The Founder of Mormonism/Appendix 3

The ordinary anti-Mormon theory of the origin of the Book of Mormon was first formally presented by Howe in 1834. It was, in brief, that a romance of prehistoric America, written in Ohio in 1812 by a Congregational minister, was the 'source, root and inspiration' by which Smith and his associate, Sidney Rigdon, wrote the Book of Mormon. The title of Howe's book is explanatory: 'Mormonism Unveiled,' or, a faithful account of that singular imposition and delusion, from its rise to the present time. With sketches of the characters of the propagators, and a full detail of the manner in ​which the famous Golden Bible was brought before the world. To which are added, inquiries into the probability that the historical part of the said Bible was written by one Solomon Spaulding, more than twenty years ago, and by him intended to have been published as a romance.'

According to the account of his widow,^[2] Solomon Spaulding was born in Connecticut in 1761, and was graduated from Dartmouth College in 1785. Becoming a Congregational minister, in 1809 he removed to New Salem, now Conneaut, Ohio. Being of a lively imagination and with a great fondness for history, he became interested in the numerous mounds and forts of Ohio, supposed to be the works of an extinct race. To beguile his invalidism he took three years in writing a historical sketch of this long lost race. Their extreme antiquity led him to write in the most ancient style, his sole object being to amuse himself and his neighbors. The book claimed to have been written by one of the lost nation, and to have been recovered from the earth. It assumed the title of the 'Manuscript Found'. Its date was 1812, about the time of Hull's surrender of Detroit. In that year Mr. Spaulding removed to Pittsburg and offered the manuscript to the printer Patterson, in whose office it was copied by an employee, Sidney Rigdon. At length the ​manuscript was returned to its author. . . . In 1834, at New Salem, Ohio, a Mormon preacher read copious extracts from the Book of Mormon. The historical part was recognized by the older inhabitants as the identical work of Mr. Spaulding. . . . 'Thus an historical romance, with the addition of a few pious expressions and extracts from the sacred scripture, has been construed into a new Bible.'

Of the ultimate fate of this manuscript, nothing is said by Spaulding's widow, but Howe claimed to have found, among Spaulding's literary remains,—'a single manuscript book, containing about one quire of paper. It was a romance purporting to have been translated from the Latin, found in twenty-four rolls of parchment in a cave, on the banks of Conneaut Creek, but written in modern style, and giving a fabulous account of a ship being driven upon the American coast, while proceeding from Rome to Britain, a short time previous to the Christian era; this country being then inhabited by Indians. This old manuscript has been shown to several of the foregoing witnesses, who recognize it as Spaulding's, he having told them that he had altered his first plan of writing by going further back with dates, and writing in the old scripture style in order that it might appear more ancient. They say that it bears no resemblance to the 'Manuscript Found.'

​It should here be noted that, as early as 1834, there appear to enter into the problem two distinct Spaulding manuscripts,—one primary, which may be called the 'Latin version' (L), the other subsequent and secondary, the 'Hebraic version' (H). These, and possibly other manuscripts, are also referred to in the testimonies of the 'older inhabitants,' which Howe cites, and which will be scrutinized later. Howe's book, with its double form of the Spaulding theory, was of course criticised in the Mormon Church organ.^[3] It was answered at length, in 1840, by B. Winchester's, 'The origin of the Spaulding story concerning the 'Manuscript Found'; with a short biography of Dr. P. Hulbert, the originator of the same; and some testimony adduced, showing it to be a sheer fabrication so far as its connection with the 'Book of Mormon' is concerned.'

The hypothesis of the agency of Hulbert (or Hurlburt) rests chiefly on the testimony of one Jackson, who, having read both the Book of Mormon and Spaulding's manuscript, said that there was no agreement between them, for 'Mr. Spaulding's manuscript was a very small work, in the form of a novel, saying not one word about the children of Israel, but professed to give an account of a race of people who originated from the ​Romans, which Mr. Spaulding said he had translated from a Latin parchment that he had found.'^[4]

For almost fifty years the treatises of Howe and Winchester contained the most valuable first-hand information. Other works, on both sides, simply rehashed the old arguments. A possible exception is the pamphlet, in 1882, of Robert Patterson, son of the Pittsburg printer. In attempting to prove that Rigdon was the connecting link between Spaulding and Smith, he acknowledged that he could find only five witnesses who could testify to Rigdon's residence in Pittsburg before 1816, and that none of these could speak from personal knowledge of Rigdon's possible employment in Patterson's printing office. Patterson yet asserts 'that Rigdon as early as 1823 had possession of Spaulding's manuscript. How he obtained it is unimportant; that during his career as a minister of the Disciples' Church in Ohio, he devoted an absorbed attention to it; that he was aware of the forthcoming Book of Mormon and its contents long before its appearance; that the said contents were largely Spaulding's romance, and partly such modifications as Rigdon had introduced, and that during the preparation of the Book of Mormon, Rigdon had repeated and long interviews with Smith, thus ​easily supplying him with fresh instalments of the pretended revelation.'

