Commentary on the Spalding/Rigdon thread

The upper-crust forum for scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.
_Uncle Dale
_Emeritus
Posts: 3685
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 7:02 am

Re: I have a question Dan

Post by _Uncle Dale »

marg wrote:Are you sure that this statement was submitted to a newspaper and not sent to Howe?



Yes -- here is the text:
http://www.sidneyrigdon.com/dbroadhu/PA ... htm#050134

The Susquehanna Register wrote:
Montrose, Penn'a, Thursday, May 1, 1834.

Mr. Ward, Sir, -- The Sect calling themselves Mormons, which started a few years since in Harmony in this County, have, you are aware brought themselves into public notice in many parts of our country. A gentleman in the state of Ohio, applied to Mr. ISAAC HALE, of Harmony, for a history of facts relating to the character of Joseph Smith, jun., author of the Book of Mormon, called by some, the Golden Bible, and the Mormons pronounced the letter a forgery; and said that ISAAC HALE was blind, and could not write his name. -- which was the cause of the taking [of] the accompanying affidavits.

Some of your subscribers, and particularly those at a distance, might feel obliged by your inserting the affidavits, then all might judge for themselves, as to the authenticity of the Revelation claimed to have been made to Joseph Smith, jun'r. A SUBSCRIBER.
Great Bend 21, March 1834.


Painesville, Ohio, Feb. 4, 1834.
Mr. Isaac Hale, --
Dear Sir, -- I have a letter with your signature, post-marked Dec. 22, 1833 -- addressed to D. P. Hurlbut, on the subject of Mormonism. I have taken all the letters and documents from Mr. Hurlbut, with a view to their publication. An astonishing mass has been collected by him and others, who have determined to lay open the imposition to the world. And as the design is to present facts, and those well authenticated, and beyond dispute, it is very desireable, that your testimony, whatever it may be, should come authenticated before a magistrate.

Your letter has already been pronounced a forgery by the Mormons, who say you are blind and cannot write, even your name. I hope no one have attempted to deceive us: deception and falsehood in this business will do no good in the end, but will help build up the monstrous delusion. We look upon your connexion with Smith, and your knowledge of facts as very important, in the chain of events, -- and if it be your desire to contribute what facts you know, in so desirable an undertaking, I hope you will without delay, have drawn up a full narative of every transaction wherein Smith, jun'r. is concerned and attest them before a magistrate -- This is our plan.

E. D. HOWE.


Statement of Mr. Hale.
I first became acquainted with Joseph Smith, Jr. in November, 1825. He was at that time in the employ of a set of men who were called "money diggers;" and his occupation was that of seeing, or pretending to see by means of a stone placed in his hat...



So -- although Father Hale's testimony was evidently written down after Howe had contacted him, I do not see that it
was primarily intended for publication by Howe. In fact, the Mormon leaders had six months to ponder the impact of
Hale's published testimony, before Howe's book ever appeared. Had they wished to refute Hale, they had ample
opportunity to respond to him (and the other associated PA witnesses) before they could blame Howe for the reports.

When I hear Mormons accusing Hale of having been a senile dupe of Howe's anti-Mormon program, I have to think
that they are purposely trying to cover up their own leaders' inability to confront Hale's testimony with any sort of
exhonorating explanations for Joseph Smith. And, if anybody argues that the Susquehanna article was too obscure
to have gained Mormon attention in Kirtalnd, it might be noted that its contents were reprinted elsewhere, months
before Howe's book appeared:
http://www.sidneyrigdon.com/dbroadhu/NY ... htm#061334
etc. etc.

UD
_why me
_Emeritus
Posts: 9589
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 8:19 pm

Post by _why me »

Well, that thread is ending just like I said it would end, with a wee-wee contest without a winner for the farthest wee-wee. However, it does point to the critic problem of disproven the Book of Mormon. It is all speculation and speculation it will remain unless a manuscript is discovered somewhere of the book that would shed light on the matter.

