Crisis at Kirtland: Episode 4 Sec. 4

OliverCowdery.com: The Premier Web-site for Early Mormon History

CRISIS AT KIRTLAND
Episode Four:
Murderous Threats and Plots, 1835-1837

by Dale R. Broadhurst
---( March 2001 )---

Intro | Sec 1 | Sec 2 | Sec 3 | Sec 4 | Sec 5 | Sec 6 | Sec 7 | Sec 8

(This Web-Page is Still Under Construction)

CRISIS AT KIRTLAND IV.

MURDEROUS THREATS & PLOTS

Section 4: Information & Analysis
From Early Geauga Co. Residents

4-A. Grandison Newell Statement 1
Painesville Telegraph
Friday, May 26, 1837

TO SIDNEY RIGDON - LETTER No. 2.

It is an old remark, that a man is known by the company he keeps. Your bosom associate is the imposture, Smith, the impious fabricator of gold bibles -- the blasphemous forger of revelations, with which he swindles ignorant people out of their hard-earned property. His audacity does not stop with the property.

Comment 1: Given the paucity of available information on the motivation and activities of Mentor farmer and businessman, Grandison Newell, it is still speculative for the modern student to assign firm reasons for his anti-Mormonism. Newell discloses a little of his thinking here, however, and some inferences may be drawn from what he has to say. His major objection against the Mormons, as stated here, is that they follow a religious leader who "swindles ignorant people out of their hard-earned property." No doubt Newell is here speaking primarily of migrant Mormon converts who have consecrated their possessions to the Church and gathered to live in Kirtland as virtual paupers. Newell may have simply abhorred, on principal, this Mormon rejection of the contemporary social and economic systems, and especially so when the Church tended to place ultimate control over its entire resources into the hands of a few top leaders. In a short seven years Newell had seen the local Mormons move from a community of goods, to observing a rigid law of total consecration, to living under a less exacting system of personal stewardship and incipient communitarianism. But no matter the system, it put wealth into the hands of Joseph Smith, Jr. at the expense of all others -- or so it seemed to Grandison Newell. He no doubt listened with considerable interest to the stories of ex-Mormons who walked away from the Church with nothing in their pockets, after giving that establishment all their resources. This, in part then was the basis for Newell's general opposition to the new religion.

Emboldened by success in his wicked schemes, he hesitates not to use his authority as the revelator of the will of Heaven, to incite his followers to remove those who have opposed his treachery and fraud, by assassination. Deluded and frantic by his pretended revelation, that it was the will of God, that I should be destroyed, two of the saints of the latter day, by concert, and under the express direction of their prophet, this high priest of satan, meet in the night, at a little distance from my house, with loaded rifles, and pistols, with a determination to kill me. But as they draw near the spot where the bloody deed was to be performed, they trembled under the awful responsibility of committing murder, a little cool reflection in darkness and silence, broke the spell of the false prophet -- they were restored to their right minds, and are now rejoicing that they were not left to the power of the devil and co-adjutor Smith, to stain their souls with a crime so horrible.

Comment 2: Newell's more immediate reason (or at least the one he cares to provide his readers here) for opposing the Mormons is that he believes their top leader to be a perpetrator of assassination. Unfortunately, for his own cause, Newell is unable or unwilling to provide any examples of this alleged murderous inclination of Joseph Smith's, other than the story of his own attempted murder. There is no reason to disbelieve the fact that Elders Marvel C. Davis and Solomon W. Denton did approach Newell's home once (or, more likely, twice) with an intent to kill their Gentile opponent. But Newell makes a huge leap in assumption in moving from the instance of the two Mormons' murder plot to the certainty he expresses in placing the blame upon the shoulders of Joseph Smith, Jr. No doubt Newell learned of the murder attempt(s) from one (or both) of the would-be killers, a long time after the event(s). By then the conspirators had plenty of time to review their respective stories and to think of ways in which to lessen their own guilty involvement in the failed plot. If one (or both) of them informed Newell that Smith was the direct instigator of the act, Newell should have taken all these circumstances into consideration and sought additional evidence to establish the facts of the matter, before blasting Smith with such allegations in the public press.

