A knowledge of these circumstances, I say, is essential to the right understanding of the Nauvoo period of the Church's history.
The founding of the city of Nauvoo was an event, the interest of which extends beyond the people immediately concerned in it. It was a unique movement in its way, and may yet suggest a policy in reference to the government of large cities from which great benefits may arise. Very naturally after the experiences of the Mormon people in Missouri, the Prophet was anxious to environ them with conditions that would insure protection to the community, hence for Nauvoo he secured as large concessions of political power as it was possible to obtain, and an examination of the Nauvoo charter proper with its attendant charters providing as they did for an independent educational system, from common schools to a University; an independent military organization with a lieutenant-general as its commander;[[3]] a large grant of commercial as well as municipal power, demonstrates how well he succeeded. Commenting upon the charter immediately after its passage by the state legislature had been formally announced, he said: "The City Charter of Nauvoo is of my own plan and device. I concocted it for the salvation of the Church, and on principles so broad, that every honest man might dwell secure under its protective influence without distinction of sect or party."[[4]] On another occasion when defending the right of the city to issue writs of habeas corpus, even against processes of the state, he held: "If there is not power in our charter and courts, then there is not power in the State of Illinois nor in the Congress or Constitution of the United States; for the United States gave unto Illinois her Constitution or Charter, and Illinois gave unto Nauvoo her charters conceding unto us our vested rights which she has no right or power to take from us. All the power there was in Illinois she gave to Nauvoo. * * * The municipal court has all the power to issue and determine writs of habeas corpus within the limits of this state that the Legislature can confer. This city has all the power that the State courts have, and was given by the same authority—the legislature. * * * The charter says that the City Council shall have power and authority to make, ordain, establish, and execute such ordinances not repugnant to the Constitution of the United States, or of this State, as they may deem necessary for the peace, benefit and safety of the inhabitants of said city.[[5]] And also that the Municipal Court shall have power to grant writs of habeas corpus in all cases arising under the ordinances of the City Council. The City Council have passed an ordinance 'that no citizen of this city shall be taken out of this city by any writ without the privilege of a writ of habeas corpus.' There is nothing but what we have power over, except where restricted by the Constitution of the United States. 'But,' says the mob, 'what dangerous powers!' Yes—dangerous, because they will protect the innocent and put down mobocrats. There is nothing but what we have power over, except where restricted by the Constitution of the United States. * * * If these powers are dangerous, then the Constitution of the United States, and of this State are dangerous; but they are not dangerous to good men; they are only so to bad men who are breakers of the laws. * * * The lawyers themselves acknowledge that we have all power granted us in our charters, that we could ask for—that we had more power than any other court in the State; for all other courts were restricted while ours was not."
Such views in relation to an ordinary municipal government would unquestionably be stamped as preposterous. No such powers as are here claimed are accorded to ordinary city governments in Illinois or any other of the states of the American Union. What then may be said of the Prophet's claims in respect to the municipal powers of Nauvoo? Nothing in way of defense, except that Nauvoo was not an ordinary municipality; that Joseph Smith had sought for extraordinary grants of power for the city of Nauvoo and had obtained them; that his personal experiences and the experiences of his people, both in Ohio and Missouri, had taught him the necessity of having officers charged with the duty of administering government wherein his people were concerned, who were friendly disposed and whose interests were largely identical with those of the Saints: that the things which both the Prophet and his people had suffered justified both him and them in seeking for and obtaining such power as had been conferred by charters upon the city of Nauvoo; that the Prophet was wholly within the lines of right conduct when he invoked the municipal powers in his own protection against the aggressions of his old enemies in Missouri and his new betrayers in Illinois. But whether the legislature of Illinois was fully aware of the extraordinary powers they were conferring upon the city of Nauvoo, or being aware of the import of their action the party in control of the legislature was willing to grant the extraordinary powers in the hope of currying political favor with the Saints, may not now be determined; but in any event these extraordinary powers were granted; and wittingly or unwittingly a "city-state" had practically been established within the state of Illinois. Nothing short of this descriptive term can adequately set forth the municipal government of Nauvoo. It seems to be an unconscious reversion. In an incipient way, to the "city-states" or "city-republics" of the old Greek confederations; or the "free-towns" of medieval times, when the cities were more potent than nations in commerce and even in politics. Whether or not the state courts of Illinois and United States courts would have sustained the Nauvoo charters if the matter of their validity had been referred to them for adjudication, may not be determined; but one can scarcely suppress the thought that the likelihood is that they would not have been sustained; on the contrary they would have been most likely declared anomalous to our system of government as it then stood, and now stands. But certainly if the experiment of such a municipal government had not been interrupted in its progress, it might have been an instructive object lesson in the government of cities; and even as it is, the founding of Nauvoo, the "city-state," suggests an important idea which may work out great practical reforms in municipal government in our country.
