooding political
enemies could have performed the deed.” This comment is especially
significant considering 1842 was an election year, and Boggs had been running
for his old position in the senate. McLaws writes that even though
there is little evidence against anyone in particular, “neither does there
exist anything but circumstantial evidence to condemn Rockwell, and much
of this can be explained away.”
B. H. Roberts, in A Comprehensive History of the Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter-day Saints, writes of a similar problem concerning official
affidavits from the time. The original affidavit, as submitted by
Boggs, “does not claim that [the Prophet] was a fugitive from justice,
or that he had fled from the state of Missouri to Illinois; but . . . that
‘the Mormon Prophet’ was a ‘citizen or resident of the state of Illinois.’”
This is in direct contradiction to the requisition made by Governor Reynolds.
Nevertheless, Governor Carlin of Illinois responded by issuing arrest warrants
for Smith and Rockwell.
In his book Orrin Porter Rockwell, Harold Schindler is very pragmatic
in how he surveys available evidence. Generally, Schindler considers
most accounts given around the time of the incident to be fact, including
those by both Mormon and anti-Mormon authors.
As are many of his peers, Schindler is hesitant to pin guilt
on anyone in particular, especially the prophet. In his opinion,
“If Rockwell did fire the shot, it would appear the decision is of his
own making.”
‡
Distortion by Boggs’ own son
Fifty years after the death of Lilburn Boggs, his own son (one of the
few overt professors of Joseph and Rockwell’s guilt) submitted a brief
biography to the Missouri Historical Review. In large part, William
Boggs’ review praises his father for his many accomplishments in framing
Missouri law and business practices. It also includes a perfect example
of the non-Mormon sentiment still circulating nearly 60 years after the
incident.
William Boggs shows a reckless disregard for fact by making
several unsubstantiated statements about the incident. Referring
to Lilburn Boggs’ attempt to exterminate the Mormons, William writes
that after being elected Governor his father was “induced” to call out
the state militia to have the Mormons removed from the state. It
was because of this act, he writes, that “the Mormons sent an emissary
to Independence to assassinate him for revenge for having them removed
from the state.”
The above statement is full of factual assumptions made in the absence
of any fact. Substantial evidence that any Mormon “sent” somebody
to kill Lilburn Boggs does not exist. In fact, that any Mormon ever
did anything akin to the assassination attempt is pure speculation.
Most amazing is William Boggs’ audacious claim to know the motive of
the purported killer. For Boggs’ statement to be true it would be
necessary for the killer to have said to William Boggs himself, something
like, “I was sent to try to kill your dad to get revenge for his expelling
the Mormons.” For such a conversation to have occurred is highly
unlikely.
Based on an overheard conversation in a bar, William Boggs also
writes, “Their prophet and leader, Jo Smith, prophesied from their temple,
that the Ex-Governor of Missouri would die by violence inside twelve months.”
He continues, claiming that in order to fulfill this prophecy, Smith hired
a man to enter Independence disguised as a laborer, steal a revolver, and
kill Boggs.
Rockwell was taken and tried, one of the few facts not invented
by William Boggs. However, according to Boggs’ story, “After a long
time the criminal got a change of venue to another county . . . where,
by the aid of counsel and money furnished by the Mormon leaders, he made
his escape in the night, but he lived to die a drunken sot and confessed
murderer.” Quite obviously, William Boggs had a conflict of
interests in his account of the assassination attempt.
‡
General sentiment among newspapers
In the months following the assassination attempt , many articles were
published in American frontier newspapers about the incident. With
little exception, the tenor of the articles was, to be gentle, anti-Mormon.
The most widely quoted articles were printed in the Quincy (Illinois) Whig.
Only two weeks after the incident, the Whig reported the “Assassination
of Ex-Governor Boggs of Missouri.” The article states, “The Governor
was alive on the 7th, but no hopes are entertained of his recovery.”