While these scenes were planned by the prophet, and promises of great temporal and spiritual good lavished upon these two men, by him, to stimulate them to assassinate me in my own house, in the midst of my family, and in a moment when I was defenceless and suspecting no danger, you was busy in preaching the infallibility of the prophet, and with an impudence and volubility peculiar to yourself, sustaining his ridiculous and heaven-daring pretensions to the power of working miracles. And it requires more charity than a good man is required to possess, to believe, that while you were clamorously holding him forth as a prophet, you did not know that he was exerting his influence over the bewildered followers to procure my death, because I fearlessly exposed to the contempt and indignation of an outraged community, your flagitious plans.

Is it not time for the People to give attention to impostors who preach murder and assassination by pretended revelation from heaven.
GRANDISON NEWELL.

Comment 3: Newell here betrays the primary reason for having this letter published. There was likely a "letter no. 1," a private missive, in which the anti-Mormon sought Rigdon's assistance in confirming the essentials of the 1835 murder plot and in publicly denouncing Smith as a bloody-handed instigator of secret works of murder. For one reason or another Rigdon had not taken Newell's bait. Perhaps he saw the man as continuing to press for his (Rigdon's) conviction on illegal banking charges, regardless of whether he denounced Smith or not. Perhaps Rigdon truly could see no blame in anything Smith had done in the matter. Whatever the case may be, Newell has here given up an recruiting Rigdon to his cause against Smith and is offering the second-in-command among the Mormons a foretaste of the pressure he was prepared to now bring against the Mormon leaders. And, of course, if Rigdon had refused to join in Newell's plans to prosecute Smith on attempted murder charges, then he (Rigdon) must have already told Smith of those plans. Grandison Newell had nothing to lose in going public with his latest project to "get Smith," and especially so in that, by the time this letter was sent to the newspaper, Smith appears to have come out of hiding and to have been ready to comply with the April 13th writ demanding his arrest and appearance before the judge in Painesville.

4-B. Grandison Newell Statement 2
Painesville Telegraph
Friday, June 30, 1837

Mr. Editor. --
I claimed the protection of the law of the land against designs upon my life, harbored, as I believe, by Joseph Smith, the pretended prophet. Upon the force of the testimony adduced the judges were equally decided, and of course my appeal for and against assassination was lost. The president judge in sustaining his views of the testimony insinuated that my hatred, not my fear, induced the prosecution. I owe it to myself and friends to show, if possible, that the imputation is groundless. I think this will very fully appear from a candid review of the more important parts of the testimony.

Comment 1: Newell's language here, "the judges were equally decided," raises the interesting possibility that the June 9 trial at Chardon was heard by a tribunal. It was not uncommon for judges in those days to ask fellow justices to sit with them upon the bench, but even so, the decision of Judge Humphrey should have been final, no matter what views any visiting judges may have expressed at the end of the trial. On the other hand, perhaps what he is really saying is that Justice Flint, at the hearing was, "decided" in one direction and that Justice Humphrey, at the trial, was "decided" in the other. This interpretation of Newell's words makes the best sense. Following this introduction to his published self-defense, Newell attempts to demonstrate that his inducement in bringing the charges against Smith was not simply hatred of the man, but also a genuine fear for his own life. By all accounts, Newell has failed to make his cases here, even in the eyes of several subsequent generations. About all that modern historians recall of all his words regarding the matter, is that Newell passed on the fact that Judge Humphrey "insinuated" that Newell's hatred "induced the prosecution." The net result is that the modern reader of the modern historians comes away from a survey of this story knowing only that Smith was acquitted and that the trial judge attributed Newell's motivation to hatred rather than fear. In fact, all of this is substantially true. And, it is just as much a fact that such a summary totally overlooks what really happened in the court room!

