Alleged Sexual Impropriety between Joseph Smith and

Lucinda Pendleton Harris

Source:

Wilhelm Wyl pseud. [Wilhelm Ritter von Wymetal], Mormon Portraits: Joseph Smith the Prophet, His Family , and His Friends, Salt Lake City: Tribune Printing and Publishing Company, 1886, 60; emphasis Wyl’s.

Accusation:

“Mrs. Harris was a married lady, a very great friend of mine. When Joseph had made his dastardly attempt on me, I went to Mrs. Harris to unbosom my grief to her. To my utter astonishment she said, laughing heartily: ‘How foolish you are! I don’t see anything so horrible in it. Why I am his mistress since four years!’

Discussion:

Besides this quote (which is discussed below), three additional pieces of evidence are available supporting the possibility that at some point Lucinda Pendleton and Joseph Smith were sealed in matrimony or experienced a sexual affair. The first is a proxy sealing of Lucinda to Joseph Smith performed in the Nauvoo Temple on January 22, 1846.[2]

The second is found in a May 24, 1839, letter from Joseph to George W. Harris, in which the Prophet wrote: “I have selected a town lot for you just across the street from my own, and immediately beside yours, one for Mr. Cleveland.”[3] Todd Compton sees this invitation to reside near the Smiths as “immediate evidence of a close bond,” which is undoubtedly true.[4] However, that same day, Joseph Smith wrote a second letter to the Judge John Cleveland and his wife Sarah. He had never met the Clevelands but was similarly welcoming: “We have selected a lot for you, just across the street from our own, beside Mr. Harris.”[5] Several months earlier, beginning on February 15, 1839, Emma Smith and her children had found refuge with the Clevelands in Quincy, Illinois, and had been grateful for their hospitality while Joseph was incarcerated in the Liberty Jail.

Third, Lucinda is included on independent Historian Andrew Jenson’s list of twenty-seven women who were sealed to the Prophet.[6] Jenson lists her third and designates her as “one of the first women sealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith.” Jenson’s personal files include a note: “Harriet Cook Young is positive that [Lucinda] was married to Joseph in Missouri.”[7] The source of Harriet’s information is unknown; and tracing Lucinda’s name through Jenson’s various rough draft lists indicates that he vacillated about whether to include her and Eliza R. Snow did not agree. Further compromising Harriet’s accuracy is that she was not a Mormon during the Missouri period. Born November 7, 1824, and baptized at age seventeen on May 1, 1842, she was sealed on November 2, 1843, to Brigham Young by Joseph Smith. She was therefore a Nauvoo polygamy insider before Joseph’s death and it is not beyond the realm of possibility that either Lucinda or another knowledgeable person confided the information to her.[8] If Harriet’s assertion was true, Lucinda’s sealing to Joseph Smith would have been the second after that of Fanny Alger. However, my study of Nauvoo polygamy suggests that no sealings were performed prior to Louisa Beaman’s in April 1841.[9]

These three observations provide a useful argument that Joseph and Lucinda were sealed at some point although the timing is not confirmed. Despite Harriet Cook Young’s recollection, however, the most likely time and place appear to be Nauvoo in 1842. My analysis of geographical and chronological considerations further reduces the likelihood of a marriage in Missouri. Lucinda and her second husband, George Harris, were living in the new Mormon town of Far West by 1837 [date unknown]. In March 1838, Joseph and his family moved to Missouri, staying in the state until the Mormon War broke out in October, being imprisoned the following month. Thus, the only time available for a plural marriage was the seven months between March and October. The History of the Church, written in the voice of Joseph Smith, records his arrival at Far West on March 14:

“Many of the brethren came out to meet us, who also with open arms welcomed us to their bosoms. We were immediately received under the hospitable roof of Brother George W. Harris, who treated us with all possible kindness, and we refreshed ourselves with much satisfaction, after our long and tedious journey.”[10]

The Smiths stay with the Harris family until mid-May lasted over two months. Joseph would have had to conduct his courtship, such as it was, in a cabin crowded with two families, persuade Lucinda to accept polygamy as a correct principle, and either conduct a sealing by unknown means or persuade her to accept a sexual relationship that was not formalized by a sealing--all this during that nine week period.

On November 2, 1837, a special council of Church members and leaders in Far West transacted several items of Church business but had to leave unresolved “a matter between Oliver Cowdery, Thomas B. Marsh” and the Prophet.[11] I think that the logical topic was Oliver’s perception of Joseph’s “immoral” relationship with Fanny Alger. The matter remained unresolved until the Far West High Council excommunicated Oliver Cowdery on April 12, 1838--right in the middle of the two months the Smiths boarded with the Harrises--for several improprieties, one of which was accusing Joseph Smith of adultery. Given these heightened sensitivities to moral questions resulting from Oliver’s accusations, it seems highly unlikely that Joseph Smith would have selected this period to teach such an explosive doctrine to his hostess. After May 1838, Joseph was in and out of Far West, nearly always in the company of other priesthood leaders, and especially as tensions with the old Missouri settlers increased in intensity.