But I need to feel compassion for the critics such as dale and dan and a host of others on this board. It is not easy trying to disprove something that just may be true as Joseph Smith related it. I suppose that in a critic mind, there is always that small doubt that they may be wrong about it all.
_Pokatator
_Emeritus
Posts: 1417
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 12:38 pm

Post by _Pokatator »

why me wrote:Well, that thread is ending just like I said it would end, with a wee-wee contest without a winner for the farthest wee-wee. However, it does point to the critic problem of disproven the Book of Mormon. It is all speculation and speculation it will remain unless a manuscript is discovered somewhere of the book that would shed light on the matter.

But I need to feel compassion for the critics such as dale and dan and a host of others on this board. It is not easy trying to disprove something that just may be true as Joseph Smith related it. I suppose that in a critic mind, there is always that small doubt that they may be wrong about it all.


Why Me you wrote it as: It is not easy trying to disprove something that just may be true as Joseph Smith related it.

Others might write it as: It is not easy trying to disprove something that just may be true as Joseph Smith related it.

I would write it as: It is not easy trying to disprove something that just may be true as Joseph Smith related it.
_marg

Post by _marg »

why me wrote:Well, that thread is ending just like I said it would end, with a wee-wee contest without a winner for the farthest wee-wee.


It may or may not be ending. Perhaps that's wishful thinking on your part. There's actually tons more to talk about and I'm supposed to continue my response to Dan in this thread. I'm still planning to but I'm overwhelmed with all the data involved. I prefer the discussion to proceed slowly so as to have time to read it and as well read on the subject elsewhere. The discussion by the way is not an attempt to prove the Rigdon-Spalding theory, it is an attempt to convince Dan (and perhaps others) to consider it.

However, it does point to the critic problem of disproven the Book of Mormon.


You are mistaken to think the critics in this thread have a problem of disproving the Book of Mormon. They have no need, no burden to prove, nor interest is disproving the supernatural claims associated with Book of Mormon. Supernatural claims are not part of the discussion for good reason. Supernatural claims are beyond physical laws meaning they are not provable. If they were provable they'd not be considered "supernatural". So it is a waste of time arguing whether a claim is true or not if it can not possibly be proven. Consequently that is why I said to you at one point in the thread your beliefs (which involve the supernatural) are irrelevant to the thread. God, angels, heaven and anything else supernatural are simply not part of the discussion. Those beliefs are based on faith. The Mormon apologetic board is the perfect place for you to discuss the supernatural in Mormonism, but it would sidetrack the discussion thread involving evidence for the Rigdon/Spalding theory and go absolutely nowhere.


It is all speculation and speculation it will remain unless a manuscript is discovered somewhere of the book that would shed light on the matter.


Of course evidence of the Spalding manuscript as described by many people would be ideal, but lack of evidence of the manuscript does not mean it's all speculation. There is still plenty of evidence, perhaps much of it has been destroyed by the church or even hidden but just the same there is evidence from which one can reason to a probable conclusion.

But I need to feel compassion for the critics such as dale and dan and a host of others on this board. It is not easy trying to disprove something that just may be true as Joseph Smith related it. I suppose that in a critic mind, there is always that small doubt that they may be wrong about it all.


Dan, Dale and the others in the Spalding thread appreciate the absence of evidence to support J.S. claims to the supernatural. Where the church has made claims which does not deal with the supernatural but rather the natural, the burden of proof rest with the church, they are the claimant. To date, the church has met no burden of proof with regards to any of their "natural" claims. Hence the church's claims can with good reason ..be ignored. When and if the church can offer evidence open to objective evaluation, only then can any of their truth claims be taken seriously by those who rationally critically evaluate as opposed to someone such as yourself who irrationally uncritically accepts truth claims based on faith.
_Uncle Dale
_Emeritus
Posts: 3685
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 7:02 am

Post by _Uncle Dale »

marg wrote:The discussion by the way is not an attempt to prove the Rigdon-Spalding theory, it is an attempt to convince Dan
(and perhaps others) to consider it.



I do not think we will ever be able to convince Dan Vogel of anything. As of today his thread has run 14 pages,
and he has not become convinced of one single point offered for consideration by the theory advocates.

I am particularly disappointed that he will not admit that the Smith-follower and money-digger Gadius Stafford lived in
Kirtland hamlet, Auburn twp., Geauga Co., within 5 or 6 miles of Sidney Rigdon's Bainbridge, Ohio cabin during 1827-30.