Denton swore that Smith [asked] him and Davis to kill me, and [enforced his] revelation by appeals to the Bible, and [by saying] that it was the will of God. Is Denton entitled to credit? If he is, the charge is established. But admit, a moment, that suspicions attach to Denton, then, is his evidence corroborated by any other witnesses? Sidney Rigdon, however much to be doubted on other occasions, is a credible witness when he gives testimony against the prophet. He said, about two years ago, information came to him from some quarter, but from whom he could not remember, that Davis and Denton entertained designs against my life; that he believed this report, and informed Smith of it; and that afterwards Smith told him that through his influence Davis and Denton had laid aside their purpose. Now the fact that Davis and Denton entertained a purpose to kill me, is proved by Rigdon, a "saint of the latter day," and by the confession of Smith, as sworn by Rigdon. One point sworn to by Denton is thus fully established by the corroborating attestation of Rigdon.

Comment 2: Newell asks "Is Denton entitled to credit?" and the likely answer is "yes, and no." From all the evidence available regarding the matter, it is established beyond a reasonable doubt that Marvel C. Davis did recruit Solomon W. Denton to help him murder Grandison Newell. It is almost as well established that the two of them set out to do this deed with the assurance of God's approbation. It is also established that some of the Mormon leaders knew of the plot, at one point in time or another in 1835. What Newell's attorney failed to demonstrate was that Joseph Smith, Jr. was the instigator of the conspiracy. Without corroborating testimony from M. C. Davis, Mrs. Davis, or Sidney Rigdon, Denton's sworn avowal was simply did not amount to proof that Smith ordered the assassination attempt. Grandison Newell might here demonstrate that he prosecuted Smith out of a desire to see justice done, rather than out of simple hatred, or even simple fear, but that fact still does reach far enough to touch Joseph Smith, Jr.

The only remaining question on which there is any doubt, is -- did Smith investigate this design? Denton declares that he did. Is Denton's testimony strengthened and supported by circumstances, and by other testimony?

Can anything be drawn from other parts of the testimony corroborative of Denton, on this point? Look at the relation of the parties. -- Denton was a mere boy in Smith's family, entirely under his control, placing in him implicit confidence as a prophet, and taught a blind obedience to all his commands. If Smith designed to assassinate me, could he have found one better trained to execute his wicked purpose? And is it not most unlikely that this boy would conceive so bold a scheme of murder without being instigated by some higher and more experienced leader? The thing is wholly improbable.

Comment 3: Again, Newell's logic is compelling, but all the fruit of its works does not amount to a proof of Smith;s guilt in the affair. It could just as easily be argued that the impressionable, young Denton was swayed entirely by the hidden guile of M. C. Davis, that Davis convinced the young man that Smith, had ordered the killing, etc. It could also be argued that later on Denton added in a false story of Smith having personally assured him that it was right to kill Newell. All Newell has established so far is that Denton was following Davis' instructions and that he may have believed that those instructions came from the Mormon leader.

It was against the leaders in this imposition that I directed my opposition, not on account of their religion, but because they used a religious cloak to defraud ignorant and honest men, and altogether through the policy of Smith and Rigdon, it assumed on their part a personal controversy with me, and they unquestionably harbored against me an implacable hatred. The scheme of my assassination originated in deep revenge for supposed injustice.

Comment 4: Newell's remarks here mostly just restate what he said at the beginning of his letter. And though his words may sound plausible, it appears that Grandison Newell still has not identified a solid reason as to why Smith might want him killed. The most that might be distilled from his statement is that perhaps Newell was assisting or avenging various ex-Mormons or neighbors of the Mormons who had sustained losses as victims of Smith's greed and lust for power. But none of this provides a believable motive for Smith to have Newell secretly murdered -- and so must the judge in Chardon have thought, back in 1837.