The article continues by speculating on who was responsible for the
crime:
A man was suspected, and is probably arrested before this. There
are several rumors in circulation in regard to the horrid affair.
One of which throws the crime upon the Mormons—from the fact, we suppose,
that Mr. Boggs was governor at the time, and no small degree instrumental
in driving them from the state.—Smith too, the Mormon Prophet, as we understand,
prophesied a year or so ago, his death by violent means. Hence, there
is plenty of foundation for rumor.
From very early on, the Mormons were assigned blame.
The “man suspected,” as the Quincy Whig article writes, was somebody
a Columbia (Missouri) Patriot article referred to as “Tompkins” one week
earlier. This article is more of an advertisement including a proclamation
by Governor Reynolds, offering a $300 reward for the capture and delivery
of the guilty party. Following the proclamation is a paragraph written
by a committee of Independence citizens, beginning, “Five Hundred Dollars
Reward. STOP THE MURDERER!!”
The article describes the man as “spare” and “well built.”
He is also
about 5 feet 8 inches high, [having a] thin visage, pale complexion,
regular features, keen black eye, and remarkably long, slender hand; had
on when last seen, a half worn brown or grey beaverton frock coat, a warm
cloth vest, boots considerably worn, and dark drab, smooth cast broad brimmed
hat.
This is not all the citizens knew of the mystery man.
He landed at Owens Landing, Jackson County, off the steam boat Rowena,
on the 27th day of April, and departed on the same boat, on the 29th of
the same month, for Lexington, Mo., and on the evening of the assassination,
was seen in the vicinity of Independence—which with many other corroborating
circumstances, leaves no doubt of his guilt.
Of the Columbia Patriot article, McLaws writes, “Unfortunately, the
‘corroborating’ evidence seems to not have been made available to the newspapers,
and its nature remains shrouded in mystery . . . [despite the fact that
they were] absolutely sure of Tompkins’ guilt.” He goes on
to write that despite their convincing evidence, this “Tompkins” was fully
acquitted and they turned their attention to Rockwell instead.
‡
John C. Bennett and church ridicule
John C. Bennett was a prominent church member excommunicated in July
of 1842. Following his excommunication, he led the crusade to provide
evidence against Smith and his “accomplice” along the American frontier,
particularly in Missouri, Illinois and Iowa.
As soon as he left the church, Bennett began “threatening . .
. [to] expose the villainy of Joe and his satellites.” According
to the Warsaw (Illinois) Signal, Bennett planned to begin disclosing secret
truths relating to the Boggs incident. He states that when Rockwell
suddenly started for Missouri from Nauvoo one day, Bennett inquired of
Smith, who reported, “[Rockwell has] gone to Missouri TO FULFILL PROPHECIES!”
Bennett also claims that, having arrived in Nauvoo just as news
of the incident began to spread, Smith rewarded Rockwell with “a carriage
and a horse, or horses . . . and he has suddenly become very fresh of money,
and lives in style.” The article goes on to state that Bennett can
prove all of these allegations and will do so in affidavit. This
is all the proof they need, writes the Signal, to assign blame to “Jo Smith.”
According to Church history Bennett appeared before a city council
two months before the drawing of Boggs’ affidavit implicating Smith and
Rockwell. Before a Nauvoo committee he stated that the Prophet was innocent
and just in all his dealings. However, only weeks before the July
20 affidavit from Boggs, Bennett began to circulate many of the stories
to be published in the Sangamo Journal, later used by the Warsaw Signal.
In keeping with his notoriously shady character, Bennett changed his story
to implicate his enemies.
Circumstances taken from John C. Bennett’s affidavit (on which much
of the Rockwell accusation was based), according to McLaws, were insufficient
to warrant even an indictment by a grand jury. Further of Bennett,
McLaws writes,
In reporting a conversation with Rockwell [Bennett] made the following
statement, which is typical of the whole book [Bennett’s anti-Mormon History
of the Saints]. “. . . And two persons in Nauvoo told me that you
told them that you had been over the upper part of the Missouri . . . I
know nothing of what happened, as I was not there. I draw my own
inferences . . . I believe that Joe ordered you to do it . . .” He
admits that he only believed, and that his own belief was based on hearsay.