In 1885 came an apparent settlement of the question, by the discovery of the alleged original of Spaulding's 'Manuscript Found' in Honolulu. Despite its acceptance by Latter-day Saints and their critics alike it appears a dubious production for a graduate of Dartmouth. It does not seem to have occurred to either side that this may be like McPherson's Ossianic poems—after-thoughts made to order; that the 'Conneaut' story which purports to have been translated from parchment in 'Roman Letters in the Latin Language' may be only another example of the literature of disguise; that with Howe's classic description of this Latin version (L) before them, the Mormon missionaries in the Sandwich Islands—such as W. F. Cluff and G. Q. Cannon—may have forged this document to fit the case, and to divert attention from the complexity of the problem. However that may be, the characteristics of both form and matter may be learned from a few excerpts and also from the correspondence relative to its discovery:—^[5]

Ex-President J. H. Fairchild, of Oberlin College, in the library of which this document now rests, has compared the manuscript with the Book of Mormon and sees no reason to doubt this is the long ​lost story and yet can detect no resemblance between the two in general and in detail except that each professes to set forth the history of lost tribes.^[6] A letter of the finder, dated Honolulu, March 28th, 1885, to Mr. Joseph Smith, president of the Reorganized Church of L. D. S., gives further details:—

Rice's subsequent conclusion that his find was 'the only writing of Spaulding,' is contradicted by ​the testimony of the 'living witnesses' of 1833, quoted by Howe. The affidavits of the three endorsers of the Honolulu document are as follows: Aaron Wright said Spaulding possessed beside 'many other manuscripts, a history of the lost tribes of Israel . . . their journey from Jerusalem to America, as it is given in the Book of Mormon, excepting the religious matter.' Oliver Smith said Spaulding 'was writing an historical novel founded upon the first settlers of this country, . . . their journey from Jerusalem till their arrival in America. No religious matter was introduced.' John N. Miller said, 'In 1811 Spaulding had two or three books or pamphlets on different subjects . . . one called the "Manuscript Found,"—a history of the settlement of America . . . from Jerusalem. I have recently examined the Book of Mormon, and find in it the writings of Solomon Spaulding, from beginning to end, but mixed up with scripture and other religious matter, which did not meet with in the "Manuscript Found." Many of the passages in the Mormon book are verbatim from Spaulding, and others in part.' These three witnesses identify the Book of Mormon with the Hebrew version (H). Of the other witnesses only one would seem to refer to (L). He said 'I have lately read the Book of Mormon, and believe it to be the same as Spaulding ​wrote, except the religious part.' Now Howe's witnesses later contradict themselves. When the Latin version (L) was subsequently shown to 'several of the foregoing witnesses' they said that it 'bears no resemblance to the "Manuscript Found" in the old scripture style.' In other words the original autographs of Spaulding were at least two, which of these, if either furnished matter to Smith for the Book of Mormon, it is now impossible to discover.

In like manner it appears impossible to show how, when or through whom, Smith obtained Spaulding document which became the 'source, root and inspiration' of the Book of Mormon. The general formula for the anti-Mormon theory is that through Patterson, Rigdon obtained a copy of a Spaulding document, and transmitted the contents to Smith, before the publication of the Book of Mormon. As the question of date is all important, the statements of the parties concerned. should first be given and a chronological table compiled therefrom. Howe having had recourse to the firm of Patterson & Lambdin, Pittsburg, 'Mr. Patterson said he had no recollection of any such manuscript being brought there for publication. . . . Now, as Spaulding's book can nowhere be found, or anything heard of it being carried to this establishment, there is the strongest presump​tion that it remained there in seclusion, till about the year 1823, or 1824, at which time Sidney Rigdon located himself in that city. [In] about three years he left there, and came into Geauga County, Ohio . . . and commenced preaching some new points of doctrine, which were afterwards found to be inculcated in the Mormon Bible. He resided in this vicinity (as a minister of the Disciples' Church) about four years previous to the appearance of the book, during which time he made several long visits to Pittsburg, and perhaps to the Susquehanna, where Smith was then digging for money, or pretending to be translating plates. . . . About the time Rigdon left Pittsburg, the Smith family began to tell about finding a book that would contain a history of the first inhabitants of America, and that two years elapsed before they finally got possession of it.'