Denton and Davis were strangers to me, and they had so little personal interest at the time in Mormonism, and no personal hate to me, that the supposition that the design originated with them does violence to all probability. When we look to the circumstances surrounding Smith and Denton, they all point to Smith as the author. He was the bold forger of the Mormon fraud, and that required a heart so thoroughly depraved, that it is now prepared to sustain it by the commission of the most atrocious crimes.

The closer we examine the subject the more probable Denton's testimony appears. Orson Hyde swore that as late as February last, Smith said in the office of their Bank, that Newell, if he commenced suits for unlawful banking against any of the Mormons, ought to be put where the crows could not find him; that it would be no sin to kill him, and accompanied these declarations by a long lamentation of the wrongs heaped upon their society. Now to a plain man whose mind has not been carried beyond the light of common sense, Hyde's evidence would be a confirmation of Denton's. Denton's testimony was, that Smith in the spring of 1835, advised him to kill me. Now if Smith gave similar advice last February, does not that fact strengthen the statements of Denton. That Smith advised to my assassination in February, is fully established by Hyde, a Mormon witness. For the defense he was credible. If it were clearly established that Smith entertained designs last February, and Denton swore he entertained the same designs two years before; who cannot see that establishing the fact in February renders the testimony of the existence of a similar design two years before quite probable. And yet the corroboration of Hyde was wholly disregarded, and his testimony laid aside as having no weight in the case. The corroboration of Hyde, and the [past evidences from] the relation of Denton and Smith to each other, and to the Mormon Society, coming in and of the positive testimony of Denton, left a full conviction on the [minds] of [nine] tenths of the very large assembly attendant on the trial, that Denton [told] the truth.

Comment 5: Here Newell is no doubt outlining the trial strategy of his own lawyer in prosecuting the case against Smith. Faced with the facts that Warren Parrish had nothing useful to say, that M. C. Davis could not be found, and that Mormons like Hyde, Johnson, and Rigdon were still sitting on the fence, unwilling to take a firm stand against the President of their Church, all Esquire Paine could hope for was to wring out enough bits and pieces of testimony from the witnesses in order to show that Smith was a murderous fellow who had identified Newell as a target of his malice. Unfortunately (for Newell) not enough evidence was to be had, no matter how many such bits and pieces were brought forth for the judge's consideration.

The objections against Denton's credibility because he could not relate the precise language that passed between him and Davis when they met, and agreed to abandon the plan of murder, hatched by the prophet, or mark the rail over which they climbed into the lot, were not sufficient to discredit him. -- When the human mind is under a deep and terrific excitement, will it mark all the little incidents that take place? Will not the main subject of the excitement engross the attention to the neglect of all unimportant circumstances? And yet, because Denton could not point out the rail over which he and Davis passed, and could not repeat the exact words of both -- his Honor, the President Judge, cast away his evidence as worthless. To my mind this course was unphilosophical. Nothing could be bro't against Denton's moral character, except that he was so far deluded as to harbor for a moment the black designs of the prophet.

From this view of the subject, I confidently trust that my friends and the public will clearly see that I was in danger from Smith: -- that I had good cause to fear him, and that in denying me the defence of the law, my rights were disregarded, and a precedent set -- full of danger to the community.
GRANDISON NEWELL.

4-B. Samuel F. Whitney Statement
Naked Truths About Mormonism #1
(Oakland: Arthur B. Deming, Jan, 1888)

"Statement of Rev. S. F. Whitney"

I was born in Fairfield, Herkimer County, N.Y., March 17, 1804.... I came to Kirtland, O., in 1826, where my brother, N. K. Whitney kept store....