Dan also sees no value in anybody researching Sidney Rigdon's Sunday preaching trips into neighboring Auburn, Hiram,
Mantua, etc. during 1826-27 and his continued frequent preaching trips to that same area during 1827-30 -- nor his
documented residence at neighboring Hiram, nor his documented preaching in Auburn while he was living at Hiram.

Dan evidently suppressed the story of Gad Stafford when he noticed his name as a Smith-follower and money-digger
in Tucker's 1867 book. Dan refrained from telling his readers that Gad's name appears as one of the 1822 heirs of
Josiah Stafford the elder, in Ontario land records. Of course Gadius' name is very slightly mis-spelled on page 317
of the 1820 Ontario census report for Farmington (Manchester), NY -- but he can be found there along with names like
Perez Antisdale, Elisha Fish, Orrin P. Rockwell, Sr., and Abraham, David, Jonathan and Joshua Stafford -- whose
families or near relatives all moved to Auburn, Ohio during the 1820s and early 1830s, and whose names read like
a duplicate of the 1867 Tucker list of Smith-followers that Dan printed in his EMD volumes.

Gad Stafford's 1827 residence in Auburn was published to the world as far back as 1880, in a Geauga Co. history which Dan himself cites regarding other people he talks about in that place: Pioneer and General Historyof Geauga County,
page 181: http://sidneyrigdon.com/books/1880Pion.htm#pg181b

Image

Now Dan continues to ignore these facts and will not venture so much of a change from his rock-solid position as to even
recommend that Auburn money-digging of the 1820s or Auburn money-digging Joe Smith-followers of that same period
ought to be looked into just a little, (along with any alleged or probable relationships with the only Baptist preacher
then operating in the area at the time: Elder Sidney Rigdon, of course).

Without my actually putting words into Dan's mouth, my conclusion is that he continues to profess that Sidney Rigdon
could have not possibly come into contact with his Auburn near neighbors of money-digging Smith-followers in
1826-30, and that the first time Rigdon could have possibly learned of Smith's name was in November of 1830,
from the Mormons.

Is this reputable scholarship, I ask you?

UD
_marg

Post by _marg »

When I first began reading about Mormonism on the Net about 6 years ago, early on I came across the Rigdon/Spalding theory. I can't say I've devoted a great deal of time on the Spalding theory, but certainly the Spalding witnesses I found convincing. The sole author theory I found unconvincing not mainly because of Smith's lack of education, but more because of the logistics of it all. It's too complex a hoax to involve only one person. There's the writing of the Book of Mormon in a short time, with all the creativity and knowledge required. The planning of the religion itself and how it would proceed into the future, the creativity of props and storyline to make Mormonism sound appealing and convincing to a credulous public ..all of it was planned out well in advance. So I didn't really have to get into much of the evidence to rationally and objectively reach a conclusion that it's highly improbable one person was behind the scheme and operation of it . And what ever I read regarding Spalding & Rigdon seemed highly probable as contributing to the scheme.

Just last night I read more information which really confirmed it for me that Spalding's completed manuscript as described by Spalding witnesses was brought back by Hurlbut. And that I found on your site, it was Hurlbut's lawyer Briggs who said he had read the Spalding's writings which Hurlbut brought back, and had examined the one which was used for the Book of Mormon as well as the other uncompleted manuscript which we call the Oberland one. When I get the link I'll put it here.

The biggest problem I have with the Spalding theory is remembering and synthesizing the data. For anyone to take a serious interest in this theory it requires a great deal of work. But frankly even if one doesn't do much work, it's pretty obvious Smith didn't do it on his own.

I have a few questions regarding the map. Where on the map did Smith extend his treasure digging to? Auburn? How far is Auburn from Bainbridge? How far from Auburn did Smith live? Did Rigdon live in Bainbridge? How far from Bainbridge would Rigdon travel to preach?
_marg

Briggs

Post by _marg »

Here's the part I was reading which I find very convincing that Hurlbut had shown people the Spalding Manuscript for the Book of Mormon..I'll copy only a portion.

http://solomonspalding.com/SRP/saga/saga05a.htm

The web page regarding recollections of Briggs is based on a reconstructive PARAPHRASE of various details related or alluded to by Briggs, taken from eight different of his own published accounts, as well as supplementary material drawn from various other sources.

