Alleged Sexual Impropriety between Joseph Smith and

Emeline White

Source:

John C. Bennett, ”Gen. Bennett’s 4th Letter,” Sangamo Journal, July 22, 1842; The History of the Saints: Or an Exposé of Joe Smith and Mormonism. Boston: Leland & Whiting, 1842, 235.

Accusation:

The following letter reportedly “addressed to her [Emeline White] by Joe, who was, when he wrote it, in Springfield, Illinois: My Sweet Emeline: You know that my love for you, as David said to Jonathan, is “wonderful, passing the love of women.” And how can that be? You know it is only figurative. I mean you have my most supreme affections. O that I had yours as truly! May I not hope that it will be so? At all events, be my friend, my best friend. If you want any thing while I am gone, call upon either of the Bishops, -- Vinson Knight or Alanson Ripley, -- and show them the signature of “Old White Hat,” and they will provide for you. Do not be afraid to receive any things from me, and these men are confidential. You need not fear to write me; and I do assure you that a few lines would be very consoling on a journey. Sign it, “Rosanna.”

Your humble servant,

Old White Hat[1]

Discussion:

Perhaps the biggest weakness of this allegation is that is comes from John C. Bennett, a known prevaricator and opportunist. Several authors consider him a "polygamy-insider" at Nauvoo, but recent research demonstrates that he was not.

While this affidavit does not mention sexual relations between Emeline White and Joseph Smith, such are implied. It is sometimes repeated in anti-Mormon literature and is included here.

The existence of a written letter of this nature could constitute undeniable proof of a questionable relationship between “Old White Hat,” allegedly Joseph Smith and Emeline White. In fact, Bennett claimed in a July 22, 1842 letter to the Sangamo Journal that “one or two of letters were on hand” and that they were “written by Joseph Smith to Mrs. White, from Springfield, signed “old white hat.”[2] Bennett never produced them as evidence, but simply asserted their existence. Neither did he utilize those letters in all of his lectures and other efforts to discredit the Prophet.

Bennett’s reference to Joseph Smith’s nickname as “old white hat,” is singular. White hats were commonly worn in Joseph Smith’s day and it is know that he possessed one, if not several. I have found two references stating Joseph Smith wore or possessed a “white hat,” one from 1827 and the second 1842. [3] Importantly, no historical data has been found supporting that he was ever referred to as “old white hat.” Richard L. Bushman also failed to find any evidence to support a nickname of “old white hat” for him.[4]

One of the greatest problems with this letter is Joseph Smith’s alleged reckless openness. For him to flaunt his purported feelings as described would have been a stark contrast to his documented behavior with plural wives in Nauvoo. Plural wife Zina Huntington recalled her days in Nauvoo. When asked: “Did you hear the question of plural marriage discussed either privately or publicly, prior to your having been sealed to Joseph Smith?” She answered: “No, we hardly dared speak of it, the very walls had ears. We spoke of it only in whispers.”[5] That the Prophet would be less cautious with an illicit relationship seems less likely. While Joseph Smith did write a few letters, most of his correspondence was penned by scribes. Letters that involved polygamy usually included instructions for them to be burned after reading in order to destroy evidence that could be used against him. For example, to the Whitney’s he wrote: “burn this letter as soon as you read it; keep all locked up in your breasts, my life depends upon it.”[6]

Equally surprising is the possibility that Joseph would write a letter offering his “supreme affections” and a desire that Emeline be his “best friend.” While it is unclear exactly what relationship “old white hat” (whomever he was, if he really existed) experienced with Emeline, the inclusion of sexuality, with or without a plural marriage ceremony, appears to have been implied.

Contrasting such forthrightness, Joseph Smith usually approached potential plural wives very cautiously, sometimes through an intermediary who could maintain privacy if the woman rebuffed the offer. To create a written document containing such suggestive language that might be used against him if it fell into the wrong hands would have been an extraordinary occurrence.

Another problem is the idea that the Prophet would promise commodities from the Bishop’s storehouse to a non-member in this manner. It is true that Vinson Knight and Alanson Ripley were bishops in the Nauvoo area. However, to assert that Joseph Smith would explicitly promise material compensation in order to sustain either an illicit sexual relationship or even a plural marriage, would raise difficult and embarrassing questions with the bishops and others involved. Those bishops were commissioned to be judges (D&C 64:40, 72:17) including judging members who committed adultery (D&C 42:80-83). Even the President of the Church could be tried for transgression by a Church council requested by a bishop (see D&C 107:82). James Whitehead, who served closely with Joseph Smith in Nauvoo as one of his secretaries was asked: “Did any woman ever come to you, or to Joseph Smith in your presence, during the time of your employment, for money, claiming that she was the wife of Joseph Smith?” and answered: “Never.”[7]

Summary:

This reported "letter" allegedly from Joseph Smith reflects multiple weaknesses . The lack of verification concerning the letter’s authorship or the actual identity of “old white hat” is problematic. In light of Joseph Smith’s general letter-writing patterns, plausibility questions arise concerning the likelihood that he would write so shamelessly about his affections, recording them on paper as lasting evidence of behavior that would have been seen as sinful and hypocritical by his followers.

That the Prophet would offer Emeline material support from the Bishop’s storehouse is also problematic due to the questions that would naturally arise in the minds of the bishop and others who were then unaware of plural marriage and who were commissioned to detect cases of adultery.

[1] John C. Bennett, ”Gen. Bennett’s 4th Letter,” Sangamo Journal, July 22, 1842; The History of the Saints: Or an Exposé of Joe Smith and Mormonism. Boston: Leland & Whiting, 1842, 235.

[2] ”Gen. Bennett’s 4th Letter,” Sangamo Journal, July 22, 1842,

[3] The first reference is from Martin Harris relating in 1859 that Joseph had a white hat in 1827. See “Mormonism--No. II," Tiffany's Monthly, 5 (August 1859): 164 [163-170]; quoted in Dan Vogel, ed., Early Mormon Documents, Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2002, 303. A second is from Henry Caswell who visited Nauvoo in 1842 and later described Joseph Smith’s dress: “His dress was of coarse country manufacture, and his white hat was enveloped in a piece of black crape, being in mourning for a brother.” (Quoted in Alexander Davidson and Bernard Stuve, A Complete History of Illinois from 1673 to 1873, Springfield, Illinois, D. L. Phillips, 1877, 499.) An over-the-top fictional work by Robert Richards, [pseud.] entitled The California Crusoe; or, The Lost Treasure Found: A Tale of Mormonism (London and New York, 1854) also described Joseph Smith wearing a white hat (page 60).

[4] Email correspondence from Richard L. Bushman to the author, August 23, 2007. The term is used in two years later in a satirical piece by an unidentified author: “The Buckeye’s First Epistle to Jo,” Warsaw Signal, Warsaw, Illinois, April 25, 1844, no. 11, p. 1. Its usage appears to be borrowed from John C. Bennett’s publication two years earlier, as no additional evidence has been located to support “old white hat” as a nickname for Joseph Smith.

[5] Zina D. Huntington, John Wight interviewer, “Evidence from Zina D. Huntington Young,” Interview with Zina, October 1, 1898, Saints Herald 52 (January 11, 1905): 28-30.

[6] Joseph Smith to Newel K. Whitney, Elizabeth Ann Whitney, etc., 18 August 1842, copy of holograph in possession of the author. The text and the signature of this document are in the handwriting of Joseph Smith. This document has been reproduced in Dean C. Jessee, The Personal Writings of Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret Book Co., 1984), pp. 539-40.

[7] James Whitehead, Testimony given at the Temple Lot Case, complete transcript, part 4, page 102, questions 154.