B. H. Roberts writes that Bennett’s public proof was based on
a letter printed in the Nauvoo Wasp, a publication edited by Joseph’s brother,
William Smith. The letter concludes by referring to the assassination
attempt as a “noble deed.” The same volume includes the following
disclaimer: “We admit the foregoing communication to please our correspondent.”
Despite the fact that it is merely a printed letter, Bennett considers
this sufficient proof of Mormon malice.
‡
Anti-Mormon newspapers and their reports
Once Mormon-friendly, Quincy was among the towns whose publications
showed an anti-Mormon bias during the Boggs assassination scandal.
In an August 13 article, the Quincy Whig reported the apprehending of Rockwell,
adding the description, “he turned deathly pale, and exhibited every symptom
of alarm and guilt.” Of Rockwell’s assertion that he was 15 miles
from Independence on May 6, the Whig writes, “This we conceive is rather
confirmatory than exculpatory; at all events it proves that Rockwell was
at the region of the country at the time of the attempted murder.”
The same article proceeds to list “the whole circumstances” of
evidence against Boggs, consisting almost entirely of claims made by the
dubious Bennett about the incident. These claims include Rockwell’s
disappearance and return to Nauvoo, his sudden rise to prominence, and
his guilt-ridden countenance when arrested.
The biased writer then concludes, “We are very much mistaken,
if those taken with what other proof might arise on identifying Rockwell
in Missouri, would not consign him and his villainous instigator to the
gallows.”
As if this was not enough, another article on the same page includes
this utterly hostile commentary:
Our citizens were in hopes that the scamp [Joseph] would be taken or
else make open resistance; no termination of the affair could be less satisfactory
than the one which has taken place [Joseph had eluded arrest by Illinois
authorities]. If he had resisted, we should have had the sport of
driving him and his worthy clan out of the state en masse, but as it is
we are mortified that there is not efficacy in the law to bring such a
scamp to justice. We hope that our Executive will spare no effort
hereafter to bring about this consumations [sic], devoutly to be wished.
A Baltimore-based national news digest called Niles’ National Register
also took pains to print the least-flattering accounts possible of the
incidents surrounding the trial of Smith and Rockwell. The paper
reports on September 30, 1843 that “there was not sufficient proof adduced
against [Rockwell] to justify an indictment for shooting ex-Governor Boggs;
and the grand jury, therefore, did not indict him for the offence [sic].”
However, on the same page the editors include a Missouri Reporter article
that mentions some Missourians’ desires to “avenge the blood of any assaults
made upon the citizens by the Mormons.” They also vow to ignore all
laws given by officers elected by Mormons, because the Mormons “have complete
control of the country, being a numerical majority.”
Another anti-Mormon paper, the St. Louis Republican, published an article
which was reprinted by Niles’ National Register closer in time to the incident.
The writer of the article has no trouble convicting both Smith and Rockwell
before any trials take place: “The report that Joe Smith and his
accomplice in the attempted assassination of Gov. Boggs, had gone to England,
is erroneous.” The men are not “alleged assassins” or even “purported
criminals,” but “Joe Smith and his accomplice in the [crime].”
The St. Louis Republican, situated hundreds of miles southwest of the intrigue,
seems to know more about the trial and apparent guilt of the two men, than
the Illinois judicial system.
The same article closes with the assurance that “[Joseph’s] influence
is on the wane; his sun has already reached its meridian height, and is
now on the decline.” Joseph Smith’s influence waning or “on
the decline?” To comment on this statement would be superfluous.
The worst of all the dogma came out of the Warsaw Signal.
Apparently the people, or at least journalists, of Warsaw (a close neighbor
to Nauvoo) utterly hated Mormons. In one article, the Signal describes
Joseph as setting “the laws at defiance, and never fear[ing] being apprehended.”