This is a small portion:


"At about the time the "Committee" met for the third time in Mentor, we heard of a man who was just then lecturing against the Mormonites in the little Methodist chapel adjacent to their half-built temple at Kirtland. We were then operating under the impression that this man was a well qualified physician who had uncovered many embarrassing secrets relating to the "Latter Day Saints" and their leaders. This Doctor met with us at the Corning home and solicited our financial assistance in sending him back to his previous home in Ontario, County, new York, the very place where Mormonism had first reared its displeasing head. This "Doctor" Hurlbut promised to return with many incriminating signed affidavits taken from the former neighbors of the Mormon Smith family. This much I heard him say myself. The man also dropped dark hints about his being able to prove the altogether human origin of the Mormon Bible in the writings of a certain deceased clergyman. The details of this impending disclosure Hurlbut shared only with Judge Allen, Dr. Card and Col. Corning. However, I was later informed that he had displayed to them and to three other men, not members of the "Committee," two personal statements he had recently obtained from the brother and sister-in-law of this mysterious deceased clergyman -- depositions which detailed the true origin of the so-called Book of Mormon.

With funds supplied to some extent from our own pockets (but largely by the three non-members of the group), Dr. Hurlbut disappeared from our view for several weeks, during which time he communicated with us by letters sent to a magistrate in Kirtland who was a Campbellite and a friend of Mr. Corning. Near the end of December, in 1833, Hurlbut returned to Ohio and the first we heard confirming that event was that the fellow was again lecturing in and around Kirtland. A few days before Christmas our "Committee" reassembled itself in Mentor and prepared a few sharp words for Hurlbut. The man presented himself with copious apologies for having let the cat out of the bag before sharing his findings with our little group. His excuse was that he had obtained such startling evidence documenting the Mormon fraud that he feared for his life and thought it best to make the exposure public to as many persons as possible and as quickly as possible. This justification of his aroused the curiosity of the Committee members and we all sat down to pour over dozens of signed and certified statements Hurlbut had brought back from Ontario and Wayne counties in New York. But, as he then said and as I still now believe, his "biggest fish" was a pile of tattered old manuscripts, retrieved from an old attic near Syracuse and a defunct publishing firm in Pittsburgh, or so he said. These, he remarked, were the "bones upon which Sidney Rigdon hung the meat of Mormonism."

The manuscripts were written with a quill pen and in a crabbed, old-fashioned hand. They appeared to us to be little more than a useless pile of rubbish, until Hurlbut began pointing out words, names, phrases, and then, whole sentences, that matched in partly or fully their numerous counterparts in his well-thumbed Book of Mormon. The style of composition, the names, etc., were the same. "This is it!" exclaimed Samuel Wilson, with a broad grin. "We publish these papers, along with certificates testifying to their authenticity, and the Mormon hoax is finished."

Dr. Hurlbut solicited still more funds from the Committee, and promised to compile the lot of his documents into a readable book, to be published at Chardon within six weeks. By this time we had all become more than a little aware of the man's deficiencies in scholarly attainments, and the common feeling was that Hurlbut should retire from the field and allow more capable hands to carry out the publicizing of his great discoveries. This idea Hurlbut protested with much bombast and a great show of hurt feelings. The meeting broke up without a clear plan of action determined upon, and with Dr. Hurlbut retaining all but a few specimens of his collection of wondrous documents. Those left temporarily in our keeping were a sheaf of letters penned by those who had known the deceased clergyman. From these and from other facts related by Hurlbut, we were convinced that Sidney Rigdon, when he had lived near Pittsburgh, copied a work of fiction, "The Manuscript Found," and from that and other things made up the Mormon Bible. The Committee did not come together again to discuss this dilemma until after Christmas, and during that slack time matters quickly spun entirely out of hand. "
Last edited by _marg on Mon Mar 12, 2007 10:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
_Uncle Dale
_Emeritus
Posts: 3685
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 7:02 am

Post by _Uncle Dale »

marg wrote:
I have a few questions regarding the map. Where on the map did Smith extend his treasure digging to?



