MORMON JESUITISM.
Denial of Mrs. Davison's statement in reference to the origin of the Mormon's Bible—The truth of her statement corroborated by a letter from the Rev. John Storrs—By another from the Rev. D. R. Austin.
Up to the period, in which the preceding sketch was published in the columns of the Episcopal Recorder, no attempt was made, as far as our information extends, to contradict the statement of Mrs. Davison, or in any way to invalidate her testimony. Shortly after the appearance of the sketch above referred to, a small pamphlet was issued by one of the Mormon ministers, who, we understand, bears the relation of Pastor to one of the societies of that people, established in Philadelphia, who call themselves "The church of the latter day saints."
Although we do not think, that the truth, or falsehood of Mormonism, in any degree turns upon the correctness, or incorrectness of the foregoing statement of Mrs. Davison, for deceit and imposture are enstamped upon every feature of this monster, evoked by a money digger and a juggler from the shades of darkness—still if her statement be correct and is to be relied upon, the facts brought out by Mrs. Davison would seem to be one of those singular developments of divine Providence, by which impostors are confounded, and their devices brought to nought; and therefore it may be well to look for a moment at the arguments that are offered to disprove, what the writer of the pamphlet just referred to denominates "The Spaulding Story." The pamphlet itself abounds with low and scurrilous remark—just such as we should think would be likely to emanate from a Mormon leader. The principal points upon which the writer rests his argument, are,
First. The worthless character of Dr. P. Hurlbut—who was deputed by a meeting called at New Salem to visit Mrs. Davison and obtain from her the manuscript written by her husband, Rev. Mr. Spaulding.
Secondly. That Mrs. Davison neither wrote nor signed the letter published in the Boston Recorder, but that it was the production of the Rev. Mr. Storrs.
Thirdly. That Sidney Rigdon did not join the Mormons nor have any connection with them, till after the Book of Mormon was published: and did not reside at Pittsburgh at the time he was supposed to have done so by Mrs. Davison.
1. In reference to the first point: this writer depicts the character of Dr. Hurlbut, as made up of dissoluteness, depravity, and crime. He was for a considerable period a zealous Mormon, was ordained an elder, became a distinguished preacher among them, and continued so, until they could endure his vices no longer and cast him out—then he turned against them, and endeavoured to expose their deception and imposture. Whether this be a slander or true testimony, we have no means of ascertaining. But we do not see, that in either case it makes any thing for Mormonism, or in the least affects the truth of Mrs. Davison's statement. We can readily believe that a system of imposture like that of Mormonism, would have charms for just such a man as Hurlbut is described.
2. The assertion that Mrs. Davison did not write nor subscribe the letter published in the Boston Recorder, furnishes a fair specimen of the Jesuitical tricks resorted to, to keep up this imposture. A letter is inserted in the pamphlet above referred to, written by Mr. John Haven, in which a conversation is related, said to have taken place between Mrs. Davison and the brother of the writer, and which is calculated and evidently designed to carry the impression that Mrs. Davison utterly disavowed the authorship of the letter, published in her name in relation to the Spaulding manuscript. To satisfy myself on the truth of this point, I addressed a letter to the Rev. Mr. Storrs, an extract from which I will subjoin:
"Hollistown, June 28th, 1841.
"The results of my inquiries from Dr. Ely and from Mr. Austin confirm me in the opinion the Spaulding manuscript was the foundation of the foolish affair called the Mormon Bible. This is my opinion though we may not be able to prove it directly. I have never supposed, I have never said that they were one and the same thing. Only that it was the foundation of the Mormon Bible: supposing that its story, its incidents, and names, gave the Mormon leaders the idea of their own book, and supposing that from it they manufactured the book about which so much has been said. So then in using the word 'identical' in relation to the manuscript and Smith's book, it must be understood in a modified sense.
"We may never be able to prove by direct testimony that such was the foundation of the Mormon Bible. But we have circumstantial evidence enough. The communication made to the world by Mrs. Davison, it seems to me settles the question.
"And then this testimony is not at all invalidated by the letter written from this town by Mr. John Haven, and published in the pamphlet you sent me, entitled "the Origin of the Spaulding Story concerning the manuscript found." And here observe the sophistry of this communication. The questions and answers from the letter are as follows: 'Did you, Mrs. Davison, write a letter to John Storrs, giving an account of the origin of the Book of Mormon? Ans. I did not. Ques. Did you sign your name to it? Ans. I did not; neither did I see the letter till I saw it in the Boston Recorder: the letter was never brought to me to sign. Ques. What agency had you in having this letter sent to Mr. Storrs? Ans. D. R. Austin came to my house and asked me some questions, took some minutes on paper, and from these wrote the letter. Ques. Is what is written in the letter true? Ans. In the main it is.' The quibbling here is palpable. It is very true Mrs. Davison did not write a letter to me, and what is more, of course she did not sign it. But this she did do, and just what I wrote you in my former letter I supposed she did: she did sign her name to the original copy as prepared from her statement by Mr. Austin. This original copy is now in the hands of Mr. Austin. This he told me last week. But again, mark another and important thing in this catechism. It is the distinct avowal after all, and published by the Mormons themselves that what she had said was true. "Is what is written in the letter true? Ans. "In the main it is." It is just as you or any other honest man under similar circumstances would affirm such a production to be the truth. In fact she does not as I understand from the questions and answers disavow a single statement made in the communication to which her name was affixed. But she affirms it all as a verity. I must confess my wonder that the Mormons should ever have published the above quotations. It must be that they thought their quibble about Mrs. D. not signing the identical piece of paper sent to me, would cover up the great and important fact that, she affirmed that all that was sent to me was the truth. So then the circumstantial evidence contained in the communication published in the Recorder some few years ago that the Spaulding manuscript was the origin of the golden Bible remains sound.