To complicate matters, however, both Brodie and Compton also use a fourth document that points to an 1838, the quotation cited above.[12] This quote is attributed to Sarah Pratt years after she had left the Church. In 1885 when she was sixty-seven and had been separated from her husband, Apostle Orson Pratt, for seventeen years, hypercritical author Wilhelm Wyl interviewed her. Both Brodie and Compton posit the relationship as occurring during March-May of 1838.

Assuming that Wyl quoted Sarah Pratt correctly, the account strikes a false note in several ways. First, Sarah Pratt claimed that the above conversation with “Mrs. Harris” occurred prior to her husband’s return from his mission to England on July 19, 1841.[14] Counting back four years establishes the described mistress-hood as beginning some months prior to July, 1837. However, Joseph Smith did not meet Lucinda until March of 1838, when the Smith family moved permanently from Ohio to Missouri.

Second, Victorian standards in the 1830s made even discussions of marital sexuality between such intimates as mothers and daughters matter of great delicacy and reticence. Hearty claims of extramarital sexual activity on the part of respectable, well-educated women are rare to the point of virtual non-existence.

Third, the need for complete secrecy about plurality in Nauvoo--both because of danger from other Church members and from outsiders--meant that Joseph’s plural wives used great care when speaking of their involvement with him. Indeed, we have no contemporary records from any of them directly acknowledging their relationship at the time whey were involved in it (before his death) or describing their relationship until much later.[15] One might assume even greater reticence in the case of illegitimate intimacy. In fact, the avidity with which the gossipy disclosures of disaffected former members like John C. Bennett provide some negative evidence of how quickly and how far first-hand accounts of unconventional sexual behavior would have spread, particularly if such behavior were attached to the Mormon prophet himself.

Fourth, the flippant tone of this alleged confession is another false note. The high councils in Kirtland, Missouri, and Nauvoo took a very serious view of sexual immorality and excommunicated participants who did not manifest serious evidence of repentance. To admit on-going adultery in the situation Sarah described would have been more than just embarrassing. It would have been a grievous moral sin and regarded as such by the community within which both women were living.

Fifth, Sarah Pratt herself had experienced a compromised reputation in the spring of 1841. Ebenezer Robinson reported: “In the spring of 1841 Dr. Bennett had a small neat house built for Elder Orson Pratt’s family [Sarah and one male child] and commenced boarding with them. Elder Pratt was absent on a mission to England.”[16] By mid-1842, she had been excommunicated along with Orson, but with no public scandal attached to Lucinda’s name at any time, and she was sixteen years older than Sarah. Would she have chosen to “comfort” Sarah by making her a confidante?

Sixth, as witnesses, Sarah Pratt (at least as quoted by Wyl) and Wyl himself seemed willing to repeat any rumor so long as it was derogatory to Joseph Smith. When Wyl asked her about the rumor that “Joseph had eighty wives at the time of his death,” she replied: “He had many more, my dear sir; at least he had seduced many more, and those with whom he had lived without their being sealed to him, were sealed to him after his death.”[17] While it is true that numerous women were sealed to Joseph Smith posthumously, no records have been found from any woman asserting that Joseph Smith seduced her. Five years before her interview with Wyl, Pratt is quoted in an anti-polygamy newspaper as saying: “An elder once said to me: ‘Sister Sarah, you are a regular Satan,’ I had been giving my views in regard to polygamy and polygamists. I answered him, there are only two classes of women in Utah, devils or fools.”[18] Insightfully, Compton observes that Sarah’s recollection of Lucinda’s statement “is antagonistic, third-hand, and late.”[19]

Both Sarah Pratt and Wilhelm Wyl made allegations that were demonstrably untrue. Non-Mormon writer Thomas Gregg wrote, on Wyl’s interviews: “The statements of the interviews must be taken for what they are worth. While many of them are corroborated elsewhere and in many ways, there are others that need verification, and some that probably exist only in the mind of the narrator.”[20] When I queried Richard Bushman about his appraisal of Wyl’s accuracy, he pointed out the high level of “hearsay” and summarized: “Personally I found all the assertions about the Prophet’s promiscuity pretty feeble. Nothing there [was] worth contending with.”[21]

Summary

Any quotation from Wilhelm Wyl and/or Sarah Pratt deserves scrutiny since both individuals have been shown to have promoted demonstrably false claims.

Pratt's allegation that Lucinda Pendleton had been the Prophet's "mistress" is a chronological impossibility. Even ignoring the dating problems presents several important improbabilities. The reported conversation would constitute a surprising personal admission of immorality for Lucinda. Her described behavior, remaining a Church member throughout the Missouri and Illinois period, despite Joseph's alleged hypocrisy, is also problematic.