Well, marg, if I recall my Dialogue collection of articles, we have Dan Vogel here to update his previous studies
on this subject. I'll let him answer your question. He may not say much about Joseph Smith's water-witching and
well-digging seersmanship, however. My notes say that the young Smith extended those activities as far afield as
Otsego County, NY -- to the towns of Oneonta, Mount Vision, and Hartwick Seminary. In the latter village there lived
next door to the Jerome Clark residence a certain Mr. Stowell, who is said to have been either a brother or a cousin of
Josiah Stowell, the money-digger and early Smith-follower. Local tradition says that the young Smith came to Hartwick
to help locate a well for the Stowells there. I have never followed-up on the allegation -- but if it is true, that activity
would have put young Joe within a few yards of Solomon Spalding's old trunk full of papers. Vernal Holley thought this
was an important lead -- so I went to Hartwick, but a series of unfortunate events rushed me back to Syracuse that
day, and I never confirmed the well-locating account.

About four different sources say that the young Joe went west, out of the state of New York, in search of a seer stone,
or something. Thurlow Weed says that Joe returned with a manuscript. I have been told that there is a very early
Weed document (a letter I think -- in Albany) in which this assertion is spelled out in greater detail -- I have been too
ill to go so far from home as Albany, however.

Auburn? How far is Auburn from Bainbridge?



Auburn touches Bainbridge, along a shared 6 mile, north-south border. The center of Bainbridge is six miles from
the center of Auburn -- about as far as my wife drives on Saturdays to go grocery shopping.

During the 1820s, the number of households in Bainbridge and Auburn was about 150 each, with most of the land still
in uncleared wilderness forest, haunted by wolves and bears. The best road between the centers of those two adjacent
Ohio townships was a dirt wagon path of about six miles in length. About half-way along that road was the home of
George Wilber, who in 1826-27 walked or rode the 3-4 miles over to Bainbridge school, a few hundred feet south of
Sidney Rigdon's cabin. Thus, George Wilber resided about half-way between Rigdon (living just south of Bainbridge
Center) and Gad Stafford (living immediately east of Auburn Center -- then called "Kirtland Tract" or just "Kirtland)).

So, when George Wilber says that he knew something about Sidney Rigdon and Joseph Smith, in 1826-27, Mr. Wilber
was then positioned almost exactly in the middle, between Rev. Rigdon and a known money-digging follower of Smith.

I tried to talk to Dan Vogel about this earlier in his thread, but he brushed the whole subject aside.

How far from Auburn did Smith live?



That depends upon where we place Joe in 1825-27. Richard L. Bushman says he was in the Harmony, PA area. But I
think it likely that he ran from that NY/PA border region after his early 1826 hearing, and was back in Manchester with
his family, for at least a short time.

There was a continual flow of pioneers moving from western New York into northeastern Ohio during these years. A
young man who wanted to go west, and who was willing to work in a wagon company, might travel hundreds of miles
practically for free. The distance from Smith's home in Manchester, NY, to Auburn, OH is about 260 miles as the crow
flies, and about 275 miles by way of 1825 wagon roads. An express stage or mail coach might have covered that
distance in less than two weeks. A pioneer wagon company would have taken 3-4 weeks to cover the distance.

Thus, if we want to know whether Smith could have made it from Manchester to Auburn -- stayed there a while -- and
made it back home -- the total time necessary would have been a minimum of two months, and probably something
more like three months. Sidney Rigdon, on the other hand, had a paid stage ticket to the Mahoning Baptist Association
meeting each year, and could have made it from there to Manchester, via stage or canal, in a total of 2 weeks travel,
or less. But I do not think young Joe could then afford stage coach tickets and hotel lodging on his long journeys.

Did Rigdon live in Bainbridge?



He moved there at the end of 1825, after his "Church of Christ" in Pittsburgh dwindled down to practically nothing.
Rigdon had previously been a visitor at meetings of the Ohio Grand River Baptist Association and no doubt had some
friends among its members. Milton Backman says that Rigdon was "called" to a pastorate in Bainbridge by that group,
but I think it more likely that he went there as a journeyman tanner -- since a tannery had just opened in that place.
It was Regular Baptist practice in those days for a congregation to elect a minister from among its own members, and
to have that chosen preacher licensed by the local association. Thus, I think Rigdon arrived in Bainbridge during the
winter of 1825-26 (probably about the end of December) and joined the little Baptist congregation there. He probably
received no cash salary, but the members might have provided him and his family with a cabin and groceries.