Robert Patterson, the son of the Pittsburg printer says:—'The theory hitherto most widely published . . . has been that Rigdon was a printer in Patterson's printing office when the Spaulding manuscript was brought there in 1812–14, and that he either copied or purloined it. Having it thus in his possession, the use made of it was an afterthought suggested by circumstances many years later. More recently another theory has been advanced, that Rigdon obtained possession of the Spaulding manu​script during his pastorate of the First Baptist Church or soon thereafter, 1822–4, . . . the friends of Rigdon, in response to the first charge, deny that he ever resided in Pittsburg previous to 1822, or that he ever was a printer, and in general answer to both charges affirm that he never at any time had access to Spaulding's manuscript.'

In the Boston Journal, May 27, 1839, Rigdon says: 'There was no man by the name of Patterson during my residence at Pittsburg who had a printing office; what might have been before I lived there, I know not. Mr. Robert Patterson, I was told, had owned a printing office before. I lived in that city. . . . This Mr. Patterson, who was a Presbyterian preacher, I had a very slight acquaintance with during my residence in Pittsburg. He was then acting under an agency in the book and stationery business, and was the owner of no property of any kind, printing office or anything else, during the time I resided in the city.'

The date of Rigdon's Pittsburg residence, is not given specifically here or elsewhere in his writings,^[7] ​According to one who knew him late in life, as an ex-Mormon, Rigdon was extremely reticent as to his early movements.^[8] Joseph Smith in his Autobiography, inserted a life of Rigdon and prefaced it with the following remarks:^[9]

'As there has been a great rumor, and many false statements have been given to the world respecting Elder Rigdon's connection with the Church of Jesus Christ, it is necessary that a correct account of the same be given, so that the public mind may be disabused on the subject. I shall therefore proceed to give a brief history of his life down, from authentic ​sources, as also an account of his connection with the Church of Christ.'

Joseph Smith, in 1843, also said of Rigdon that he was pastor of the First Baptist church in Pittsburg from Feb., 1822, to August, 1824. In 1826 he went to Bainbridge, Ohio, preaching there and at Mantua his own and Alexander Campbell's doctrines of repentance and baptism for the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Ghost. In 1827 he went to Mentor, thirty miles from Bainbridge, and near Lake Erie. The doctrines he there advanced were new, especially the Biblical prophecies concerning the Literal Restoration of Israel. The eight months he was there he baptized many. In the Fall of 1830, Parley Pratt, Oliver Cowdery and Peter Whitmer baptized and ordained Rigdon as a Mormon Elder. Previous to this Pratt had been a preacher in the same church with Rigdon in Amherst, Lorain County, Ohio, and had been sent to New York State where he met Joseph Smith, junior. Rigdon's prevailing characteristic was his entire freedom from any sectarian bias. After a fortnight's reading of the Book of Mormon he was converted. In December, 1830, came the first revelation to Joseph and Sidney at Fayette, New York, saying that Sidney had prepared the way, and in the same month, the second, saying that 'it is not expedient that ye should translate any more, until ye shall go to the ​Ohio.' In January, 1831, Joseph went with Sidney to the branch of the church in Kirtland, Ohio.

By comparing the above tables, it is seen that the Mormon sources do not account for Rigdon's movements from about September, 1827, to October, 1830, during which time Howe supposes the visits were made to Smith at Harmony, Pennsylvania. Another supposition is that if Rigdon had no direct connection himself, it may have been through this Ohio associate Pratt. According to Smith's account, Elder Parley Pratt had been a preacher in the same church with Elder Rigdon, and resided in the town of Amherst, Lorain County, in that state, and had been sent into the State of New York, on a mission, where he had become acquainted with the circumstances of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon, and was introduced to Joseph Smith, junior, and others of the Church of Latter-day Saints. After listening to the testimonies of the "witnesses," and reading the ​"Book," he became convinced . . . and was baptized.'

Now the witnesses 'viewed' the plates some time in June, 1829, while the Book of Mormon was copyrighted the 11th instant. From the approximation of dates, it is difficult to see how Pratt could have had time to be the go-between. Thus, judging from the time of Pratt's mission, the period of Rigdon's direct collusion is likewise narrowed. If he had personal intercourse with Smith, it must have been between September, 1827, and June, 1829, but these are the dates, respectively, of the obtaining of the plates and the copyright of the book. In other words the period of manufacture of the Book of Mormon coincides with the period in which Rigdon's movements are unaccounted for.

The gap in the Mormon sources is significant and much has been made of it by the opposition. For example, it was 'afterwards discovered that Rigdon's occasional business calls from Kirtland and Mentor tallied with the visits of the mysterious stranger at the Smith residence.' To uphold this double assumption, no dates are given except that, in March, 1828, Rigdon was at Warren, Ohio, and this was over two hundred miles from Smith's itinerary. In fine, Rigdon is a doubtful connecting link; the presumption of collusion is only negative; the argument from silence is strong, but the ​case falls, if an alibi can be proved for Rigdon,—if he was not at Harmony, Pennsylvania, or Fayette, New York, during the six actual months of translating, Smith is justly entitled to the authorship of the Book of Mormon.