"But another thing: I expect we shall never be able to lay our hands on the identical manuscript, and thus prove by comparison in the sight of all that one was the foundation or origin of the other. But be this as it may, the very fact that it is lost, is evidence in my mind that the manuscript was the foundation of the Mormon book. Dr. Hurlbut took the manuscript. It is reported in Missouri, that he sold it for four hundred dollars; that the manuscript is not to be found. I must confess that my suspicions are, that a deep laid plot has been consummated to obtain possession of the manuscript, and thus preclude all possibility of its ever being compared by competent men with the Book of Mormon. At least my suspicions will not be removed until the manuscript—and the whole manuscript—is returned to the hands of its owner. I am suspicious that a deep and long game has been played by the Mormons to obtain and destroy the manuscript. Some one has got that manuscript and has got it secreted from the public eye. And if that manuscript cannot be found, in my mind will be proved that the Mormons have conveyed it away. The burden of proof is on the Mormons. To them it belongs to produce the manuscript. If they have got the manuscript and will not produce it, it is plain they fear its publication to the world will destroy their pretended revelation.
"Your brother in the Lord,
John Storrs."
I also wrote to the Rev. Mr. Austin for information, who returned me an answer from which I make the following extracts.
"Sturbridge, Mass., June 28th, 1841.
"The circumstances which called forth the letter published in the Boston Recorder in April 1839, were stated by Mr. Storrs in the introduction to that article. At his request I obtained from Mrs. Davison a statement of the facts contained in that letter, and wrote them out precisely as she related them to me. She then signed the paper with her own hand which I have now in my possession. Every fact as stated in that letter was related to me by her in the order they are set down. (There is one word mis-printed in the published letter—instead of "woman preacher," on the second column, it should be Mormon preacher.)
"That the pamphlet published to refute the letter should contain false statements is not surprising. A scheme got up in falsehood must be sustained by lies. But the truth of the statements contained in that letter of Mrs. D. will remain unshaken, notwithstanding all the Mormons can do. It gives a very clear, consistent and rational account of the origin of that abominable piece of deception and fraud.
"Mrs. Davison is now living about twelve miles from this place; is an aged woman and very infirm. Dr. Hurlbut was an entire stranger to her, and obtained her confidence by means of the letters of introduction which he brought from gentlemen in New-Salem. He promised to return the manuscript in a short time. Mrs. D. would only consent to lend it to him. He stated some time after he had received the manuscript that he had made $400 out of it. Mrs. D. has not the least doubt now but that he obtained it in order to sell it to the Mormons. If Dr. H. can be found, I have no doubt but that the manuscript may be traced into the hands of the Mormons—which would be about as satisfactory as to find it. If they purchased it of him, (of which there is no doubt) and refuse to present it, the reason is obvious. I can give no information with respect to the present residence of Dr. H. I suppose light on this point may be obtained at New Salem.
"It is really wonderful how this most palpable delusion has spread. The foundation of it is the most weak and absurd of any delusion ever palmed upon the world. It is remarkable how these manias all tend to one point. Perfectionism, Unionism, and Mormonism, as they have been developed in this region, have all aimed directly at licentiousness. They feed and fatten upon one base passion. Mormonism will doubtless have its day and then die. Something quite as absurd will spring up in its place. There is an appetite in the community which craves such food. If it can be garnished with the name of religion, it will go into more extensive use.
"This is one of the deepest plots of the devil. He has placed his golden hook under the name of a "golden book" in the nose of these miserable fanatics, and is leading them in the direct way to destruction.
"Yours in the bonds of christian fellowship,
"D. R. Austin."
3. In relation to the assertion, that Sidney Rigdon did not embrace Mormonism till after the publication of the Book of Mormon; and that he did not reside in Pittsburgh at the time stated by Mrs. Davison, we have some remarks to offer in a subsequent chapter.
If Rigdon did not reside there at the time, still in accordance with Mrs. D's suggestion, a copy might have been made of Mr. Spaulding's manuscript, which subsequently came into his hands. This copy, even if Rigdon had no hand in preparing the Book of Mormon, and was wholly ignorant of the existence of Mr. Spaulding's manuscript, might have reached Smith in some other way. It is enough to know that the one was the foundation of the other, no matter who the agents in the imposture are. Even if it could be proved that Rigdon had no knowledge of the manuscript, and no hand whatever in preparing the Book of Mormon, this would in no respect invalidate Mrs. Davison's testimony, or show that Mr. Spaulding's historical romance was not the foundation of that book. Mrs. Davison merely conjectures that Rigdon must have been the agent—and that from circumstantial evidence—but she knows that the outline of her husband's historical romance is actually the basis—the manifest substratum of the Mormon Bible.
This point is made very clear by her testimony, that, in some way or other, Smith and his coadjutors obtained a copy of Mr. Spaulding's manuscript, which evidently forms the basis of this pretended bible, and fastens upon it the undoubted mark of imposture.
But were not this the case—had Smith and those associated with him no such basis, on which to build the scheme developed in the Book of Mormon, this would in no way strengthen the claims which this volume sets up for a divine origin. The book itself is full of internal evidence of imposture and fraud.
If the reader can have patience to follow us we will endeavour in the two subsequent chapters to furnish him with an outline of the principal topics contained in the Book of Mormon.