I was well acquainted with Grandison Newel, before and after the Mormons arrived in Kirtland. He was a go-ahead fellow and carried through what he undertook. He was a public-spirited man and tried to break down Mormonism by legal prosecution. Jo Smith claimed he had a revelation that Newel must be killed. I heard M. K. [sic] Davis say he went up to Newel's house, and when he stepped out of the door, before going to bed, he tried to raise his rifle and shoot him but he had not the strength. Newel told me when he was coming home from Painesville one night, he was in deep thought and his team passed the road where he should turn off, he continued on to the next road and escaped being murdered as men were waiting to kill him on the road he usually came from Painesville...

Comments: Kirtland resident Samuel F. Whitney, the brother of Bishop N. K. Whitney, supplies the information of there having been two attempts upon Grandison Newell's life. The most likely sequence was that on the first attempt Davis and Denton tired of waiting for their intended prey to come home at night and decided to make a second attempt shortly thereafter. In the course of the second attempt the men "had not the strength" to carry out an assassination, and gave up the project. It may be significant that Whitney attributes no other methods to Newell's anti-Mormon activism than "legal prosecution." While such harassment in the courts may have angered Smith terribly, it seems doubtful that this alone would have caused the Mormon leader to attempt Newell's murder.

4-C. Christopher G. Crary Recollections
Pioneer and Personal Reminiscences
(Marshalltown Iowa: Marshall Printing Company, 1893)

[p. 34]
There were probably nearly 2,000 Mormons in the place [Kirtland] in 1837, composed of all classes -- good, bad and indifferent. There was a large class of ignorant and fanatical people who placed full confidence in Joseph Smith's revelations and stood ready to execute his bidding, even to the taking of life. Smith was once arrested, taken to Chardon, and tried for inciting his followers to murder Grandison Newell. Marvel C. Davis and a Mr. Lake swore that they were ordered by Smith to assassinate him, and waylaid him for that purpose, but by some mishap failed to fulfill the will of the Lord as revealed to Smith. Mormon testimony not being first class, or by some technical flaw, Smith was acquitted...

Comments: Crary's account was published many years after the events it speaks of transpired and he probably was mistaken in some of his memories. There is no other evidence implicating a "Mr. Lake" (Elder John Lake, Jr.?) in the murder plot, nor is there any record of a "Mr. Lake" having testified in the Painesville hearing or the Chardon trial. Crary's identification of M. C. Davis' full name being "Marvel C. Davis" is a helpful recollection, however. It is certainly possible that Davis did go about Ohio admitting his role in the 1835 murder plot, this is especially believable following his eventual separation from the Latter Day Saints.

4-C. William Rockafellow's Statement
Naked Truths About Mormonism #2
(Oakland, Arthur B. Deming, April 1888)

"William Rockafellow"

... I resided in Kirtland after the Mormons had mostly left. Leonard Rich, a Mormon elder, told me he saw Jo Smith walk on the water. He said planks had been fixed in the water and one had been removed so Jo went down where he got out of the water. Jo said he could have walked if the brothers' and sisters' faith had not failed. He told me Jo Smith had a revelation that Grandison Newell must be killed, and he was the man indicated to do it. Rich refused and Jo engaged M. C. Davis, a gunsmith, who went on horseback and said he saw Newell sitting with his back to a window reading a newspaper, but could not shoot him. He told prophet Jo, Newell was not at home..."

When I came to Kirtland small boys carried from $5.00 to $1,000 in Mormon money. It was often said if the Mormons had been honest they might have [ ------] prospered.

[Signed] WILLIAM ROCKAFELLOW.

Witnessed by:
Cora Parsons.
Russell, Geauga Co., Ohio,
March 19, 1885.

Comments: Rockafellow's late statement is not particularly helpful in establishing the facts. No otehr evidence identifies Elder Leonard Rich as having been involved in the 1835 murder plot, even as an unsuccessful recruit of Joseph Smith, Jr. Rockafellow is correct in identifying M. C. Davis as being a gunsmith. It sems odd that he makes no mention of Denton in this account.

Return to "Crisis at Kirtland" Introduction

Return to: OliverCowdery.com

last revised: Mar. 2, 2001