The founders of our Government dealt with conditions that were very simple in comparison with the complexity of the conditions which government in its various forms, municipal, state and national, is confronted with today. The Municipal problems which now vex the people had not then arisen above the horizon of their experience. The American commonwealths of the early decades of the nineteenth century were practically rural commonwealths. At the time of Washington's inauguration (1789) the population of New York was but thirty-three thousand; Philadelphia forty-two thousand; Boston but eighteen thousand; Baltimore thirteen thousand; Brooklyn one thousand six hundred, and more village than town. Now compare these cities with their present population. New York has a population of over four millions;[[6]] Philadelphia a population of one and a half millions;[[7]] Boston more than half a million;[[8]] Baltimore over five hundred thousand;[[9]] Brooklyn is absorbed in New York, but as a borough of the larger city it has a population of nearly one and a half millions;[[10]] Chicago, which in 1840 had but four thousand inhabitants, much smaller than Nauvoo, has now a population of more than two millions;[[11]] St. Louis which in 1840 had a population of but 16,469, has now a population of three quarters of a million.[[12]] Nothing like the growth of urban population within the United States during the last fifty years has been known in the history of the world, and it has brought to the inhabitants of these cities problems undreamed of by the founders of our government. Every year discloses more and more distinctly the fact that between these condensed communities and the town, village, and rural population of the states in which they are located, there are very distinct interests and governmental problems of widely differing character. The differences which justify distinct local governments in the state of New York and the peninsula of Florida are not more insistent than the differences between the great commercial city of New York and the state of the same name. Without entering upon elaborate discussion of these questions (a discussion which is foreign to the character of this writing) I venture the suggestion that separate and complete state governments for our large cities, or the elevation of them into what I have called "city-states," such as Nauvoo was, in an incipient way, will be the solution to most of the problems of municipal government in our very large cities. It would greatly enlarge in them the governmental powers essential to their more perfect peace, security, and prosperity. Also it would separate them from embroilment in those questions of the state governments under which they are now located, and in which they have so little interest—often indeed, there is even sharp conflict of interests, engendering bitterness and strife which hinders progress for both city and state. Besides, granting complete statehood to our larger cities would be but a proper recognition of the right of those great aggregations of citizens with their varied industries, their immense wealth and distinct interests, to that measure of influence in our national affairs which their numbers and intelligence and interests justly demand.
The Appeal of the Church to the National government for Redress of Wrongs Suffered in Missouri.
The Prophet Joseph Smith, Sidney Rigdon, and Judge Elias Higbee were chosen as the committee to present to the National Congress the petition of the Saints for a redress of their grievances, suffered in Missouri. This journey to the nation's Capital was of importance quite apart from the immediate purpose for which it was undertaken; namely, it brought the Prophet in contact with the leading statesmen of the United States. While in Washington, he was brought in contact with and interviewed such men as Henry Clay, John C. Calhoun, President Martin Van Buren, different members of the Cabinet, Senators, and Representatives. Such contact enabled him to take new measurements, not only of a different class of men from those with whom he had been accustomed to associate, but new measurements of himself by comparison and contrast of himself with those leading spirits of the nation. Comparisons which could not result otherwise than in advantage to him; and I think it must be conceded by all students of the Prophet's character, especially to those who have been at all close observers of its development, that after this trip to Washington, which afforded the above noted opportunities of comparison and contrast, the Prophet's growth was immeasurably greater than at any time before that journey.
In some respects however it was unfortunate that the Prophet was not more cosmopolitan in his training and in his views of life on the occasion of this visit to the nation's capital; for lack of such training and views of life led him to the formation of rather hasty judgments as to the character of our nation's public men at that time. He undoubtedly had sticking to him as yet, some of the prejudices of his New England and New York sectional training; and at the time of his visit the spirit of the public men of the nation at Washington was largely influenced by the Southern character and spirit. Bourbon Democracy was at its height. The gentlemen of the South with their extreme notions of chivalry and polite deportment, predominated. In those days men were held to strict account for their manner of address one to another. An improper word, a slight, magnified into an insult, meant a challenge to mortal combat on "the field of honor," and this sense of personal responsibility for utterances begot, no doubt, an extreme politeness in personal deportment which seemed puerile to those reared in another atmosphere and influenced by other sentiments than those which resulted from education in the South. Joseph Smith's judgment upon manners and customs in Washington, was doubtless New England's judgment upon Southern customs with which it had no patience, much less sympathy. It is only from these considerations that the rather harsh judgment of the Prophet in relation to conditions in Washington can be properly understood.
Relative to the business upon which this committee visited Washington, it should be said that Sidney Rigdon failed to participate in it at all, in consequence of an illness which befell him on his journey, and hindered him from reaching Washington until the business was practically settled. A short stay in Washington convinced the Prophet that nothing was to be expected in the way of obtaining a redress of grievances for his people from the very cautious politicians then in control of the government, all of whom were anxious, apparently, to palliate the actions of Missouri with reference to the Saints, for the sake of retaining her political influence on their side; and also because of a prevailing inclination to a strict construction of the powers of the general government in its relations to the states. The Prophet therefore left Washington to preach the Gospel for a short time in New Jersey and Philadelphia, after which he returned to Nauvoo, leaving Judge Elias Higbee to urge consideration of the petition of the Saints which had been referred to the Senate committee on Judiciary, with what result is made known in detail in the body of this volume of the history. It is sufficient here to say that the net result of the Committee's deliberations was simply to recommend that the Saints appeal for a redress of their wrongs to the United States District Court having jurisdiction in Missouri, or they could, if they saw proper, "apply to the justice and magnanimity of the State of Missouri—an appeal which the committee feel justified in believing will never be made in vain by the injured or oppressed."—(Sic!)
This suggestion to take their case to the United States Courts was never acted upon by the Saints, nor does it appear in what manner it would have been practicable for them to do so. True it is expressly provided in the Constitution that "The Judicial power of the United States shall extend to all cases in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority; to controversies between two or more states; between a state and citizens of another state; between citizens of different states; between citizens of the same state," etc.[[13]] The case of the Saints would fall either under the clauses in the above quotation respecting controversies arising between a state (Missouri) and citizens of another state (the Saints, now citizens, of Illinois); or "between citizens of different states," the Saints, citizens of Illinois, and their former persecutors, citizens of Missouri. In considering the question under the first clause it must be remembered that the eleventh amendment to the Constitution (declared in force 1798) provides that "The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by citizens of another state, or by citizens or subjects of any foreign state." It is held that "the power as well as the dignity of a state would be gone if it could be dragged into court by a private plaintiff."[[14]]