The external evidence leaves the battle drawn; it is not so with the internal evidence. Judging from the characteristics of the book, the proof of authenticity is decisive. In form it has no resemblance to the Honolulu manuscript; in matter it needs neither Rigdon's personality nor Spaulding's romances to account for itself. Take the four marks of the book, and compare them with what is known of Rigdon. In old age his style was redundant,^[13] while in 1821 Alexander Campbell called him 'the great orator of the Mahoning Association,^[14] and, as a minister of the Disciples in the Western Reserve, he was described as fluent in utterance and copious in language.^[15]

If Rigdon's style, at this time, was better, so with his twelve years of seniority over Smith, his knowledge was wider.^[16] In particular, in the Western Re​serve, he was counted learned in the history of the world. Moreover as to archæology, he seems to have taken no interest in Americana; the only point of resemblance is in his unsystematic theology. His frequent sectarian changes were unique even for that day. In 1819, he was an old school Baptist; in 1821, he came under the influence of Alexander Campbell the 'new light'; with him he ultimately differed on communistic ideas, which he had meanwhile absorbed, from a leader of the Disciple church in Ohio. The so-called Campbellite baptism for the remission of sins does not occur in the Book of Mormon, while the insistence on faith^[17] is partly plagiarized from Scripture, partly due to Smith's dabbling with the occult. Smith's creed of 1844^[18] ​promulgates these among his five ordinances: faith; repentance; baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; and the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost. Again, in 1832, Alexander Campbell sharply attacked the Book of Mormon and its contents.^[19] The alleged Discipleism inherent in Mormonism is still denied by the more orthodox apologists.^[20]

​But the question of the injection of these doctrines into the Book of Mormon, through the agency of Rigdon, is again a question of date. The Declaration of the two Campbells against 'the divided and disturbed condition of the religious community,' came out in 1809,^[21] but before Rigdon came over from Ohio, Campbell's teachings were spread broadcast over the country,^[22] and Discipleism had spread northeast into New York.^[23] Already in the days of Joseph's money digging there existed these Disciples of Christ near Ithaca, through which ran the State road from Binghampton to the Susquehanna. Yet there are three special doctrines which Rigdon is said to have taught among the Disciples in Ohio, and then put into the Book of Mormon. ​The first of these, Communism, is not mentioned in the text, while new revelations and miracles and gifts of the Spirit are not unusual recrudescences due to a literal interpretation of scripture.^[24]

Without penetrating further into the wilderness of minor sects,^[25] it is the historic background of western New York, in the third decade, more than any 'mysterious stranger' from the West, that acts for the Book of Mormon and its doctrinal contents. The proof of authenticity is cumulative: especially do the minor movements, reflected in the narrative, show that the book is in accordance with its supposed historical position, as to time, place and circumstances. Thus the Morgan excitement by fixing the lower limit of date as 1826, excludes the Spaulding theory in its crudest form of entire incorporation. Even if any Spaulding manuscript were used as a mere basis and slight framework, it would not in ​validate the essential integrity of the work. Although this purported series of plates^[26] cannot be called the product of one mind 'as an organic whole,'^[27] yet the integrity of the Book of Mormon is not thereby impaired; the discrete parts are bound ​together, as it were, by a single cord. It is the line of life, the thread of autobiography, that discloses the real origin of the book. The various experiences of the various American prophets, could almost be said to form a 'Biographical Sketch of Joseph Smith the Prophet and his Progenitors, for many Generations.' If the discovery of the gold plates was suggested by the paternal dream of the Magic Box, and the beginning of the Book of Mormon incorporates the dream of the Fruit Tree, so the cord of Joseph junior's experience runs unbroken from I Nephi to Moroni. Without the aid of the commentator to explain the prophecies of the 'coming laborer in the vineyard' as Joseph Smith, one can read between the lines the meanings of the frequent visions, of the stones for interpreting, of the visits of the angels which strike the beholder 'dumb, weak and helpless.^[28]

To sum up: These marks of the book are not the marks of the man Rigdon. Negatively,—there is but slight coincidence in career with that of the visionary, crystal-gazing youth, and there is as little resemblance in temperament; positively,—the similarity of style is exact between the 'Account written by the hand of Mormon' and Joseph's synchronous ​writings contained in the Book of Commandments; finally on the title page of the first edition of the Book of Mormon is that inadvertent admission of authorship.