So Rigdon lived in about the center of Bainbridge township for all of 1826 and part of 1827. His kids' nursemaid is
said to have left the Rigdon's employ when they moved north to Mentor in 1827, and to have then gotten married.
I suppose that Sidney had moved his family north to Mentor by the time the maid got married -- or at least by late 1827.
Sidney himself was then a traveling preacher who ranged all through southern Geauga Co. and adjacent northern
Portage Co. As 1827 wore on, he spent more and more time at Mentor -- but he maintained his ties in the Auburn area
well into the 1830s.

How far from Bainbridge would Rigdon travel to preach?



If he could depend upon meals and lodging from local Baptist families, he might have traveled typically as far
away as Mantua (6 miles). Hiram (12 miles), Nelson (18 miles) or possibly Ravenna (20 miles) and Mentor. Once he
was installed in Mentor as a salaried preacher he might have had enough pocket money to range as far away from
home as Cleveland, Erie and Youngstown. We know that he visited congregations west of Cleveland before 1830 and
helped establish churches at a considerable distance from Mentor, before he became a Mormon.

A ride on his horse from his cabin to the schoolhouse next to George Wilber's home in Auburn (Baptist meetings often
were held in schoolhouses) would have taken Rigdon less than an hour. A ride to Gad Stafford's home might have
taken an entire hour in bad weather.

Rigdon was very early rejected by the Bainbridge congregation -- so it appears that on Sundays he would typically
ride over to Hiram or Mantua to preach, eat Sunday dinner and perhaps return home after a night's rest. We know
from extant records that Rigdon paid some of his bills from that period by doing leather work. He was a leather-finisher,
so he could pick up tanned hides from the local tannery (two miles south of his cabin) and process the raw material in
his home on weekdays. After the Bainbridge Baptists rejected him, I suppose Rigdon had to restort to this sort of work
in order to feed his family. Before he left Bainbridge, ownership of the local tannery passed to another person -- a man
whose sister later became a plural wife of LDS President Lorenzo Snow. I would think that her diaries might be worth
reading ---- but Brent Metcalf has advised that I quit my Spalding studies. Maybe I will -- my neurologist says has about
the same advice for me as does Brent.

from James A. Briggs, Esq:



Uhhhhh ... not quite, marg -- go back and read carefully the warning posted with that particular text ---
it is docu-drama, and not meant to be a direct quote from Briggs' various statements on the matter.


Uncle Dale
_marg

Post by _marg »

Uhhhhh ... not quite, marg -- go back and read carefully the warning posted with that particular text ---
it is docu-drama, and not meant to be a direct quote from Briggs' various statements on the matter.


Ok I did read that last night but I didn't see it this morning and with the various readings I'm getting confused. So last night i seem to remember reading you paraphrased a number of sources of statements of Briggs..so Iill go back and correct that later.

Regarding health, I agree this is bad for one's health. You should spend less time on this and enjoy the weather you have. I don't have weather to enjoy but I also should spend less time on this and more on taking better care of my health.

The reason I was asking you questions regarding the map is I was having difficulty understanding the point you were making in your post. I gather that Gad Stafford moved from Palmyra (or some place close) during the period Smith was into treasure seeking and he moved to Auburn about 6 miles from Bainbridge where Rigdon was living. So that it's likely Gad may have talked with Rigdon and informed him about Smith or Rigdon heard from someone Gad talked to about Smith? Is that what you were essentially pointing out. If that's not what you were saying I'd have to reread. And this information you say Dan ignores and doesn't want to acknowledge it, even in discussions if it's brought up.
_jhammel
_Emeritus
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 3:49 pm

When did Gad Stafford move to Auburn?

Post by _jhammel »

Hi Dale,

The 1880 source you cited says Gad Stafford moved to Auburn in 1827, but this source says 1824: http://www.rootsweb.com/~ohgeauga/query005.htm

I tried e-mailing Mike Stafford at the address provided by the site, but unsuccessfully.

Do you have reason to believe one source over the other?

Jeff
Post Reply