The writer is convinced that “to bring him to justice will be a matter
of impossibility.”
The writer also says, “the Mormons are irresponsible to our laws
. . . [and] can only be punished by consent of their Prophet. This
is the pass we have come to,” says the writer, “and yet there are white
men to be found, who tell us that there is no danger to be apprehended
from the Mormons.” This is the kind of writing, referring to
the Mormons as “dangerous,” that made a fair trial for Smith and Rockwell
difficult, and fair lives for the rest of the Saints impossible.
The Signal was also the first newspaper to feature Bennett’s plans
to destroy the Prophet and alienate his followers. As one can readily
deduce from the following excerpt, the Warsaw Signal was proud of its anti-Mormon
stance. I quote a large portion of the article for purpose of effect:
We understand that Gen. Bennett, who our readers are aware has been
ousted from his place in the Mormon church; has commenced writing for the
Sangamo Journal a series of communications, going to show the rascality
of Joe Smith and his clan, and the dangerous designs which he is capable
of forming and executing. The General asks not to be believed on
his own assertions, but proves matters as he goes; he is a man of great
energy and perseverance and we should not be surprised if he made the Mormons
feel like stuck hogs for a few months to come.—Give it to them General,
we like to see it—although there is no doubt that you yourself deserve
a few SMALL compliments.
‡
Conclusion
Statements like the above created, or added to, a prevalent bias against
Mormons along the American frontier while the Saints there resided.
Although this bias was not enough to fool the Illinois State judicial system,
it was enough to create a serious hubbub that lasted for several months
and inspired several attempts at arrest.
This sentiment was the cause of greater persecution for the Mormons
generally, and Joseph Smith, specifically. Furthermore, the noise
created by the media in the 1840s over the incident has echoed continually
since. Believe it or not, there are those today who still believe
that Orrin Porter Rockwell rode to Independence on orders from the Prophet
and shot, but failed to, kill Lilburn W. Boggs.
Harold Schindler writes a fine summary of the general conclusion
drawn by historians on the matter: “Whether Orrin Porter Rockwell
fired the shot which nearly snuffed out the life of Lilburn W. Boggs is
a matter for conjecture.”
However, RLDS scholar Heman Smith expresses an opinion on the matter
closer to my own: “When it is considered that all the machinery of the
courts was in the hands of enemies of the church this whole affair about
O. P. Rockwell attempting to murder ex-Governor Boggs and Joseph Smith
being accessory before the fact, partakes of the nature of a huge joke.”
Monte B. McLaws, “The Attempted Assassination of Missouri’s Ex-Governor,
Lilburn W. Boggs,” Missouri Historical Review, 60.1 (October 1965): 59.
Ibid.
Harold Schindler, Orrin Porter Rockwell: man of God, son of
thunder (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1966): 80.
William M. Boggs, “A short biographical sketch of Lilburn W.
Boggs, by his son,” Missouri Historical Review, 4.2 (January 1910): 107.
Ibid., 108.
Ibid., 109.
Quincy Whig, May 21, 1842.
Ibid.
Columbia Patriot, May 14, 1842.
Ibid.
Ibid. Italics added.
McLaws, 55.
Warsaw Signal, July 9, 1842.
Ibid.
Ibid.
McLaws, 59.
Nauvoo Wasp, quoted from B. H. Roberts, A Comprehensive History
of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Vol. II (Salt Lake
City: Church Deseret News Press, 1930): 154.
Quincy Whig, August 13, 1842.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Niles’ National Register, September 30, 1843.
Ibid., October 2, 1842.
Ibid.
Warsaw Signal, September 17, 1842.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Harold Schindler, Orrin Porter Rockwell: man of God, son of
thunder (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1966): 79.
Heman C. Smith. “Mormon troubles in Missouri,” Missouri Historical
Review, 4.4 (1910): 251.