While it is true that circumstantial evidence places Joseph Smith and Lucinda Pendleton in geographic proximity both in Missouri and later in Illinois, the evidence supporting a plural marriage is undoubtedly the weakest of all of Joseph Smith's identified plural wives. Evidence supporting a sexual relationship is even more tenuous.

[1] Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, 4, 49. See also Harry M. Beardsley, Joseph Smith and His Mormon Empire (New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1931), 229, and Klaus J. Hansen, Quest for Empire: The Political Kingdom of God and the Council of Fifty in Mormon History (East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1967), 53.

[2] Lisle G Brown, Nauvoo Sealings, Adoptions, and Anointings: A Comprehensive Register of Persons Receiving LDS Temple Ordinances, 1841–1846 (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2006), 282.

[3]The letter is reprinted in History of the Church, 3:362, but erroneously lists the recipient as “E. W. Harris.”

[4]Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, 51.

[5] History of the Church, 3:362.

[6]Andrew Jenson, “Plural Marriage,” Historical Record, 6:233-34. Thomas Milton Tinney, The Royal Family of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Jr. (Salt Lake City: Tinney-Greene Family Organization, 1973), 41, 136, also lists Lucinda as a plural wife of the Prophet. However, Tinney may have simply been repeating Jenson’s claim.

[7]“Harris,” document two, in Andrew Jenson Papers (ca. 1871–1942), Ms 17956, Box 49, fd. 16, LDS Church History Library. Don Bradley discovered this note in his research in Jenson’s papers. Harriet was sealed to Brigham Young on November 2, 1843, as a nineteen-year-old convert. Joseph F. Smith, Affidavit Book 1:50, Ms 3423, fd. 5, CHL.

[8] Her obituary stated: “’Aunt Harriet’, as she was commonly called, was an eccentric character, but a woman of more than ordinary intelligence.” Journal History, November 5, 1898, on Turley, Selected Collections, 2:22.

[9]I discuss this issue in detail in Joseph Smith’s Polygamy: History (Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, forthcoming, chapters eight and nine).

[10] History of the Church, 3:8–9. See also Scott H. Faulring, ed. An American Prophet’s Record: The Diaries and Journals of Joseph Smith. Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1989, 160.

[11] History of the Church, 2:521; italics mine.

[12]See Todd Compton, “Fawn Brodie on Joseph Smith’s Plural Wives and Polygamy: A Critical View,” in Newell G. Bringhurst ed., Reconsidering No Man Knows My History: Fawn M. Brodie and Joseph Smith in Retrospect, Logan, Utah: USU Press, 1996, 167. Neither Brodie or Compton reference the Harriet Cook Young statement from Jenson’s files.

[13] Wilhelm Wyl pseud. [Wilhelm Ritter von Wymetal], Mormon Portraits: Joseph Smith the Prophet, His Family , and His Friends, (Salt Lake City: Tribune Printing and Publishing Company, 1886, 60; emphasis Wyl’s.

[14] John C. Bennett, The History of the Saints: Or an Exposé of Joe Smith and Mormonism. Boston: Leland & Whiting, 1842, 230-31. History of the Church, 4:389.

[15]For example, Emily Dow Partridge reluctant acknowledgement that she shared Joseph’s bed on at least two occasions was forced out of her under adversarial questioning during the Temple Lot litigation in 1892. See United States Circuit Court (8th Circuit)… The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, complainant, vs. the Church of Christ at Independence, Missouri… Complainant’s abstract of pleading and evidence. (Originals at the 8th Circuit Court, Kansas City, Kansas; copies at the Community of Christ Archives and microfilm at CHL, digitized copy in possession of the author, respondents’ testimony (part 3), pages 371, 384, questions 480-84, 747, 751-62.

[16] Ebenezer Robinson, The Return, St. Louis, vol. 1, no. 11 (November 1890) 362. [title of article - "Items of Personal History of the Editor," with the volume number as vol. 2, and place of publication as Davis City, Iowa]

[17] Wyl, Mormon Portraits, 54.

[18]Athena [pseudo], “The Women of Utah,” Anti-Polygamy Standard 1 (June 1880), 18. Quoted in Jennie Anderson Froiseth, The Women of Mormonism; Or, the Story of Polygamy As Told by the Victims Themselves (Detroit, Mich.: C. G. G. Paine, 1882), 40.

[19]Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, 650.

[20] Thomas Gregg, The Prophet of Palmyra: Mormonism Reviewed and Examined in the Life, Character, and Career of its Founder. New York: John B. Alden, 1890, 504.

[21] Richard L. Bushman, Email to Brian Hales, August 23, 2007.